NATION

PASSWORD

[PASSED] Ban on Statutory Limitations for Heinous Crimes

A carefully preserved record of the most notable World Assembly debates.
User avatar
Auralia
Senator
 
Posts: 4907
Founded: Dec 15, 2011
New York Times Democracy

[PASSED] Ban on Statutory Limitations for Heinous Crimes

Postby Auralia » Thu Aug 10, 2017 1:27 pm

Ban on Statutory Limitations for Heinous Crimes
Category: Human Rights | Strength: Mild

Recognizing the moral depravity of war crimes, crimes against humanity, and crimes against peace,

Recalling this Assembly's prior commitments to the prosecution of perpetrators of such crimes,

Emphasizing that the effective protection of human rights by this Assembly necessitates that there be no statutory limitations on prosecution of perpetrators of such crimes,

The General Assembly,

  1. Defines a statutory limitation as any limitation on the period of time following the commission of a crime that the alleged perpetrator or perpetrators may be prosecuted for that crime, with the understanding that this includes, but is not limited to, limitations imposed by administrative regulation, judicial order, or legislative statute;
  2. Prohibits member states, whether acting individually or collectively through World Assembly resolution, from applying a statutory limitation to any crime explicitly or implicitly recognized under World Assembly law as:
    1. a war crime,
    2. a crime against humanity, or
    3. a crime against peace.
Last edited by Frisbeeteria on Sat Apr 14, 2018 9:10 am, edited 13 times in total.
Catholic Commonwealth of Auralia
Also known as Railana

"Amor sequitur cognitionem."

User avatar
Christian Democrats
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 9977
Founded: Jul 29, 2009
New York Times Democracy

Postby Christian Democrats » Fri Aug 11, 2017 2:56 am

We will support this proposal. Our only recommendation, at the moment, is that the prohibition be broadened to include the World Assembly itself in addition to its individual member states and their subdivisions.
Leo Tolstoy wrote:Wrong does not cease to be wrong because the majority share in it.
GA#160: Forced Marriages Ban Act (79%)
GA#175: Organ and Blood Donations Act (68%)^
SC#082: Repeal "Liberate Catholic" (80%)
GA#200: Foreign Marriage Recognition (54%)
GA#213: Privacy Protection Act (70%)
GA#231: Marital Rape Justice Act (81%)^
GA#233: Ban Profits on Workers' Deaths (80%)*
GA#249: Stopping Suicide Seeds (70%)^
GA#253: Repeal "Freedom in Medical Research" (76%)
GA#285: Assisted Suicide Act (70%)
GA#310: Disabled Voters Act (81%)
GA#373: Repeal "Convention on Execution" (54%)

* denotes coauthorship
^ repealed resolution
#360: Electile Dysfunction
#452: Foetal Furore
#560: Bicameral Backlash
#570: Clerical Errors

User avatar
Separatist Peoples
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 13759
Founded: Feb 17, 2011
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Separatist Peoples » Fri Aug 11, 2017 4:29 am

"Full support. No issues with the current text."

What's the problem with lawyer jokes?
Lawyer's don't think they're funny, and no one else thinks they're jokes.

Third year law student, homebrewer, and cat worshiper

User avatar
Imperium Anglorum
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8429
Founded: Aug 26, 2013
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Imperium Anglorum » Fri Aug 11, 2017 4:54 am

We have no real objections to the proposed text.

Author: 1 SC and 26 GA resolutions
Maintainer: GA Passed Resolutions
Developer: Communiqué and InfoEurope
Delegate for Europe
Out-of-character unless marked otherwise
Ideological Bulwark 285, WALL delegate

User avatar
United Massachusetts
Minister
 
Posts: 2147
Founded: Jan 17, 2016
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby United Massachusetts » Fri Aug 11, 2017 5:04 am

Support.
United Massachusetts
World Assembly Mission

Pro-Life Social Democratic Catholic
Ambassador: Bishop Alexander Pierce

WA Affairs Minister, The East Pacific
Assistant: Father Carl Sullivan

Fmr. President, Right to Life
Queen Yuno wrote:You have a very contradictory rep yourself, [UM].
Sanctaria wrote:We get it. You're pro-life.
Davelands wrote:(UM tries to slip another one by)
Wallenburg wrote:You've got to be the most ignorant person on this Discord.
Davelands wrote:Remember that United Mass is extremely on the religious right side. Look for hidden gotcha's for later. He is playing a long game with proposals...
"Stat crux dum volvitur orbis"
"The Cross is steady while the world is turning"


