NATION

PASSWORD

[PASSED] Command Responsibility

Where WA members debate how to improve the world, one resolution at a time.

Advertisement

Remove ads

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

Postby Thyerata » Tue Aug 28, 2018 4:36 pm

Separatist Peoples wrote:
Thyerata wrote:OOC: I'm having trouble with Article II. Assuming you're following RL public international law in this resolution, the "I was following orders" defence either doesn't exist, or is severely restricted. If that were true - and I'd need to check my books when I go back to university next week - then Article II is redundant


OOC: you're not correct. The Nuremburg defense may fly in Nationstates because some nations will consider that acceptable as a defense. Certainly, there is nothing that bans it as a defense, currently. I've limited it. Similarly, I've bolstered it in a select few circumstances, so the opposite approach, that it is never a good defense, isn't always true.

Unlike Real World international law, we assume there is no common law or customary law when writing WA resolutions. If it isn't written into statute, then its the wild west.


OOC: Thyerata does follow RL public international law, meaning that the Nuremberg defence would not work. Consequently Article II is incompatible with domestic law.

IC: it is our view that the defence of "I was just following orders" does not exist in international law. In any event Thytian law does not recognise it. Consequently, as Article II seems to envisage such a defence, we are opposed to this proposal.
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: 13784
Founded: Feb 17, 2011
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Separatist Peoples » Tue Aug 28, 2018 4:38 pm

Thyerata wrote:
OOC: Thyerata does follow RL public international law, meaning that the Nuremberg defence would not work. Consequently Article II is incompatible with domestic law.

OOC: National law is not a defense to not comply with international law, and it isn't a justification to prevent drafting on a topic. Vote against.
IC: it is our view that the defence of "I was just following orders" does not exist in international law. In any event Thytian law does not recognise it. Consequently, as Article II seems to envisage such a defence, we are opposed to this proposal.

"If you are unwilling to comply with WA law, you and I have little to discuss. Until then, your vote against is noted."

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: 8435
Founded: Aug 26, 2013
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Imperium Anglorum » Tue Aug 28, 2018 5:00 pm

lolwut, GA 2.

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
Bears Armed
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 17664
Founded: Jun 01, 2006
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Bears Armed » Wed Aug 29, 2018 5:35 am

*<notes that the definition of "commander" used in Article 1.1 would cover not only officers in the standard line of command but also political commissars or religious inquisitors>*

"Good. We can, and will, support this."

Hwa Sue,
Legal Attaché,
Bears Armed Mission to the World Assembly
(and anthropomorphic male Giant Panda).
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.

User avatar
Separatist Peoples
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 13784
Founded: Feb 17, 2011
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Separatist Peoples » Thu Aug 30, 2018 3:56 am

"All edits made to bring this up to date."

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: 13784
Founded: Feb 17, 2011
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Separatist Peoples » Fri Aug 31, 2018 5:46 pm

OOC: I know I'm good, but am I that good?

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
Senator
 
Posts: 3788
Founded: Jul 03, 2017
Corporate Bordello

Postby Kenmoria » Sat Sep 01, 2018 1:32 am

“Clause I-4 seems unusually harsh for a WA-mandated punishment, where said infraction could have happened years ago or was of a very trivial nature.”
A representative democracy with a parliament of 535 seats
Kenmoria is Laissez-Faire 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 nearly all resolutions
This is due to a problem with how the WA contradicts 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: 13784
Founded: Feb 17, 2011
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Separatist Peoples » Sat Sep 01, 2018 4:45 am

Kenmoria wrote:“Clause I-4 seems unusually harsh for a WA-mandated punishment, where said infraction could have happened years ago or was of a very trivial nature.”

"Clause four is not punitive. Clause four is a disincentive so nations cant stack up the same trivial punishments on their one general who is happy to get his hands dirty. It prevents abuse, even if its harsh. Frankly, if you're found guilty of a war crime, you were unlikely to retain command anyway."

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 Free Islands of Independence
Envoy
 
Posts: 256
Founded: Oct 01, 2016
Iron Fist Consumerists

Postby The Free Islands of Independence » Sat Sep 01, 2018 11:16 pm

"The FII supports this proposal and will vote for this should it go to vote."
No NS stats please.
Embassy Program: viewtopic.php?f=23&t=425840
QNA: viewtopic.php?f=23&t=427001

User avatar
Tuummaarraa
Lobbyist
 
Posts: 14
Founded: Sep 03, 2018
Ex-Nation

Postby Tuummaarraa » Mon Sep 10, 2018 12:17 pm

I am going to say this diplomatically: I am against your proposal and will not support it in any way. Your suggestions will only lead to the eventual downfall of the affected nations. Try again.

