NATION

PASSWORD

[DISCARDED] Repeal "On Universal Jurisdiction"

Where WA members debate how to improve the world, one resolution at a time.
User avatar
Imperium Anglorum
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8220
Founded: Aug 26, 2013
Left-Leaning College State

[DISCARDED] Repeal "On Universal Jurisdiction"

Postby Imperium Anglorum » Tue Jul 17, 2018 9:59 am

Image
Repeal "On Universal Jurisdiction"
Category: Repeal



This august World Assembly,

Concerned that the target resolution requires nations to prosecute in section 3, but that the target does not also require that nations provide prosecutors with information they may have, meaning that the target sets up a prosecutorial scheme where nations may be prosecuting persons without a full accounting of the facts,

Observing that section 7 of the target resolution “[f]orbids the World Assembly from preempting a member state’s claim to universal jurisdiction under this resolution, including but not limited to through an international criminal court or a substantially similar institution”,

Seeing that it is patently obvious that this section prohibits the Assembly from establishing an international court,

Believing that a lack of such a court means:

  1. there are few prosecutions of war criminals and perpetrators of genocide, since (i) prosecutorial discretion exists, due to differing interpretations of section 3(c) and (ii) such criminals and perpetrators would not willingly move themselves to jurisdictions which would prosecute them and

  2. victims of war crimes and other crimes against humanity are unlikely to receive justice, as (i) even when prosecutions occur, they will likely be in friendly jurisdictions, meaning that they will be slaps on the wrist and (ii) section 3(b) prohibits a second trial, even when punishment is minimal to nonexistent,
Expressing its malcontent at this state of affairs, where criminality of the worst degree is not punished and where the international rules-based order is unable to deter or bring justice to would-be tyrants from engaging in mass murder or other heinous crimes,

Saddened at the deaths caused by the Assembly’s inability to act and the incredible injustices that the Assembly is unable to take action to right, and

Calling for the creation of an compulsory, fair, and effective international tribunal to resolve these issues, hereby:

Repeals GA 312 “On Universal Jurisdiction”.
Last edited by Wrapper on Wed Sep 05, 2018 1:06 pm, edited 6 times in total.

Author: 1 SC and 24 GA resolutions
Maintainer: GA Passed Resolutions
Developer: Communiqué and Regional Records
Delegate for Europe
Out-of-character unless marked otherwise
Ideological Bulwark 285, WALL delegate

User avatar
Wallenburg
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 18952
Founded: Jan 30, 2015
New York Times Democracy

Postby Wallenburg » Tue Jul 17, 2018 9:59 am

Against.
PROFESSIONAL CRITIC OF ALL THINGS GENSEC
There never has been, nor will there ever be, such thing as a wallenburger.
grestin went through the MKULTRA program and he has more of a free will than wallenburg does - Imperial Idaho
PRO: GOOD || ANTI: BAD

User avatar
Xanthal
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1005
Founded: Apr 16, 2005
Scandinavian Liberal Paradise

Postby Xanthal » Thu Aug 23, 2018 7:29 pm

You have my support for a repeal, only because I regard GAR312 as largely useless, but I'm obliged to point out while the Federation agrees with the broad strokes of your argument, it would be useful to have at least a draft replacement text to which I could refer. Xanthal does support the establishment of a WA criminal court in principle, but the devil, as always, is in the details. I can't promise a vote for a replacement without a much clearer picture of what that would be.
General Assembly IC
Security Council OOC

User avatar
Cosmopolitan borovan
Diplomat
 
Posts: 990
Founded: Jan 18, 2018
Father Knows Best State

Postby Cosmopolitan borovan » Thu Aug 23, 2018 8:22 pm

Article 3 section 3 s bad under on universal jurisdiction. For
Last edited by Cosmopolitan borovan on Thu Aug 23, 2018 8:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Kenmoria
Minister
 