User avatar
Greifenburg
Attaché
 
Posts: 99
Founded: Mar 08, 2017
New York Times Democracy

Postby Greifenburg » Fri Aug 11, 2017 7:04 am

"Greifenburg will support this notion."
Robert Schreiner, Ambassador of the City and Republic of Greifenburg to the World Assembly

User avatar
Aclion
Minister
 
Posts: 3046
Founded: Apr 12, 2016
Anarchy

Postby Aclion » Fri Aug 11, 2017 7:23 am

Opposed. Consider that;
  1. Statutory limitations are put in place in part to ensure that innocent defendants will still have access to exonerating evidence.
  2. Politically motivated prosecution for war crimes and crimes against humanity are commonplace, and protecting the innocent is not a high priority.
  3. Conviction for war crimes and crimes against humanity rightly carry the most extreme penalties nations offer; often death.
Weiner - Cummings 2020
The left-right spectrum; an analogy.
XKI: Recruiter, TITO member
TEP: WA Executive Staff member
Forest: Cartographer
Oatland: Caesar, Cartographer

User avatar
Auralia
Senator
 
Posts: 4907
Founded: Dec 15, 2011
New York Times Democracy

Postby Auralia » Fri Aug 11, 2017 8:30 am

Christian Democrats wrote:We will support this proposal. Our only recommendation, at the moment, is that the prohibition be broadened to include the World Assembly itself in addition to its individual member states and their subdivisions.

This is now clarified.

Aclion wrote:Statutory limitations are put in place in part to ensure that innocent defendants will still have access to exonerating evidence.

As time passes, both incriminating and exonerating evidence become less accessible, so I don't find this argument particularly compelling.

Aclion wrote:Politically motivated prosecution for war crimes and crimes against humanity are commonplace, and protecting the innocent is not a high priority.

Politically motivated prosecutions often occur for many crimes, not merely war crimes and crimes against humanity. Nonetheless, most jurisdictions do not employ statutory limitations for crimes less serious than war crimes and crimes against humanity, such as murder, kidnapping, or even forgery.

Aclion wrote:Conviction for war crimes and crimes against humanity rightly carry the most extreme penalties nations offer; often death.

Again, this is true for many serious crimes that are not subject to a statute of limitations.

Ultimately, due process protections have to be carefully designed to avoid convicting innocent people while still ensuring that justice is done in most cases. On balance, we -- along with most other nations -- believe that statutory limitations for serious crimes allow criminals to go free far more often than they prevent mistaken convictions.

Martin Russell
Chief Ambassador, Auralian Mission to the World Assembly
Last edited by Auralia on Fri Aug 11, 2017 8:30 am, edited 1 time in total.
Catholic Commonwealth of Auralia
Also known as Railana

"Amor sequitur cognitionem."

User avatar
States of Glory WA Office
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1921
Founded: Jul 26, 2016
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby States of Glory WA Office » Fri Aug 11, 2017 8:34 am

Fairburn: Our Delegation is happy to support this fine effort.

OOC: Unfortunately, I can't guarantee that you'll get a ton of support from TWP, but best of luck anyway. :)
Ambassador: Bartholomew Harper Fairburn Rowan Flowerhaze Souldream Bartholomew Harper Fairburn
Assistant: Neville Lynn Robert
#MakeLegislationFunnyAgain

Other ambassadorial staff include but are not limited to Barbera Warner and Harold "The Clown" Johnson.

User avatar
Lexicor
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1022
Founded: Jun 10, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Lexicor » Sat Aug 12, 2017 2:40 pm

Remy: "We"
Jean-Luc: "Shall"
Remy & Jean-Luc, harmonizing now: "Support!"
"The less one knows about the Civil War the more likely one is to think the North fought to free the slaves."
"As hours worked by an individual approaches zero, the probability of engagement in political activism approaches one."
"As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of the mention of inter-sectional group identities approaches one."

User avatar
Imperium Anglorum
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8429
Founded: Aug 26, 2013
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Imperium Anglorum » Sat Aug 12, 2017 3:59 pm

OOC: I would try some other title though. This one seems a bit too dry.

Author: 1 SC and 26 GA resolutions
Maintainer: GA Passed Resolutions
Developer: Communiqué and InfoEurope
Delegate for Europe
Out-of-character unless marked otherwise
Ideological Bulwark 285, WALL delegate

User avatar
Auralia
Senator
 
Posts: 4907
Founded: Dec 15, 2011
New York Times Democracy

Postby Auralia » Mon Sep 04, 2017 4:55 pm

Imperium Anglorum wrote:OOC: I would try some other title though. This one seems a bit too dry.

