[DRAFT] Proven Terrorist Registry

[The Republic of New Alabama]

Proven Terrorist Registry

Regulation|Safety|Significant

Noting a lack a resolutions on the knowledge of terrorists, and their whereabouts.

Defining "terrorist' as:

1. A person who has commited an extreme act of violence in pursuit of political aims
2. An organization or group that has unlawfully committed an act of violence

Outraged by the ignorance of who a terrorist and where they reside

The World Assembly establishes the following:

1. A world wide database containing the names and last known adresses of anyone considered a terrorist.
   
2. A requirement to register on the above mentioned database as a known terrorist, if found guilty in a court of law, of any terrorism crime.
   
3. Requiring all members of this database, remain on the above mentioned database for the course of their life.
   
4. A Classification of any and all members of this database for the following criteria:
   
   1. Active Terrorist
      
      1. Defined as a person/group that has committed a terroristic act within a timeframe of ten years
   2. Inactive Terrorist
      
      1. A person/group not having committed a terroristic crime within the active timeframe
   3. Potential Terrorist
      
      1. A person who has threatened to commit a terroristic act
5. Military action for all unregistered terrorists who refuse to register.

Requiring a no exception rule, defined as a rule that any and all persons convicted of a terroristic crime be added to the list, regardless of age, race, gender, etc.

Also requiring all known terrorists convicted before this law is passed to be grandfathered onto this database

*OOC* I would like any and all feedback on this proposal that you are willing to give. This is my first actual proposal.

[Bears Armed]

OOC
'Regulation: Safety' is for safety features in goods & services. This would probably fall within 'Moral Decency' instead.
There are typos and grammar problems that need fixing (for example, what do you mean by "Military action for all unregistered terrorists who refuse to register.").
And I'm fairly sure -- although I don't have time available to check right now -- that parts of this would contradict several existing resolutions.

but
Welcome to the GA \forum, and congratulations on having the sense to post here instead of just submitting your first draft straight away.

[The ethereal lord]

Shouldn't the registry contain a photo too? A name is hardly useful if the terrorist can just say they are someone else, admittedly technology and the connected world we live in makes disappearing a lot harder but it's always good to err on the side of caution.

[Liberimery]

Shouldn't we make sure that terrorists are convicted of the crime before naming them as such and dozing them. And how do you ensure that they are really terrorists and not, say, people revolting against their own genocidal government.

Also grandfather clauses do not work that way. Grandfather clauses prevent the state from making ex post facto sentences for actions taken prior to the passing of the law. We do have a law banning ex post facto laws on the book here, so that requirement cannot occur. You would need a new trial to resentance and that means a new crime, as we also ban Double Jeopardy.

OOC: This is looking too much like the Sex Offender Registry, which is a database of people who committed a crime and not like the terrorist watch list, which is merely a list of who could be suspect of a particular type of crime. Because of this, the US cannot take away rights because you are on a list (airlines quasi enforce this by electing not to let people on the list purchase services, but that does not mean the suspect cannot travel). There is a right to move around the nation, but there is no right that says you must be allowed to do it in an airplane.

[Caracasus]

Hmmm....

Defining "terrorist' as:
A person who has commited an extreme act of violence in pursuit of political aims
An organization or group that has unlawfully committed an act of violence

Okay, under this reading every single soldier who has fired a gun on the battlefield, every pilot who has blown up a missile silo in a hostile country in defense of their homeland, every revolutionary guerrilla fighting to overthrow a dictator and every police officer who has fired tear gas into a crowd of protesters counts as a terrorist. After all, all these examples have committed violence in pursuit of a political aim.

The problem with legislating against terrorism rather comes down to the fact that the term terrorist is itself not a particularly useful one.

[Verdant Haven]

Caracasus beat me to the reply I initially thought to make, pointing out that the very general definition given would define nearly every member of any police or military force as a terrorist. Lawful authority is a political aim, just as surely as the overthrow of same, and a declared act of war is inherently violent and political, without falling in to generally accepted concepts of terrorism.

Furthermore, the subject of illegality on a global scale is subject to the countless government approaches to law that exist in our world. Some nations will convict an individual of terrorism on the basis of a pro-civil rights graffiti tag, while other will consider violent public protest just part of their dialogue. I believe any proposal seeking to create an international database of terrorist suspects must first have an international definition of what a terrorist is, which does not rely upon the frequently incompatibile legal systems of member states.

