[DRAFT] Improving rehabilitation of prisoners

[Widowed Land]

[jumping up and down]

As if on cue. We get it. You don't like Ara, and you don't like RP. Knock it off with the constant attacks.

When a draft supposes itself to handle prison overcrowding by imposing an absurd measure upon all Member-States regardless of the supposed necessity, questioning why Member-States without overcrowding issues should have to take up extreme practices to reduce overcrowding that doesn't exist, is a perfectly valid question.

Then I could change that clause from whatever it is right now to: "Nations that suffer from overpopulation in jails must implement "Split Sentences".
Same thing with building new jails.

This is to avoid offending advanced nations.
And before someone will say "nation can just deny having overpopulation in prisons" l, yea that can be easily checked.

[Kenmoria]

“Is your bracketed section in the ‘mandates’ clause intended to be a list of what is defined as ‘good behaviour’, or merely examples thereof? I suggest clarifying this, since it is currently open to interpretation. Also, I agree with the Araraukarian delagation that measures such as this, while necessary to reduce overcrowding in some nations, are over the top in most others.”

[Widowed Land]

“Is your bracketed section in the ‘mandates’ clause intended to be a list of what is defined as ‘good behaviour’, or merely examples thereof? I suggest clarifying this, since it is currently open to interpretation. Also, I agree with the Araraukarian delagation that measures such as this, while necessary to reduce overcrowding in some nations, are over the top in most others.”

"What does Kenmorian delegation suggests? About clarifying "outstanding good behavior"? Should I clarify that those "mere examples" are only things considered as outstandingly good behaviour or should I clarify that that's just an example?"

[Kenmoria]

“Is your bracketed section in the ‘mandates’ clause intended to be a list of what is defined as ‘good behaviour’, or merely examples thereof? I suggest clarifying this, since it is currently open to interpretation. Also, I agree with the Araraukarian delagation that measures such as this, while necessary to reduce overcrowding in some nations, are over the top in most others.”

"What does Kenmorian delegation suggests? About clarifying "outstanding good behavior"? Should I clarify that those "mere examples" are only things considered as outstandingly good behaviour or should I clarify that that's just an example?"

“What I meant was that it should be clarified whether those are: examples of behaviour that constitutes good, or the necessary components of good behaviour that must be adhered to in order to abide by this proposal’s mandates. Just putting ‘for example’ would suffice.”

[Widowed Land]

"What does Kenmorian delegation suggests? About clarifying "outstanding good behavior"? Should I clarify that those "mere examples" are only things considered as outstandingly good behaviour or should I clarify that that's just an example?"

“What I meant was that it should be clarified whether those are: examples of behaviour that constitutes good, or the necessary components of good behaviour that must be adhered to in order to abide by this proposal’s mandates. Just putting ‘for example’ would suffice.”

"I think that governments/judges should determine what is outstanding good behaviour of their own standard, so of course. I'll fix the clause"

[Imperium Anglorum]

When a draft supposes itself to handle prison overcrowding by imposing an absurd measure upon all Member-States regardless of the supposed necessity, questioning why Member-States without overcrowding issues should have to take up extreme practices to reduce overcrowding that doesn't exist, is a perfectly valid question.

Unless the draft has been massively overhauled in the last day, I don't see much of anything which isn't either optional or contingent on there existing some problem of overcrowding. Moreover, the provisions that don't have to do with building more jails have to do with how persons who are imprisoned are treated. That's a moral question that can exist independent of overcrowding.

[Wallenburg]

As if on cue. We get it. You don't like Ara, and you don't like RP. Knock it off with the constant attacks.

When a draft supposes itself to handle prison overcrowding by imposing an absurd measure upon all Member-States regardless of the supposed necessity, questioning why Member-States without overcrowding issues should have to take up extreme practices to reduce overcrowding that doesn't exist, is a perfectly valid question.

Then I could change that clause from whatever it is right now to: "Nations that suffer from overpopulation in jails must implement "Split Sentences".
Same thing with building new jails.

This is to avoid offending advanced nations.
And before someone will say "nation can just deny having overpopulation in prisons" l, yea that can be easily checked.

GA resolutions must, at least on paper, apply to all member states in the same manner.

[The First German Order]

“After going through the voice transcript we have of this chamber and reading literally everything stated, I can confidently say on the behalf of our delegation, we will NOT be supporting this proposal and are strongly opposed to the requirements it puts forward.”

[Widowed Land]

“After going through the voice transcript we have of this chamber and reading literally everything stated, I can confidently say on the behalf of our delegation, we will NOT be supporting this proposal and are strongly opposed to the requirements it puts forward.”

"Thank you for specifying what you don't like, instead of casually saying that you don't approve it"

[The First German Order]

“After going through the voice transcript we have of this chamber and reading literally everything stated, I can confidently say on the behalf of our delegation, we will NOT be supporting this proposal and are strongly opposed to the requirements it puts forward.”

"Thank you for specifying what you don't like, instead of casually saying that you don't approve it"

“I wonder if this is sarcasm or serious. Because if sarcasm, then you’re not helping your case. Your refusal to accept truths and crticism along with the fact that you insult other delegates and their nations is one of the big reasons we have no desire to support this proposal anytime soon.”

