OOC: My what now?
You mean this?
Advertisement
by Sierra Lyricalia » Sat Dec 02, 2017 12:17 am
by Imperium Anglorum » Sat Dec 02, 2017 12:19 am
Separatist Peoples wrote:OOC: Based on SL's majority opinion in Mandatory Vaccinations, I don't think it will be necessary.
by Auralia » Sat Dec 02, 2017 7:38 pm
by Auralia » Sat Dec 02, 2017 8:13 pm
by United Massachusetts » Sat Dec 02, 2017 8:21 pm
Auralia wrote:We note further that, should this proposal become World Assembly law, Auralia does not recognize the authority of the IAO to levy fines for non-compliance with World Assembly resolutions that violate the moral law.
This declaration is pursuant to the reservation filed by Auralia upon joining the World Assembly, in which we stated our understanding that the object and purpose of the World Assembly is not to compel member states to enact unjust laws, and that accordingly we may validly declare that our membership does not entail any obligation to comply with World Assembly resolutions that require defiance of the moral law or prevent the execution of moral obligations.
Martin Russell
Chief Ambassador, Auralian Mission to the World Assembly
by Separatist Peoples » Sat Dec 02, 2017 8:29 pm
by Separatist Peoples » Sat Dec 02, 2017 8:38 pm
by Bruke » Sat Dec 02, 2017 9:21 pm
by Separatist Peoples » Sat Dec 02, 2017 9:27 pm
Bruke wrote:The Royal Republic concurs with Auralia and United Massachusets.
There is the possibility, if this resolution is passed, of nations being forced to choose between their self-interest and their most fundamental values and beliefs.
This resolution as it stands is abhorrent to us, and we will not support it.
Dessalegne Nega
by Bruke » Sat Dec 02, 2017 9:34 pm
by Separatist Peoples » Sat Dec 02, 2017 9:35 pm
Bruke wrote:"It is not against our self-interest, quite the opposite considering the penalties you're proposing. But we do fear it may be against our most fundamental values."
by Auralia » Sun Dec 03, 2017 1:20 pm
Separatist Peoples wrote:"The C.D.S.P. does not recognize the concept of 'morality'. Further, we recognize that obeying this demand - for it is nothing less than a demand - would gut this legislation. Were we to cede to these demands, there would be no reason to continue. The C.D.S.P. rarely engages in pointless activity."
by States of Glory WA Office » Sun Dec 03, 2017 4:16 pm
Auralia wrote:Separatist Peoples wrote:"The C.D.S.P. does not recognize the concept of 'morality'. Further, we recognize that obeying this demand - for it is nothing less than a demand - would gut this legislation. Were we to cede to these demands, there would be no reason to continue. The C.D.S.P. rarely engages in pointless activity."
I don't see how proportionality in IAO punishments "guts" this legislation any more than proportionality in member state punishments "guts" the criminal justice system in those nations. A proportionate punishment will often have the effect of inducing compliance with the law. However, it is necessary to accept this is not always the case, and it is not permissible to inflict an unjust punishment simply to accomplish that goal of compliance. The ends simply do not justify the means.
Martin Russell
Chief Ambassador, Auralian Mission to the World Assembly
by Auralia » Sun Dec 03, 2017 4:40 pm
States of Glory WA Office wrote:Auralia wrote:I don't see how proportionality in IAO punishments "guts" this legislation any more than proportionality in member state punishments "guts" the criminal justice system in those nations. A proportionate punishment will often have the effect of inducing compliance with the law. However, it is necessary to accept this is not always the case, and it is not permissible to inflict an unjust punishment simply to accomplish that goal of compliance. The ends simply do not justify the means.
Martin Russell
Chief Ambassador, Auralian Mission to the World Assembly
Neville: The rationale behind a punishment is to prevent recidivism. A punishment that fails to accomplish that goal fails as a punishment, and thus a harsher punishment must be dealt. I'm not saying "KILL ALL PETTY CRIMINALS!", but I am saying that punishments need to be harsh if an individual is likely to reoffend. It's true that rehabilitative justice can complement punitive action, but that's apparently too "soft" and "socialist" for some member states.
by Aclion » Sun Dec 03, 2017 5:23 pm
States of Glory WA Office wrote:Auralia wrote:I don't see how proportionality in IAO punishments "guts" this legislation any more than proportionality in member state punishments "guts" the criminal justice system in those nations. A proportionate punishment will often have the effect of inducing compliance with the law. However, it is necessary to accept this is not always the case, and it is not permissible to inflict an unjust punishment simply to accomplish that goal of compliance. The ends simply do not justify the means.
Martin Russell
Chief Ambassador, Auralian Mission to the World Assembly
Neville: The rationale behind a punishment is to prevent recidivism. A punishment that fails to accomplish that goal fails as a punishment, and thus a harsher punishment must be dealt. I'm not saying "KILL ALL PETTY CRIMINALS!", but I am saying that punishments need to be harsh if an individual is likely to reoffend. It's true that rehabilitative justice can complement punitive action, but that's apparently too "soft" and "socialist" for some member states.
by Tinfect » Wed Dec 06, 2017 5:11 pm
Imperium Central News Network: EMERGENCY ALERT: ALL CITIZENS ARE TO PROCEED TO EVACUATION SITES IMMEDIATELY | EMERGENCY ALERT: ALL FURTHER SUBSPACE SIGNALS AND SYSTEMS ARE TO BE DISABLED IMMEDIATELY | EMERGENCY ALERT: THE FOLLOWING SYSTEMS ARE ACCESS PROHIBITED BY STANDARD/BLACKOUT [Error: Format Unrecognized] | Indomitable Bastard #283
by The Greater Siriusian Domain » Thu Dec 07, 2017 11:20 am
by Separatist Peoples » Thu Dec 07, 2017 11:32 am
The Greater Siriusian Domain wrote:Teran Saber: "Unfortunately, due to the risk of legislation being passed that could potentially dismantle certain nations, we have decided to oppose this proposal. You may remember that there were a few proposals that would have heavily restricted space flight or banned colonies on other planets, which would have adversely affected nations that consist of multiple planets. If such a proposal ever passes, it would be impossible for such nations to comply."
by The Greater Siriusian Domain » Thu Dec 07, 2017 12:02 pm
Separatist Peoples wrote:The Greater Siriusian Domain wrote:Teran Saber: "Unfortunately, due to the risk of legislation being passed that could potentially dismantle certain nations, we have decided to oppose this proposal. You may remember that there were a few proposals that would have heavily restricted space flight or banned colonies on other planets, which would have adversely affected nations that consist of multiple planets. If such a proposal ever passes, it would be impossible for such nations to comply."
"That's what repeals are for. You'll note that the fines consider ability to comply."
by Separatist Peoples » Thu Dec 07, 2017 12:14 pm
by Wallenburg » Thu Dec 07, 2017 12:16 pm
Separatist Peoples wrote:OOC: Do we have any legality challenges beyond the HoC? Duplication? Contradiction? Legislating in a Repeal?
by Imperium Anglorum » Thu Dec 07, 2017 12:16 pm
Separatist Peoples wrote:OOC: Do we have any legality challenges beyond the HoC? Duplication? Contradiction? Legislating in a Repeal?
by Separatist Peoples » Thu Dec 07, 2017 12:28 pm
by Wallenburg » Thu Dec 07, 2017 12:31 pm
by Separatist Peoples » Thu Dec 07, 2017 12:32 pm
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: No registered users
Advertisement