User avatar
Separatist Peoples
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 13784
Founded: Feb 17, 2011
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Separatist Peoples » Mon Sep 10, 2018 12:36 pm

Tuummaarraa wrote:I am going to say this diplomatically: I am against your proposal and will not support it in any way. Your suggestions will only lead to the eventual downfall of the affected nations. Try again.

"No. Your vote against is noted, though."

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: 13784
Founded: Feb 17, 2011
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Separatist Peoples » Sat Sep 15, 2018 6:43 am

OOC: Bump

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: 8435
Founded: Aug 26, 2013
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Imperium Anglorum » Sat Sep 15, 2018 2:03 pm

I have no real objections.

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
Cosmopolitan borovan
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1033
Founded: Jan 18, 2018
Ex-Nation

Postby Cosmopolitan borovan » Sun Sep 16, 2018 8:25 pm

I support

User avatar
Separatist Peoples
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 13784
Founded: Feb 17, 2011
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Separatist Peoples » Sat Dec 15, 2018 4:12 pm

OOC: Bump

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
Old Hope
Diplomat
 
Posts: 761
Founded: Sep 21, 2014
Tyranny by Majority

Postby Old Hope » Sat Dec 15, 2018 5:25 pm

"Well written, sensible legislation... we will vote for if this ever comes to vote in this version, and recommend the authoring nation to submit this version for consideration."

User avatar
Kenmoria
Senator
 
Posts: 3788
Founded: Jul 03, 2017
Corporate Bordello

Postby Kenmoria » Sun Dec 16, 2018 3:31 am

“I have no objections. Nothing in here looks as though it could pose any problems at vote, nor requires more rethinking.”
A representative democracy with a parliament of 535 seats
Kenmoria is Laissez-Faire 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 nearly all resolutions
This is due to a problem with how the WA contradicts 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
Bears Armed
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 17664
Founded: Jun 01, 2006
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Bears Armed » Sun Dec 16, 2018 6:47 am

OOC
Just one suggestion.
Maybe this could be extended to cover responsibility not only for "armed forces" as such -- which some national governments might argue means only their own "regular" forces -- but also, explicitly, responsibility for all other military or paramilitary groups working for (or, at least, condoned by) those nations as well? Otherwise some member nations might "overlook" or even [however covertly] order atrocities carried out by -- for example -- armed 'police' units, privateers, 'private military contractors' (and other mercenaries not organised as an integral part of the nation's regular forces), non-governmental 'militias' or 'volunteer' groups of various kinds (as seen in RL, for example, in the atrocities that a gang organised from among a Serbian football team's supporters carried out in Bosnia), and so on...
If you decide not to make this change then I'll have to search my old notes: I started work on drafting for a proposal requiring member nations to hold any such groups working on their behalf to the same standards of operational behaviour as they do their own armed forces, with a named officer or official in that nation's employ legally responsible for this in each case, but suspect that that draft has long since been lost.
Last edited by Bears Armed on Sun Dec 16, 2018 6:48 am, edited 1 time in total.
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.

User avatar
Separatist Peoples
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 13784
Founded: Feb 17, 2011
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Separatist Peoples » Sun Dec 16, 2018 7:32 am

Bears Armed wrote:OOC
Just one suggestion.
Maybe this could be extended to cover responsibility not only for "armed forces" as such -- which some national governments might argue means only their own "regular" forces -- but also, explicitly, responsibility for all other military or paramilitary groups working for (or, at least, condoned by) those nations as well? Otherwise some member nations might "overlook" or even [however covertly] order atrocities carried out by -- for example -- armed 'police' units, privateers, 'private military contractors' (and other mercenaries not organised as an integral part of the nation's regular forces), non-governmental 'militias' or 'volunteer' groups of various kinds (as seen in RL, for example, in the atrocities that a gang organised from among a Serbian football team's supporters carried out in Bosnia), and so on...
If you decide not to make this change then I'll have to search my old notes: I started work on drafting for a proposal requiring member nations to hold any such groups working on their behalf to the same standards of operational behaviour as they do their own armed forces, with a named officer or official in that nation's employ legally responsible for this in each case, but suspect that that draft has long since been lost.