((OOC: Any suggestions? Personally, I have no objection to dry titles. Frankly, I would prefer the name of the equivalent real-life treaty, which is "Convention on the Non-Applicability of Statutory Limitations to War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity", but unfortunately that's too long.))
Last edited by Auralia on Mon Sep 04, 2017 4:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Catholic Commonwealth of Auralia
Also known as Railana

"Amor sequitur cognitionem."

User avatar
Secundus Imperium Romanum
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1032
Founded: Dec 12, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby Secundus Imperium Romanum » Mon Sep 04, 2017 5:18 pm

The Second Roman Empire after the complete observation by our team of experts who help me agree absolutely to support the proposal. The project has excellent articles that will certainly reduce or not extinguish any kind of torture or surplus in the criminal-state relationship that we will fully support it.

Madam Giulia Maccini,
WA Representative of Roma.
Secundus Imperium Romanum
A democratic nation, with the 1950s fashion.
Constitution · Parliamentary Debates · News · Embassy Program
Every day in Rome

User avatar
States of Glory WA Office
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1921
Founded: Jul 26, 2016
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby States of Glory WA Office » Tue Sep 05, 2017 5:35 am

Neville: Having reread the definition, it seems to us that member states aren't allowed to stipulate that the defendant in these cases must still be alive. Are we reading it correctly?
Ambassador: Bartholomew Harper Fairburn Rowan Flowerhaze Souldream Bartholomew Harper Fairburn
Assistant: Neville Lynn Robert
#MakeLegislationFunnyAgain

Other ambassadorial staff include but are not limited to Barbera Warner and Harold "The Clown" Johnson.

User avatar
Sanctaria
Senior Issues Editor
 
Posts: 7137
Founded: Sep 12, 2008
New York Times Democracy

Postby Sanctaria » Tue Sep 05, 2017 6:00 am

States of Glory WA Office wrote:Neville: Having reread the definition, it seems to us that member states aren't allowed to stipulate that the defendant in these cases must still be alive. Are we reading it correctly?

I don't speak for the author, but there is nothing in this piece of legislation that I can read that would prevent your nation, or any nation, from stipulating in further pieces of legislation that all defendants in criminal (or indeed civil) cases must be alive.

This legislation simply wishes to enforce the, wholly correct, notion that crimes against humanity should not have a statute of limitations.
Divine Federation of Sanctaria

Ideological Bulwark #258
Member of UNOG

Dr. Katherine Saunders ORD DSJ, Sanctarian Ambassador to the World Assembly
Author of:
GA#109 GA#133 GA#176 GA#201 GA#222 GA#297
Frisbeeteria wrote:Do people not realize that moderators can tell when someone is wanking?

Luna Amore wrote:Sanc is always watching. Ever vigilant.

User avatar
States of Glory WA Office
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1921
Founded: Jul 26, 2016
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby States of Glory WA Office » Tue Sep 05, 2017 6:05 am

Sanctaria wrote:
States of Glory WA Office wrote:Neville: Having reread the definition, it seems to us that member states aren't allowed to stipulate that the defendant in these cases must still be alive. Are we reading it correctly?

I don't speak for the author, but there is nothing in this piece of legislation that I can read that would prevent your nation, or any nation, from stipulating in further pieces of legislation that all defendants in criminal (or indeed civil) cases must be alive.

This legislation simply wishes to enforce the, wholly correct, notion that crimes against humanity should not have a statute of limitations.

Neville: Wouldn't a stipulation that the defendant be alive be an example of 'a limitation on the period of time following the commission of a crime that the alleged perpetrator or perpetrators may be prosecuted for that crime'?
Ambassador: Bartholomew Harper Fairburn Rowan Flowerhaze Souldream Bartholomew Harper Fairburn
Assistant: Neville Lynn Robert
#MakeLegislationFunnyAgain

Other ambassadorial staff include but are not limited to Barbera Warner and Harold "The Clown" Johnson.

User avatar
Separatist Peoples
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 13759
Founded: Feb 17, 2011
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Separatist Peoples » Tue Sep 05, 2017 6:08 am

States of Glory WA Office wrote:
Sanctaria wrote:I don't speak for the author, but there is nothing in this piece of legislation that I can read that would prevent your nation, or any nation, from stipulating in further pieces of legislation that all defendants in criminal (or indeed civil) cases must be alive.

This legislation simply wishes to enforce the, wholly correct, notion that crimes against humanity should not have a statute of limitations.