Regarding section 2, and assuming the above difficulties are worked out, it seems foolish to rely upon a convicted terrorist to self-register. It is entirely in their interest to flout this requirement, and only those who do not actually pose a threat, and probably should not be on the list in the first place, would comply. If such a list is to be worthwhile, it must be the convicting state that submits the registration data, preferably through a vetting system to ensure accuracy both of the data, and the classification of the conviction with regards to the aforementioned necessary international definition of terrorism.

Regarding section 3, the creation of a life-long registration without provision for removal on appeal is a gross violation of civil rights. Whether an appeal is based on overturning of conviction, inaccuracies in originally reported data, conflation of similarly named people, or miscarriage of justice, there must be a straightforward and accessible means of removal from such a list.

Regarding section 4, subsection III, either a person has been convicted of a terrorism offense or they have not. The making of terroristic threats is itself a terroristic crime, and upon conviction, such a person might be registered. It is not necessary to add this separately, as it is both redundant, and creates the opportunity for a dishonest regime to register individuals who have not been convicted.

Regarding section 5, this is unclear. What is meant? Are you suggesting that the army will be deployed to forcibly register an individual who is not on the list? That is a bureaucratic task, not a military one. If it is necessary to take an individual in to custody, that is why we have civilian law enforcement.

The issue with grandfathering has already been addressed.

OOC: Speaking as somebody who spent a number of (unhappy) years with the US Dept of Homeland Security, you've got your work cut out for you here if you want to make this work. Doesn't mean it isn't worth trying, but there are going to be sovereignty issues coming out the wazoo even if all difficulties are otherwise resolved!

[The Republic of New Alabama]

*OOC*

I would like to thank you all for the feedback on my proposal. I am taking them all into consideration, and I think that I'm going to go back to the drawing board with this one. If any of you have a template of a good proposal that I could use, or a detailed explaination of how to write a good proposal, it would really help me. The main thing I need help with is the beginning of clauses/sentences, E.g. Noting... or, Proposing... having a document that explains all of those would not only help me, but any other hopeful writers in the future. I know what they mean, but I'm not sure how and when to use them.

[Aclion]

Hmmm....

Defining "terrorist' as:
A person who has commited an extreme act of violence in pursuit of political aims
An organization or group that has unlawfully committed an act of violence

Okay, under this reading every single soldier who has fired a gun on the battlefield, every pilot who has blown up a missile silo in a hostile country in defense of their homeland, every revolutionary guerrilla fighting to overthrow a dictator and every police officer who has fired tear gas into a crowd of protesters counts as a terrorist. After all, all these examples have committed violence in pursuit of a political aim.

The problem with legislating against terrorism rather comes down to the fact that the term terrorist is itself not a particularly useful one.

Defines terrorist as a person who makes use of indiscriminate violence towards a civilian group for the purpose of furthering a political goal

[Frisbeeteria]

Defines terrorist as a person who makes use of indiscriminate violence towards a civilian group for the purpose of furthering a political goal

Who defines "indiscriminate"?

Bomb explodes in theatre, killing or maiming hundreds. "Terrorists?" "Nah, they were showing the latest Michael Moore film. Clearly a selected target demographic."

[Caracasus]

Defines terrorist as a person who makes use of indiscriminate violence towards a civilian group for the purpose of furthering a political goal

Who defines "indiscriminate"?

Bomb explodes in theatre, killing or maiming hundreds. "Terrorists?" "Nah, they were showing the latest Michael Moore film. Clearly a selected target demographic."

Not to mention this'd also include soldiers under the command of people who don't care much about human rights or civilian casualties. An artillery unit that drops phospherous on civilian areas shouldn't really be tried as terrorists I don't think. A war crimes tribunal would be a bit more fitting.

Honestly, even if you take the violence towards civilians to further political ends committed by a non state actor you're still left with the age old 'one man's terrorist is another's freedom fighter' problem.

[Liberimery]

Who defines "indiscriminate"?

Bomb explodes in theatre, killing or maiming hundreds. "Terrorists?" "Nah, they were showing the latest Michael Moore film. Clearly a selected target demographic."