Posts: 3424
Founded: Jul 03, 2017
Corporate Bordello

Postby Kenmoria » Fri Aug 24, 2018 5:04 am

“The main gist of this repeal, contained in all but one of the applicable clauses, is that the resolution prevents the WA from creating a universal court that would prosecuted incredibly serious crimes. I do not see why this is such a bad thing; the basis of international relations is that each country has the right to conduct itself how it pleases, within the constraints of international law. If a leader commits crimes that are against another nation, they can be tried there. If their actions affect no other state, there is no reason to try them.”
A representative democracy with a parliament of 535 seats
Currently centre-right on economy but centre-left on social issues
Located in Europe and border France to the right and Spain below
NS stats and policies are not canon, use the factbooks
Not in the WA despite coincidentally following all resolutions
This is due to a problem with how the WA contradicts our democracy
However we do have a WA mission and often participate in drafting
Current ambassador: James Lewitt

For more information, read the factbooks here.

User avatar
Separatist Peoples
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 13389
Founded: Feb 17, 2011
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Separatist Peoples » Fri Aug 24, 2018 5:05 am

Kenmoria wrote:“The main gist of this repeal, contained in all but one of the applicable clauses, is that the resolution prevents the WA from creating a universal court that would prosecuted incredibly serious crimes. I do not see why this is such a bad thing; the basis of international relations is that each country has the right to conduct itself how it pleases, within the constraints of international law. If a leader commits crimes that are against another nation, they can be tried there. If their actions affect no other state, there is no reason to try them.”

"Ambassador, do you not see the inherent conflict with allowing the perpetrator of an international crime to be tried in either their own nation or the victim nation?"

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
Kenmoria
Minister
 
Posts: 3424
Founded: Jul 03, 2017
Corporate Bordello

Postby Kenmoria » Fri Aug 24, 2018 5:13 am

Separatist Peoples wrote:
Kenmoria wrote:“The main gist of this repeal, contained in all but one of the applicable clauses, is that the resolution prevents the WA from creating a universal court that would prosecuted incredibly serious crimes. I do not see why this is such a bad thing; the basis of international relations is that each country has the right to conduct itself how it pleases, within the constraints of international law. If a leader commits crimes that are against another nation, they can be tried there. If their actions affect no other state, there is no reason to try them.”

"Ambassador, do you not see the inherent conflict with allowing the perpetrator of an international crime to be tried in either their own nation or the victim nation?"

“The target resolution requires all prosecution to be conducted ‘safely and fairly’, so there cannot be an issue with bias. There is also a line whichever states that the punishment must not be disproportionate to the crime committed, so the idea that the victim nation would prosecute too harshly is unfounded. There is also the fact that most war crimes are done by people representing nations, so sanctions could be applied to the perpetrator’s nation rather than the perpetrator themself.”
A representative democracy with a parliament of 535 seats
Currently centre-right on economy but centre-left on social issues
Located in Europe and border France to the right and Spain below
NS stats and policies are not canon, use the factbooks
Not in the WA despite coincidentally following all resolutions
This is due to a problem with how the WA contradicts our democracy
However we do have a WA mission and often participate in drafting
Current ambassador: James Lewitt

For more information, read the factbooks here.

User avatar
Thyerata
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 408
Founded: Mar 17, 2017
Ex-Nation

Postby Thyerata » Fri Aug 24, 2018 5:18 am

The doctrine of universal jurisdiction allows any member state to prosecute crimes no matter where they occur. This means that a member state may prosecute, in its courts, another state's citizens for crimes recognised under the doctrine. Consequently there is no need for a "world court".

