[DRAFT] Reducing Sexual Exploitation

[Wallenburg]

Full support.

[John Milton]

OOC: Bump. Considering submission soon... ish. Hoping the fluffy title is enough to sway delegates as I don't have the wherewithal to run a campaign, but if not, I can try again come fall, maybe.

---

IC: "See how this strikes ya. I think most of the serious weaknesses are gone."

I'd be happy to run a campaign for this on your behalf.

--UM

[Christian Democrats]

Our nation has no objections. We're willing to approve this proposal and, then, to vote in favor of it.

[Podrovny]

Zladny: "We support this resolution. The more regulated prostitution is in exploitative capitalist economies, the better. While we could prefer more, there are no adverse effects resulting from this proposal."

[Teretstein]

4. Member nations are forbidden from prosecuting underage or enslaved sex workers for prostitution-related charges, and must treat them as persons fleeing servitude under international law. Further, member nations are forbidden from carrying out law enforcement raids on underage or enslaved sex workers or brothels without first ensuring the existence of sufficient social assistance programs to permit the victims to grow into gainfully employed, well-adjusted adults.

"The Imperium must voice a concern with this fourth clause. While its goal to ensure that a structure exists to support those removed from such conditions is admirable, as written, it prevents a Member State from removing them from such conditions until such structure exists, which, in underdeveloped states, or those undergoing economic failures, such structure may not be available for some condemning those enslaved in such a manner to their enslavement. Further, it provides a method by which a sufficiently corrupt state might ignore the provisions of this resolution; by simply refusing to create, or acknowledge the existence of, such structures, so as to ensure the continued existence of these operations.

The Imperium suggests that a mandate to create such structure be included, along with perhaps the consideration of a method by which the World Assembly might assist states in need of support in the creation of such structures and systems."

We share the concern of The Imperium. We will support this resolution as drafted, but do request that this issue be addressed.

[Kenmoria]

"In the 'Resolute' clause, does the 'its' refer to law enforcement, as referenced in the above clause, or the World Assembly? Also I find issue with the definition in clause 1, namely the 'agreed' part. This is because a member state could take it that only sex workers who work for a definite sum count as such, and those whose clients choose how much they pay the workers do not. Other than that, full support."

[Araraukar]

"Shouldn't the category be Moral Decency, given how the freedoms of individuals - pimps and police(?) and whatnot - are being restricted? Nevermind whether one counts coercion a right to begin with. And isn't there already a resolution that ensures the right to choose who you have sex with? If the only "right" part is already covered by an existing resolution, and the rest are restrictions, then Human Rights doesn't sound like the right choice."

[Bears Armed]

OOC
Looking at it, I'd say

1. Defines a 'sex worker' as a person who trades his or her own sexual services for agreed compensation. One who exclusively trades the sexual services of others for compensation (a 'pimp') shall not be classified as a sex worker;

Just a definition, doesn't affect the category.

2. Requires member states, regardless of the legality of sex work therein, to faithfully investigate and prosecute criminal allegations made by sex workers against pimps, clients, or law enforcement for criminal charges generally, but especially emphasizing:
violence, including sexual assault
trafficking or enslavement
entrapment or coercion, sexual or otherwise, especially by means of blackmail, intimidation, theft of possessions or identification, etc.

Could be re-written to be more clearly 'Human Rights'(something along the lines of "Declares that member nations within whose jurisdictions 'sex work' is illegal must not treat that illegality as a valid reason for refusing to faithfully investigate and prosecute [etc.]"), but probably scrapes through as that category anyway... although if the proposal was redefined as 'Moral Decency' then this clause would still be okay then.

3. Mandates that member states' investigations, prosecutions, and fines or criminal sentencing of pimps, clients, and law enforcement shall take precedence over such actions against sex workers which stem primarily or exclusively from their employment;

Again, could be re-written to fit the category more obviously but passes as adequate.

4. Forbids member states from prosecuting underage or enslaved sex workers for prostitution or related charges, and classifies them as persons fleeing servitude under international law;

'Human Rights'.

5. Beseeches member nations to ensure the existence of adequately structured and funded psychological and social assistance programs to permit rescued sex slaves and underage sex workers to grow into gainfully employed, well-adjusted adults;

Social Justice?

and
6. Strongly encourages nations choosing to prohibit the sex trade to offer amnesty or reduced charges to sex workers for cooperation in investigations of other, more serious or non-victimless crimes and the suspects thereof.

Human Rights, although it could be re-written to fit Moral Decency instead.

I might want more change to fit the category for 'Significant' strength, but for 'Mild' this balances out okay.

[Sierra Lyricalia]

We share the concern of The Imperium. We will support this resolution as drafted, but do request that this issue be addressed.

"The most critical part of the Imperial critique has already been addressed. Please see the current draft. Now, if you're arguing that the assistance clause should be a requirement rather than a suggestion, that's a reasonable view; we are wary of mandating too much spending by member states, some of whom are already not going to like, say, the mandate to hold law enforcement accountable. We'll give due consideration."

"In the 'Resolute' clause, does the 'its' refer to law enforcement, as referenced in the above clause, or the World Assembly? Also I find issue with the definition in clause 1, namely the 'agreed' part. This is because a member state could take it that only sex workers who work for a definite sum count as such, and those whose clients choose how much they pay the workers do not. Other than that, full support."

