In principle, we support an enforcement mechanism for World Assembly law such as the one described by this proposal.
However, we insist as a condition of our support that any fine or economic sanction imposed by this proposal be proportionate to the nature of the violation, even if a proportionate fine or sanction is insufficient to induce compliance. This is a necessary condition for punishment to be legitimate. For example, a member state may not execute petty thieves because execution as a penalty is grossly disproportionate to the crime of petty theft. This prohibition holds even in cases where a thief's rate of recidivism is extremely high.
Accordingly, the following clause:
Coordinate with the WA General Accounting Office (GAO) to assess and levy a fine and schedule calculated proportionately to the violation but in no case less than what will reasonably coerce compliance from member states.
must be changed to:
Coordinate with the WA General Accounting Office (GAO) to assess and levy a fine and schedule calculated to reasonably coerce compliance from member states but in no case disproportionate to the violation.
Moreover, the following clause:
Member states are obligated to enforce the strongest measures of economic sanction available against those member states which refuse to pay IAO fines, subject to the limitations of extant law.
must be changed to:
Member states are obligated to enforce measures of economic sanction available against those member states which refuse to pay IAO fines, calculated proportionately to the violation of World Assembly law for which the fine was imposed but in no case disproportionate to the violation, subject to the limitations of extant law.
We also insist as a condition of our support that there be a right of appeal of a fine imposed by the Independent Adjudicative Office to another World Assembly body.
Martin Russell
Chief Ambassador, Auralian Mission to the World Assembly