Opposed - though show us a replacement and we may reconsider (although it is very unlikely)

OOC: I would suggest you read this first: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_jurisdiction. Furthermore, leading international criminal law scholars recognise the doctrine as a valid exercise of the inherent duty to prosecute. It has also been recognised as part of customary international law by Werle and Jessberger. O'Keefe recognises it too (though he acknowledges that it is controversial). Cryer goes so far as to say that universal jurisdiction has become entrenched
I did this in my Masters 6 months ago. I know what I'm talking about.
From the Desk of the Honourable Matthew Merriweather Ph.D. (Law, 2040) LLM Public and International Law, 2036) LLB Law (2035) (all from Thyerata State University)
Thytian Ambassador to the World Assembly and Security Council

I'm a gay LLM candidate with mild Asperger syndrome and only one functioning eye. My IC posts may reflect this, so please be aware

User avatar
Separatist Peoples
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 13389
Founded: Feb 17, 2011
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Separatist Peoples » Fri Aug 24, 2018 5:51 am

Kenmoria wrote:
Separatist Peoples wrote:"Ambassador, do you not see the inherent conflict with allowing the perpetrator of an international crime to be tried in either their own nation or the victim nation?"

“The target resolution requires all prosecution to be conducted ‘safely and fairly’, so there cannot be an issue with bias. There is also a line whichever states that the punishment must not be disproportionate to the crime committed, so the idea that the victim nation would prosecute too harshly is unfounded. There is also the fact that most war crimes are done by people representing nations, so sanctions could be applied to the perpetrator’s nation rather than the perpetrator themself.”


"There are any number of legal tricks a court can use that maintain the facade of fairness, ambassador. And "disproportionate" is equally flexible when a population is angry. Or defensive. Surely you see the inherent subjectivity when you leave such a charged issue to national courts?"

OOC: The first round of Nuremberg trials were drumhead courts, more intent on vengeance and dismantling the power structure of the fallen Nazi Reich than on justice. They were the definition of Victor's Justice. Don't tell me that nations of either victims or perpetrators can be unbiased. Both have agendas. An international court has the advantage of having existing procedure and law, and insulation from agendas.

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
Separatist Peoples
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 13389
Founded: Feb 17, 2011
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Separatist Peoples » Fri Aug 24, 2018 6:50 am

Thyerata wrote:The doctrine of universal jurisdiction allows any member state to prosecute crimes no matter where they occur. This means that a member state may prosecute, in its courts, another state's citizens for crimes recognised under the doctrine. Consequently there is no need for a "world court".

Opposed - though show us a replacement and we may reconsider (although it is very unlikely)

OOC: I would suggest you read this first: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_jurisdiction. Furthermore, leading international criminal law scholars recognise the doctrine as a valid exercise of the inherent duty to prosecute. It has also been recognised as part of customary international law by Werle and Jessberger. O'Keefe recognises it too (though he acknowledges that it is controversial). Cryer goes so far as to say that universal jurisdiction has become entrenched
I did this in my Masters 6 months ago. I know what I'm talking about.

OOC: There is no customary international law in the GA. IA has without a doubt taken the time to research the topic. Probably well beyond the Wiki page.

Real World International customary practice isn't recognized in the GA, where there is no IC recognized customary practice other than codified international statute and rule.

Further, nothing prevents nations from maintaining universal jurisdiction practices on their own post-repeal.

Lets not wave credentials around if you cannot apply them to the GA.
Last edited by Separatist Peoples on Fri Aug 24, 2018 6:50 am, edited 1 time in total.

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
Thyerata
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 408
Founded: Mar 17, 2017
Ex-Nation

Postby Thyerata » Fri Aug 24, 2018 7:04 am

Separatist Peoples wrote:
Thyerata wrote:The doctrine of universal jurisdiction allows any member state to prosecute crimes no matter where they occur. This means that a member state may prosecute, in its courts, another state's citizens for crimes recognised under the doctrine. Consequently there is no need for a "world court".

Opposed - though show us a replacement and we may reconsider (although it is very unlikely)

OOC: I would suggest you read this first: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_jurisdiction. Furthermore, leading international criminal law scholars recognise the doctrine as a valid exercise of the inherent duty to prosecute. It has also been recognised as part of customary international law by Werle and Jessberger. O'Keefe recognises it too (though he acknowledges that it is controversial). Cryer goes so far as to say that universal jurisdiction has become entrenched
I did this in my Masters 6 months ago. I know what I'm talking about.

