[DRAFT #2] Co-operation on Criminal Evidence

[Tinhampton]

Character count: 2,098
Word count: 300

Bianca Venkman, Assistant to the Delegate-Ambassador: I have been given permission by the Knessian ambassador, in the wake of their sudden volte-face on the WA, to make a few changes to the International Release of Criminal Evidence Act, hence Draft 2. Criticism and comment is still welcome:

Co-operation on Criminal Evidence
A resolution to improve world security by boosting police and military budgets.

Category: International Security

Strength: Significant

Proposed by: Tinhampton

---

The General Assembly:

Aware, in lieu of international legislation on the matter, that some nations may withhold evidence when attempting to co-operate to bring transnational criminals to justice;

Concerned that the pursuit of justice could be significantly endangered by malevolent parties who withhold evidence for their own gain; and

Believing that action must be taken on such egregrious schemes to ensure international law and order:

Hereby:

1. Mandates that nations share both evidence of crimes committed and exonerating evidence that would protect the accused, as long as such evidence is directly relevant to the charge, is not protected by client confidentiality or sealed court orders, and is admissible in a court of law;
2. Defines "evidence" to include, but not be limited to, documents, audiovisual evidence, DNA testing, fingerprint analysis, expert testimony, and witness statements;
3. Stipulates that evidence can only be transferred between government agencies, may only be transferred when the prosecuting nation officially requests as such to the other nation via open diplomatic channels, and further orders both nations to take all possible precautions to ensure that evidence shall not be seen by private entities;
4. Permits nations to withhold evidence if:
   
   1. there are no active criminal charges against the accused;
   2. they do not recognise the crime committed in the other nation as a crime in their own;
   3. they have a reasonable suspicion that the accuser's human rights are, or would be, violated; or
   4. they have a reasonable and empirical suspicion that the trial will be unfair;
5. Tasks the Judicial Committee of the Compliance Commission with:
   
   1. defining admissible and inadmissible evidence under §1 of this resolution;
   2. defining fair and unfair trials under §4d of this resolution; and
   3. investigating misuse of this resolution which results to an unfair trial; and
6. Clarifies that nothing in this resolution affects intrajudicial criminal investigations.

Co-authored by Knessniet

[Separatist Peoples]

"Ambassador, none of the problems previously pointed out are addressed in this draft. As I suggested to your co-authoring delegation, you should take some time to learn about the nuance of evidence law before taking the time to regulate it."