Neville: Wouldn't a stipulation that the defendant be alive be an example of 'a limitation on the period of time following the commission of a crime that the alleged perpetrator or perpetrators may be prosecuted for that crime'?

"I can't imagine what system would do this, but Fairness in Criminal Trials require the accused be able to face the accusor. I don't see how a dead person could do that, so it rather seems covered."

What's the problem with lawyer jokes?
Lawyer's don't think they're funny, and no one else thinks they're jokes.

Third year law student, homebrewer, and cat worshiper

User avatar
States of Glory WA Office
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1921
Founded: Jul 26, 2016
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby States of Glory WA Office » Tue Sep 05, 2017 6:12 am

Separatist Peoples wrote:
States of Glory WA Office wrote:Neville: Wouldn't a stipulation that the defendant be alive be an example of 'a limitation on the period of time following the commission of a crime that the alleged perpetrator or perpetrators may be prosecuted for that crime'?

"I can't imagine what system would do this, but Fairness in Criminal Trials require the accused be able to face the accusor. I don't see how a dead person could do that, so it rather seems covered."

Neville: I've read Fairness in Criminal Trials. I can't see where it requires that the accused should be able to face their accuser.
Ambassador: Bartholomew Harper Fairburn Rowan Flowerhaze Souldream Bartholomew Harper Fairburn
Assistant: Neville Lynn Robert
#MakeLegislationFunnyAgain

Other ambassadorial staff include but are not limited to Barbera Warner and Harold "The Clown" Johnson.

User avatar
Sanctaria
Senior Issues Editor
 
Posts: 7137
Founded: Sep 12, 2008
New York Times Democracy

Postby Sanctaria » Tue Sep 05, 2017 6:28 am

States of Glory WA Office wrote:Wouldn't a stipulation that the defendant be alive be an example of 'a limitation on the period of time following the commission of a crime that the alleged perpetrator or perpetrators may be prosecuted for that crime'?

No, it would not. Under no reading of this proposal, or mature understanding of what statute of limitations are, would that be a stipulation.
Divine Federation of Sanctaria

Ideological Bulwark #258
Member of UNOG

Dr. Katherine Saunders ORD DSJ, Sanctarian Ambassador to the World Assembly
Author of:
GA#109 GA#133 GA#176 GA#201 GA#222 GA#297
Frisbeeteria wrote:Do people not realize that moderators can tell when someone is wanking?

Luna Amore wrote:Sanc is always watching. Ever vigilant.

User avatar
Separatist Peoples
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 13759
Founded: Feb 17, 2011
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Separatist Peoples » Tue Sep 05, 2017 8:02 am

States of Glory WA Office wrote:
Separatist Peoples wrote:"I can't imagine what system would do this, but Fairness in Criminal Trials require the accused be able to face the accusor. I don't see how a dead person could do that, so it rather seems covered."

Neville: I've read Fairness in Criminal Trials. I can't see where it requires that the accused should be able to face their accuser.

"Huh. It appears I mixed up GAR#13 and GAR#37. My apologies."

What's the problem with lawyer jokes?
Lawyer's don't think they're funny, and no one else thinks they're jokes.

Third year law student, homebrewer, and cat worshiper

User avatar
The Bible Baptist Republic
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 120
Founded: May 28, 2017
Ex-Nation

Postby The Bible Baptist Republic » Tue Sep 05, 2017 9:57 am

The Bible Baptist Republic has no objection to this proposal and agrees that there are crimes so heinous that perpetrators should not be given an opportunity to run out a clock.
-- Ambassador Robert Make-Me-An-Instrument-Of-Your-Worship Conklin, Bible Baptist Republic

User avatar
States of Glory WA Office
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1921
Founded: Jul 26, 2016
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby States of Glory WA Office » Tue Sep 05, 2017 12:03 pm

Separatist Peoples wrote:
States of Glory WA Office wrote:Neville: I've read Fairness in Criminal Trials. I can't see where it requires that the accused should be able to face their accuser.

"Huh. It appears I mixed up GAR#13 and GAR#37. My apologies."

OOC: I decided to check out GA #13, only to realise that it was repealed. Curse you. :P

Sanctaria wrote:
States of Glory WA Office wrote:Wouldn't a stipulation that the defendant be alive be an example of 'a limitation on the period of time following the commission of a crime that the alleged perpetrator or perpetrators may be prosecuted for that crime'?

No, it would not. Under no reading of this proposal, or mature understanding of what statute of limitations are, would that be a stipulation.