OOC: There is no customary international law in the GA. IA has without a doubt taken the time to research the topic. Probably well beyond the Wiki page.

Real World International customary practice isn't recognized in the GA, where there is no IC recognized customary practice other than codified international statute and rule.

Further, nothing prevents nations from maintaining universal jurisdiction practices on their own post-repeal.

Lets not wave credentials around if you cannot apply them to the GA.


OOC: you realise that everything from "OOC" onwards was to be read OOC? I should add that telling me not to cite to RL, while doing so yourself, is a bit of hypocrisy
Last edited by Thyerata on Fri Aug 24, 2018 7:05 am, edited 1 time in total.
From the Desk of the Honourable Matthew Merriweather Ph.D. (Law, 2040) LLM Public and International Law, 2036) LLB Law (2035) (all from Thyerata State University)
Thytian Ambassador to the World Assembly and Security Council

I'm a gay LLM candidate with mild Asperger syndrome and only one functioning eye. My IC posts may reflect this, so please be aware

User avatar
Imperium Anglorum
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8220
Founded: Aug 26, 2013
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Imperium Anglorum » Fri Aug 24, 2018 7:14 am

Actual application of the argument to policies applied in the GA one way or another would require their IC applicability. Which is also what Sep talks about when he says 'Lets not wave credentials around if you cannot apply them to the GA'. But that distracts from the total non-response to anything Sep said anyway, so I guess we're done here. As my ambassador would say, 'Addressed'.

Author: 1 SC and 24 GA resolutions
Maintainer: GA Passed Resolutions
Developer: Communiqué and Regional Records
Delegate for Europe
Out-of-character unless marked otherwise
Ideological Bulwark 285, WALL delegate

User avatar
Separatist Peoples
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 13389
Founded: Feb 17, 2011
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Separatist Peoples » Fri Aug 24, 2018 7:28 am

Thyerata wrote:OOC: you realise that everything from "OOC" onwards was to be read OOC? I should add that telling me not to cite to RL, while doing so yourself, is a bit of hypocrisy


OOC: I did use an analogous example to demonstrate what would happen. I did not use it to bolster an argument that a legal policy exists ICly.

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
Wallenburg
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 18952
Founded: Jan 30, 2015
New York Times Democracy

Postby Wallenburg » Fri Aug 24, 2018 8:47 am

Still against.
PROFESSIONAL CRITIC OF ALL THINGS GENSEC
There never has been, nor will there ever be, such thing as a wallenburger.
grestin went through the MKULTRA program and he has more of a free will than wallenburg does - Imperial Idaho
PRO: GOOD || ANTI: BAD

User avatar
Furry Things
Bureaucrat
 
Posts: 44
Founded: Feb 12, 2018
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Furry Things » Sat Sep 01, 2018 11:03 am

I don't see any drafting on this nor do I see a proposed replacement resolution. Against.

User avatar
Imperium Anglorum
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8220
Founded: Aug 26, 2013
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Imperium Anglorum » Sat Sep 01, 2018 11:05 am

Furry Things wrote:I don't see any drafting on this nor do I see a proposed replacement resolution. Against.

Lol. 17 Jul 2018

Author: 1 SC and 24 GA resolutions
Maintainer: GA Passed Resolutions
Developer: Communiqué and Regional Records
Delegate for Europe
Out-of-character unless marked otherwise
Ideological Bulwark 285, WALL delegate

User avatar
Wallenburg
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 18952
Founded: Jan 30, 2015
New York Times Democracy

Postby Wallenburg » Sat Sep 01, 2018 11:11 am

Imperium Anglorum wrote:
Furry Things wrote:I don't see any drafting on this nor do I see a proposed replacement resolution. Against.