Not to mention this'd also include soldiers under the command of people who don't care much about human rights or civilian casualties. An artillery unit that drops phospherous on civilian areas shouldn't really be tried as terrorists I don't think. A war crimes tribunal would be a bit more fitting.

Honestly, even if you take the violence towards civilians to further political ends committed by a non state actor you're still left with the age old 'one man's terrorist is another's freedom fighter' problem.

OOC: Then you have the issue of not all terrorists commit crimes that are intended to kill or injure. In the United States, the most active [bold]domestic[/bold] terrorist group is the Earth Liberation Front (ELF) according to the FBI. Their MO is sabatoge of equipment and destruction of property that they deem is related to environmentally unfriendly practices with almost all of their actions not intending to harm human life (though some of their stunts can be dangerous if the equipment operator doesn't see the sabotage and the equipment fails in an unsafe way. Never the less they do billions of dollars in damages annually and feel justified in their actions because of a political motivation.

[Kenmoria]

*OOC*

I would like to thank you all for the feedback on my proposal. I am taking them all into consideration, and I think that I'm going to go back to the drawing board with this one. If any of you have a template of a good proposal that I could use, or a detailed explaination of how to write a good proposal, it would really help me. The main thing I need help with is the beginning of clauses/sentences, E.g. Noting... or, Proposing... having a document that explains all of those would not only help me, but any other hopeful writers in the future. I know what they mean, but I'm not sure how and when to use them.

(OOC: In response to the formatting thing, the main thing to do isn’t just to begin every clause with a continuos tense verb (normally -ing, but there are exceptions such as ‘worried’) and then make the rest of the sentence fairly normally. For example:

The World Assembly,

Noting a lack of resolutions on the knowledge of terrorists and their whereabouts,

Outraged by the ignorance of who a terrorist is and where they reside,

Hereby,

1) Defines ‘terrorist’ as:

1. A person who has committed an extreme act of violence in pursuit of political aims,
   
   
2. An organisation of group that has unlawfully committed an act of violence

2) Establishes a world wide database contains the names and last known addresses of anyone considered a terrorist,

3) Requires registration of any known terrorist, if found guilty in a court of law of any terrorism crime, to the database,

4) Further requires all members of this databasse remain on the database for the course of their life,

5) Creates a classification of any and all members of this database for the following criteria:

1. Active terrorist: a person/group that has committed a terrorist act within ten years,
   
   
2. Inactive terrorist: a person/group that had not committed a terrorist act with the aforementioned timeframe,
   
   
3. Potential terrorist: a person who has threaten to commit a terrorist act,

6) Mandates military action for all unregistered terrorists who refuse to register,

7) Requires a no-exception rule, defined as a rule that any and all persons convicted of a terrorist crime be added to the list, regardless of age, race gender, etc.,

8) Also requires that all known terrorists convicted before the creation of the database be added to it.

. Note that I have not added any content to the draft, just put in a more typical format. However, this is not the only option, as there are many different ways to layout your draft, this is just one of the more typical ones.

Code: Select all

The World Assembly,

Noting a lack of resolutions on the knowledge of terrorists and their whereabouts,

Outraged by the ignorance of who a terrorist is and where they reside,

Hereby,

1) Defines ‘terrorist’ as:
[list=a][*]A person who has committed an extreme act of violence in pursuit of political aims,


[*]An organisation of group that has unlawfully committed an act of violence[/list]

2) Establishes a world wide database contains the names and last known addresses of anyone considered a terrorist,

3) Requires registration of any known terrorist, if found guilty in a court of law of any terrorism crime, to the database,

4) Further requires all members of this databasse remain on the database for the course of their life,

5) Creates a classification of any and all members of this database for the following criteria:
[list=a][*]Active terrorist: a person/group that has committed a terrorist act within ten years,


[*]Inactive terrorist: a person/group that had not committed a terrorist act with the aforementioned timeframe,


[*]Potential terrorist: a person who has threaten to commit a terrorist act,[/list]

6) Mandates military action for all unregistered terrorists who refuse to register,

7) Requires a no-exception rule, defined as a rule that any and all persons convicted of a terrorist crime be added to the list, regardless of age, race gender, etc.,

8[color=#000000])[/color] Also requires that all known terrorists convicted before the creation of the database be added to it.[/box]

.)