Link to the repeal's target resolution.
Rules broken: Honest Mistake. And partially outright lie, but I don't think there's a separate rule for that.
This...
...is a lie. I never said regulating pesticides wasn't an international issue. It is what IA himself said. Evidence below.Agreeing with the co-author of the original resolution, that rational nations take reasonable precautions, and therefore, without World Assembly mandate, will:
*snipped for brevity*
Perplexed that the co-author would support legislation which does nothing more than codify what nations have long already done, meaning it is not an international issue,
Pleased that the self-resolution of this issue means that there is no real need for this legislation to stay on the books and that any flaw is therefore justification for repeal, and
From the drafting thread of the resolution targeted by the repeal:
Araraukar wrote:Separatist Peoples wrote:"Sounds like a domestic issue."
Like human rights when applied only to each nation's own citizens? Or discrimination? Or food and drug standards? Healthcare standards and availability? Basic welfare of your own citizens? Or legal rights? The micromanagement in those resolutions goes well into the "domestic issue" level.
Also ND and I ended up using what SP said here in the FAQ for the proposal (in the first post of the thread), because he said it better than either of us could.
Araraukar wrote:Imperium Anglorum wrote:They're so blatantly straightforward, only dysfunctional nations wouldn't have them already in place.
It's funny that when I use this argument on various other resolution proposals, like the recently passed Rule of Law, I get told that while such things may look like only idiots wouldn't already have them in place, the WA should codify them anyway, just in case such idiots are around.
And yes, I would hope most nations already have something like this in place, but now at least if your neighbouring nations are also in the WA, you'll know they have to abide by similar (or same) rules as well.
Also, nothing fordbids a nation from putting in stricter limits or even forbidding the use of pesticides entirely, if they so choose.
An additional mistake seems to be the issue with clause four, which is about pesticide run-off avoidance, as none of it restricts eradication campaigns when carried off systematically rather than just spraying pesticides randomly.