Lol. 17 Jul 2018

That wasn't a draft. You just resubmitted the same undrafted proposal as before.
PROFESSIONAL CRITIC OF ALL THINGS GENSEC
There never has been, nor will there ever be, such thing as a wallenburger.
grestin went through the MKULTRA program and he has more of a free will than wallenburg does - Imperial Idaho
PRO: GOOD || ANTI: BAD

User avatar
Kenmoria
Minister
 
Posts: 3424
Founded: Jul 03, 2017
Corporate Bordello

Postby Kenmoria » Sat Sep 01, 2018 12:33 pm

Furry Things wrote:I don't see any drafting on this nor do I see a proposed replacement resolution. Against.

(OOC: I agree with this, and am also against.)
A representative democracy with a parliament of 535 seats
Currently centre-right on economy but centre-left on social issues
Located in Europe and border France to the right and Spain below
NS stats and policies are not canon, use the factbooks
Not in the WA despite coincidentally following all resolutions
This is due to a problem with how the WA contradicts our democracy
However we do have a WA mission and often participate in drafting
Current ambassador: James Lewitt

For more information, read the factbooks here.

User avatar
Xanthal
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1005
Founded: Apr 16, 2005
Scandinavian Liberal Paradise

Postby Xanthal » Sat Sep 01, 2018 12:37 pm

OOC: It's a repeal; that's literally its only effect. How much drafting is really necessary? A master politician's preamble and me jamming my fist on the keyboard a few times make absolutely no substantive difference. I agree it would be nice to have some idea of where we're going from here though, vis-a-vis a replacement.
General Assembly IC
Security Council OOC

User avatar
Sierra Lyricalia
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 2974
Founded: Nov 29, 2008
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Sierra Lyricalia » Sat Sep 01, 2018 12:41 pm

Thyerata wrote:Furthermore, leading international criminal law scholars recognise the doctrine as a valid exercise of the inherent duty to prosecute. It has also been recognised as part of customary international law by Werle and Jessberger. O'Keefe recognises it too (though he acknowledges that it is controversial). Cryer goes so far as to say that universal jurisdiction has become entrenched


OOC: None of which means The Hague has nothing to do, or makes it superfluous in any way. If all the target did was oblige nations to prosecute where they think they can get a conviction, that would be tolerable-to-peachy, but it also specifically forbids the creation of an international body to handle such crimes. RL universal jurisdiction has the advantage of that gold standard for people to measure it against and thus improve national procedures where necessary; but the WA has left everything in local hands. That's not a tenable situation for a supranational body intent on actually enforcing human rights.
Principal-Agent & Master of Duck Recipes, Anarchy
The Mostly Alright Steph Zakalwe *
Author: 354 GA / Issues 436, 451, 724
S.L. Ambassador to the World Assembly
Tech Level: Complicated (or not: 7/0/6 i.e. 12) / RP Details
The Semi-Honorable Leonid Berkman Pavonis,
Ambassador-At-Large
Illustrious Bum #279
Pol. Compass: Econ. -5 to -8, Soc. -8 to -9 (depending), 8values: LibSoc
"When the people are being beaten with a stick, they are not much happier if it is called 'the People’s Stick.'" -Mikhail Bakunin (to Karl Marx)


User avatar
Imperium Anglorum
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8220
Founded: Aug 26, 2013
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Imperium Anglorum » Sat Sep 01, 2018 1:35 pm

Wallenburg wrote:That wasn't a draft. You just resubmitted the same undrafted proposal as before.

Lol, what, was the thread locked?