Neville: The law does what the law says. We contend that under a literal reading of the proposal, our nation is not allowed to mandate that defendants in cases concerning war crimes and crimes against humanity should be alive.
Ambassador: Bartholomew Harper Fairburn Rowan Flowerhaze Souldream Bartholomew Harper Fairburn
Assistant: Neville Lynn Robert
#MakeLegislationFunnyAgain

Other ambassadorial staff include but are not limited to Barbera Warner and Harold "The Clown" Johnson.

User avatar
Deropia
Envoy
 
Posts: 235
Founded: Apr 08, 2014
Father Knows Best State

Postby Deropia » Tue Sep 05, 2017 12:26 pm

States of Glory WA Office wrote:
Sanctaria wrote:No, it would not. Under no reading of this proposal, or mature understanding of what statute of limitations are, would that be a stipulation.

Neville: The law does what the law says. We contend that under a literal reading of the proposal, our nation is not allowed to mandate that defendants in cases concerning war crimes and crimes against humanity should be alive.


"I would have to agree with the delegation from Sanctaria on this one, since the proposal text states..."
Auralia wrote:Defines a statutory limitation as a limitation on the period of time following the commission of a crime that the alleged perpetrator or perpetrators may be prosecuted for that crime

"It would seem to me that wither or not you place a deceased person on trial has less to do with a statute of limitations and more to do with wither or not your criminal justice system allows trials in absentia. Since a deceased person obviously can't attend court proceedings you could decline to prosecute based on that fact rather than the amount of time that has elapsed since the alleged offense."

EDIT: Grammatical changes.
Last edited by Deropia on Wed Sep 06, 2017 7:11 am, edited 1 time in total.
Lieutenant-Commander Jason MacAlister
Deropian Ambassador to the World Assembly
macalister.j@diplomats.com
Office 1302, 13th Floor, World Assembly Headquarters
Captain, North Pacific Army Special Forces

User avatar
States of Glory WA Office
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1921
Founded: Jul 26, 2016
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby States of Glory WA Office » Tue Sep 05, 2017 12:57 pm

Deropia wrote:
States of Glory WA Office wrote:
Neville: The law does what the law says. We contend that under a literal reading of the proposal, our nation is not allowed to mandate that defendants in cases concerning war crimes and crimes against humanity should be alive.


"I would have to agree with the delegation from Sanctaria on this one, since the proposal text states..."
Auralia wrote:Defines a statutory limitation as a limitation on the period of time following the commission of a crime that the alleged perpetrator or perpetrators may be prosecuted for that crime

"It would seem to me that wither or not you place a deceased person on trial has less to do with a statute of limitations, but wither or not your criminal justice system allows trials in absentia since a deceased person obviously can't attend court proceedings you could decline to prosecute based on that fact rather than the amount of time that has elapsed since the alleged offense."

Neville: That seems acceptable to us. In that case, we pledge our support for this proposal.
Ambassador: Bartholomew Harper Fairburn Rowan Flowerhaze Souldream Bartholomew Harper Fairburn
Assistant: Neville Lynn Robert
#MakeLegislationFunnyAgain

Other ambassadorial staff include but are not limited to Barbera Warner and Harold "The Clown" Johnson.

User avatar
Bears Armed
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 17654
Founded: Jun 01, 2006
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Bears Armed » Thu Sep 07, 2017 10:04 am

Deropia wrote:"It would seem to me that wither or not you place a deceased person on trial has less to do with a statute of limitations and more to do with wither or not your criminal justice system allows trials in absentia. Since a deceased person obviously can't attend court proceedings you could decline to prosecute based on that fact rather than the amount of time that has elapsed since the alleged offense."


"Our homeland's legal system does allow for the prosecution of ghosts, under certain circumstances. Such trials do not happen verrry often -- maybeso only once or twice per octade, across the whole country -- but they are a real thing."

Artorrios o SouthWoods,
ChairBear, Bears Armed Mission at the World Assembly.
The Confederated Clans of the Free Bears of Bears Armed
(includes The Ursine NorthLands) Demonym = Bear[s]; adjective = ‘Urrsish’.
Our population is approximately 20 million. We do have a national government, although its role is strictly limited. Economy = thriving. Those aren't "biker gangs", they're our traditional cross-Clan 'Warrior Societies'... and are generally respected, not feared.
Author of some GA Resolutions, via Bears Armed Mission; subject of an SC resolution.
Factbook. We have more than 70 MAPS. Visitors' Guide.
The IDU's WA Drafting Room is open to help you.
Author of issues #429, 712, 729, 934, 1120, 1152.

Next

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to WA Archives

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users

Advertisement

Remove ads