"I clarified a bit to include irregular forces, but I drew the line at decentralized mobs. Where there isn't a command element, command responsibility isn't really applicable."

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
Bears Armed
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 17664
Founded: Jun 01, 2006
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Bears Armed » Sun Dec 16, 2018 7:38 am

OOC
Okay, thanks.
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.

User avatar
Separatist Peoples
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 13784
Founded: Feb 17, 2011
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Separatist Peoples » Fri Jan 04, 2019 9:26 am

OOC: Bump

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
Araraukar
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 12351
Founded: May 14, 2007
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby Araraukar » Wed Jan 09, 2019 12:11 pm

IC: The young woman on the Araraukarian seat frowns as she tries to decipher some handwritten notes. "Um, the clause four says you need to sack commanders after a military court has decided they've done what the proposal says needs to be criminalized, but isn't that a loophole for nations that don't want to obey, as all they'd need to do was to not do the military court bit? Like, I get that you want to separate the whole "yes they did wrong" from "and this is their punishment for the wrongdoing" parts, but wouldn't the "yes they did wrong" work through any kind of court, not just military one? Especially if you've got no military and thus no military court, but you got these military-like forces, like private armies or something, that do the dirty work normally done by militaries."

OOC: In case the intern is being unclear, rather than specifically require a court martial to decide the commander has broken the proposal's commandments, couldn't you just require a legal procedure of any kind to determine it, separate from criminal punishment?
"I've come to appreciate boring bureaucracy much more after my official execution..." - Johan Milkus, acting ambassador in the absence of miss Leveret
Giovenith wrote:And sorry hun, if you were looking for a forum site where nobody argued, you've come to wrong one.

User avatar
Visionary Union
Attaché
 
Posts: 99
Founded: Sep 16, 2018
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Visionary Union » Wed Jan 09, 2019 2:54 pm

OOC: Despite reading previous replies, I'm yet to understand on who falls the responsibility in a case of a Prime Minister/President gives the order to commit war crimes. On the civilian politican, or on the Chief Commamder who relied it forward?

Also, if I may borrow from a real life case, here in the IDF we have a thing called "Completely illegal order", "ilegal order" and "order".

The first one is an order to which a soldier is expected to refuse to follow it and actively stop it, like shooting a baby or rape or anything similar, because any decent human being will never do those acts. While I'm aware that there is a clause which touches this exact issue, I'm afraid that trying to define when is it s completely ilegal order will only cause problems with either soldiers committing horrible crimes or just refusing non completely ilegal orders.

User avatar
Karteria
Secretary
 
Posts: 40
Founded: Jun 28, 2018
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Karteria » Thu Jan 10, 2019 7:03 pm

"Full support."
World Assembly Delegate for the New West Indies region.

References: | Wiki| WA Platform | NS Stats | Regional World Assembly Affairs |

User avatar
Separatist Peoples
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 13784
Founded: Feb 17, 2011
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Separatist Peoples » Thu Jan 10, 2019 7:47 pm

Visionary Union wrote:OOC: Despite reading previous replies, I'm yet to understand on who falls the responsibility in a case of a Prime Minister/President gives the order to commit war crimes. On the civilian politican, or on the Chief Commamder who relied it forward?

OOC: both. Though, the civilian commander doesn't have a real command to lose, so its theoretically possible such a leader could be permitted office after such a violation. However, I think it so unlikely that a nation would permit a convicted war criminal to hold office multiple times. Not much for it though.
Also, if I may borrow from a real life case, here in the IDF we have a thing called "Completely illegal order", "ilegal order" and "order".

That is silly. An order is legal or it is not.
The first one is an order to which a soldier is expected to refuse to follow it and actively stop it, like shooting a baby or rape or anything similar, because any decent human being will never do those acts. While I'm aware that there is a clause which touches this exact issue, I'm afraid that trying to define when is it s completely ilegal order will only cause problems with either soldiers committing horrible crimes or just refusing non completely ilegal orders.

OOC: Its quite simple. I've done it. If the order violates the law in it's necessary execution, it is not a legal order. If the order does not violate the law, it isn't an illegal order. An order that is ambiguously illegal is really only a problem if the illegal interpretation is executed. It is a very simple dichotomy.

Karteria wrote:"Full support."

"Your support is appreciated, ambassador."

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

PreviousNext

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General Assembly

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Free Distan, Imperium Anglorum, Tenkyoku, The Sheika, Tinhampton, Vrama

Advertisement

Remove ads