Sierra Lyricalia wrote:
Thyerata wrote:Furthermore, leading international criminal law scholars recognise the doctrine as a valid exercise of the inherent duty to prosecute. It has also been recognised as part of customary international law by Werle and Jessberger. O'Keefe recognises it too (though he acknowledges that it is controversial). Cryer goes so far as to say that universal jurisdiction has become entrenched

OOC: None of which means The Hague has nothing to do, or makes it superfluous in any way. If all the target did was oblige nations to prosecute where they think they can get a conviction, that would be tolerable-to-peachy, but it also specifically forbids the creation of an international body to handle such crimes. RL universal jurisdiction has the advantage of that gold standard for people to measure it against and thus improve national procedures where necessary; but the WA has left everything in local hands. That's not a tenable situation for a supranational body intent on actually enforcing human rights.

This is a good point. OUJ doesn't create universal jurisdiction. Nations can still claim it and exercise it. The main thing actually relevant here is that OUJ stops the creation of an international criminal court. What the WA has created is a system so that people who commit genocide don't get punished unless they opt into some jurisdiction in which they will get punished, which is pointless.
Last edited by Imperium Anglorum on Sat Sep 01, 2018 1:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Author: 1 SC and 24 GA resolutions
Maintainer: GA Passed Resolutions
Developer: Communiqué and Regional Records
Delegate for Europe
Out-of-character unless marked otherwise
Ideological Bulwark 285, WALL delegate

User avatar
Lord Dominator
Minister
 
Posts: 3214
Founded: Dec 22, 2016
Corporate Police State

Postby Lord Dominator » Sat Sep 01, 2018 1:51 pm

"Hrm, this seems decent. Might as well support." At this, Dee wanders out of the room and back to the Bar.
Osiris Sub-Vizier of WA AffairsDee Vytherov-SkollvaldrForest is a great regionThe Black Hawks LieutenantCitizen of Lazarus

User avatar
Arasi Luvasa
Envoy
 
Posts: 254
Founded: Aug 29, 2018
Democratic Socialists

Postby Arasi Luvasa » Sat Sep 01, 2018 2:51 pm

What the WA has created is a system so that people who commit genocide don't get punished unless they opt into some jurisdiction in which they will get punished, which is pointless.


While I do agree that this is an issue,I believe the issue most have is that there has been no alternative suggested. This is merely to repeal Universal Jurisdiction and thus needs not suggest the alternative, I do understand this, positing the alternative would likely convince more to support the idea. Yes I am also aware that the new proposal would likely mirror Universal Jurisdiction with slight alterations or specifically introduce the guidelines for an international court. Providing this would likely convince more individuals that this is the right move.
Ambassador Ariela Galadriel Maria Mirase
37 year old Arch-bishop of the Arasi Christian Church (also the youngest ever arch-bishop and fifth woman in the church hierarchy). An attractive but stern woman with a strict adherence to religious and moral ethical codes, also somewhat of an optimist. She was recently appointed to the position following the election of Adrian Midnight to the position of Patriarch.

User avatar
Wallenburg
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 18952
Founded: Jan 30, 2015
New York Times Democracy

Postby Wallenburg » Sat Sep 01, 2018 3:11 pm

Imperium Anglorum wrote:
Wallenburg wrote:That wasn't a draft. You just resubmitted the same undrafted proposal as before.

Lol, what, was the thread locked?

Argh! These zingers are diabolically lethal! I yield, I yield! :roll:
PROFESSIONAL CRITIC OF ALL THINGS GENSEC
There never has been, nor will there ever be, such thing as a wallenburger.
grestin went through the MKULTRA program and he has more of a free will than wallenburg does - Imperial Idaho
PRO: GOOD || ANTI: BAD

User avatar
Separatist Peoples
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 13389
Founded: Feb 17, 2011
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Separatist Peoples » Sat Sep 01, 2018 4:17 pm

Wallenburg wrote:
Imperium Anglorum wrote:Lol, what, was the thread locked?

Argh! These zingers are diabolically lethal! I yield, I yield! :roll:

Ooc: you heard Wally, everybody. IA wins. Everybody has to vote For now, or get banjected from the internet.

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

Next

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General Assembly

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Inberdia, The Sect Meces

Advertisement

Remove ads