"'Its' in that preamble clause refers to the WA. The antecedent at the top, which should be understood to repeat for each preamble clause, is 'the World Assembly.' Frankly it would disrupt the flow of the sentence to stick another 'the WA' in at that point - because the subject in all the numbered clauses is also 'the WA.' If I shove the proper noun into the preamble, that subjecthood is lost."

"As for 'agreed,' that is there to limit the protections to working people, as opposed to the minor partner in a 'sugar daddy' or 'sugar mama' relationship (or spouses, for that matter). If that's not a necessary distinction to make, it can be removed."

---

OOC: I'll address the category issues separately later on. Points taken to a certain extent, although... Ara, if this is viewed as restricting the "rights" of pimps and cops, then the Ban on Slavery and Trafficking should also be a different category, as it is actually a restriction on the property rights of slaveowners. I find that conclusion slightly absurd.

[Azadistan-land of the free]

I agree with this.
There is already a resolution against slavery and trafficking so it just clarified that.

[Premiora]

I wish to convey my agreement with this resolution. The draft appears to be very good. Looking forward to seeing the resolution passed.

[Snowman]

I don't know if I like this "underage." Can criminals be bumped up to being considered "of age" in severe cases? Also, "under age" is not defined. For nations where prostitution is legal, this would already be national law. However, for nations where it is illegal, what constitutes underage?

Also, I am against this protecting sex workers. Why do they gain protection over pimps & the clients?

Also, would using illegal drugs or (example) be "exclusively related" to prostitution if it was the only way they had enough money for such activities or (example)?

[New Min]

"After the recent changes to the draft, The United Socialist States Of New Min is in full agreement with the proposal."

[Imperium Anglorum]

Oh, yea, inb4 someone says that their country's entire budget is funded by sexual exploitation and that eliminating it is an ideological ban.

[Araraukar]

OOC: Ara, if this is viewed as restricting the "rights" of pimps and cops, then the Ban on Slavery and Trafficking should also be a different category, as it is actually a restriction on the property rights of slaveowners. I find that conclusion slightly absurd.

OOC: Then reply to it in IC. My point was, there already is at least one resolution against human trafficking and at least one for everyone being equal before the law and at least one for having the right to decide who you have sex with, so the points on human rights that I can see, have already been covered. The rest of it is restrictions on the actions of others.

Several EDITs because I can't type this morning, looks like.

[Imperium Anglorum]

lolwut? Category disagreements are IC now?

[Veniyerris]

In clause 1, does the word exclusively mean that people who pimp on the side aren’t defined as pimps in this proposal?

[Kenmoria]

“Why does the ‘understanding’ preambulatory clause have a semicolon, whereas the other preamble clauses have commas instead?”

[Araraukar]

lolwut? Category disagreements are IC now?

OOC: Yes, and have been for a long time.

[Imperium Anglorum]

They're not and have only been forced into that scope recently. Statistical categories aren't things that can be discussed in-character.

[Sierra Lyricalia]

OOC: Bippitty-bumpity-boo.

Question for GenSec colleagues or other knowledgeable sorts: I don't buy Ara's argument for MD above; but given the recent category ruling, would this be more fitting as is (Civil Rights), or as Regulation/Legal Reform?

[Graintfjall]

Have you guys kept track of the rules discussion in Moderation? I would not want to see a proposal like this run into trouble, nor go ahead and then have debate on the motion constrained. I don’t know how/if it will affect the WA.

“Generally supportive. If it came to vote as is we’d vote for it and buy a round in the Strangers’ Bar to celebrate its passage.”

-- Kastíel Kormáksson
Permanent Representative and Head of Mission to the World Assembly for the Queendom of Græntfjall

Kastíel stands and leaves, while behind him Júlía Maria cracks a yawn, and then sweeps dust off the copy of the proposal text in front of her.

“Given this appears to have been under discussion for quite some time you’ll have to forgive this doddery old woman if this has already been raised, but we have a – probably trivial – question about Article 3.

Mandates that member states’ investigations, prosecutions, and fines or criminal sentencing of pimps, clients, and law enforcement shall take precedence over such actions against sex workers which stem primarily or exclusively from their employment;

“What of the following, admittedly grisly, scenario – which has happened in the regrettable experience of the Queendom and thus is not some ludicrous hypothetical, though which I will admit is probably rare.

“Some years ago there was a case of a male prostitute, knowingly infected with VODAIS, who had unprotected sex with male clients, and thereby infected them with the deadly disease in turn. It seems to me his acts did ‘stem primarily or exclusively’ from his employment as a prostitute. I don’t think this proposal can be reasonably interpreted as mandating that law enforcement would not have been able to pursue him for his crime of reckless transmission and would rather have had to prioritize pursuing his clients for their crime of solicitation. Does it?”

-- Júlía Maria Jónsdóttir
Economic Advisor to the Græntfjall WA Mission

[Marxist Germany]

"This receives no objections from me; support."

[Honeydewistania]

I support this wholeheartedly. If there are issues with campaigning I can help if needed.

[Kenmoria]

“Is clause 5 intended to be mandatory or non-mandatory? ‘Beseeches’ is pretty strong, but is also a matter of asking rather than requiring.”