[Widowed Land]

"Thank you for specifying what you don't like, instead of casually saying that you don't approve it"

“I wonder if this is sarcasm or serious. Because if sarcasm, then you’re not helping your case. Your refusal to accept truths and crticism along with the fact that you insult other delegates and their nations is one of the big reasons we have no desire to support this proposal anytime soon.”

"You failed to see that you specifically have no use to this resolution. For others who tried to help, I am grateful. Have a nice day, ambassador"

[Marxist Germany]

Mandating, to let the detainee out of a prison for three days after outstandingly good behavior.(For example: Cleaning kitchens, toilets, cells; Having healthy relationships with other prisoners; Having no rule broken since the arrest)
1.) Prisoner will be judged by a psychologist;
2.) During three days of freedom, convict will be reunited with the family;
3.) Prisoner will be under a surveillance and will be prohibited to exit the house;
4.) Only time a detainee can leave the house is for medical reasons, with escort of police;
5.) There will be no sanctioning for criminals who were detained for a murder and terrorism;
6.) Consent from the family and prisoner is needed, without consent no such actions will take place.

"Ambassador, isn't this basically house arrest?"

[Araraukar]

GA resolutions must, at least on paper, apply to all member states in the same manner.

OOC: Yeah, but if your nation doesn't hold elections, then the election-resolutions don't apply. So basically if it's written to be about the particular prisons that are over-populated, then it'll fit all nations equally.

However, as has already been pointed out repeatedly, house arrest isn't going to make for less work or need for professionals, it's just moving the problem out of the prisons, and giving the convicts more chances at hurting people or breaking the law.

[Maowi]

OOC: Rather than what you're doing right now, you could go about it setting certain standards for prisons and suggesting ways of achieving them. Of course, then you'd have to avoid overlap with GARs 161 and especially 194, but you'd avoid forcing unnecessary measures on nations which don't need them.

That would require a major overhaul.

[Araraukar]

OOC: Rather than what you're doing right now, you could go about it setting certain standards for prisons

OOC: #194 already does that, though - doing more would mean micromanagery nonsense, pretty much.

[Widowed Land]

Mandating, to let the detainee out of a prison for three days after outstandingly good behavior.(For example: Cleaning kitchens, toilets, cells; Having healthy relationships with other prisoners; Having no rule broken since the arrest)
1.) Prisoner will be judged by a psychologist;
2.) During three days of freedom, convict will be reunited with the family;
3.) Prisoner will be under a surveillance and will be prohibited to exit the house;
4.) Only time a detainee can leave the house is for medical reasons, with escort of police;
5.) There will be no sanctioning for criminals who were detained for a murder and terrorism;
6.) Consent from the family and prisoner is needed, without consent no such actions will take place.

"Ambassador, isn't this basically house arrest?"

"Basically, yes. But It's just for three days, and detainees will know that they were out for good behavior, so I doubt that they will break any law during the house arrest. Only if the person wasn't arrested for domestic crimes, in such case there's subclause 6, which will prevent such accident from happening"

[The New Nordic Union]

Mandating, to let the detainee out of a prison for three days after outstandingly good behavior.(For example: Cleaning kitchens, toilets, cells; Having healthy relationships with other prisoners; Having no rule broken since the arrest)
1.) Prisoner will be judged by a psychologist;
2.) During three days of freedom, convict will be reunited with the family;
3.) Prisoner will be under a surveillance and will be prohibited to exit the house;
4.) Only time a detainee can leave the house is for medical reasons, with escort of police;
5.) There will be no sanctioning for criminals who were detained for a murder and terrorism;
6.) Consent from the family and prisoner is needed, without consent no such actions will take place.

OOC: What about prisoners without family? Will they not have the option to leave prison?

[Separatist Peoples]

"Ambassador, isn't this basically house arrest?"

"Basically, yes. But It's just for three days, and detainees will know that they were out for good behavior, so I doubt that they will break any law during the house arrest. Only if the person wasn't arrested for domestic crimes, in such case there's subclause 6, which will prevent such accident from happening"

"The constant processing and reprocessing for three days of house arrest would be prohibitively expensive and a significant security threat, ambassador. That's unacceptable. and I've every intention of framing that issue to delegates upon submission until those requirements are removed from the draft."

[The First German Order]

“I wonder if this is sarcasm or serious. Because if sarcasm, then you’re not helping your case. Your refusal to accept truths and crticism along with the fact that you insult other delegates and their nations is one of the big reasons we have no desire to support this proposal anytime soon.”

"You failed to see that you specifically have no use to this resolution. For others who tried to help, I am grateful. Have a nice day, ambassador"

“How have I ‘failed to see that I specifically have no use to this resolution’, ambassador? Last I checked, if this somehow gets to the point of being voted on, my vote counts just as much as anyone else’s. This just goes to show how rude and inconsiderate you are. We’re mostly fine with the proposal considering that we don’t use prisons per se, but your attitude really makes it difficult to want to support your proposal.”

[Kenmoria]

“I’ve left some feedback on the preamble in red.”

Category: Civil Rights The title appears misleading to me. What rights of prisoners are you guaranteeing? Being under house arrest is not, last time I checked, a right.

Strength: Mild


Disturbed, that in penitentiary establishments, in certain nations, there is a low level of infrastructure, which causes unsanitary conditions for life. You don’t mention sanitation or infrastructure in this proposal at all. Furthermore, you still shouldn’t have commas after each opening verb.

Observing, that in some nations, there's overpopulation in prisons, that usually causes mass riots, underfed, unsanitary and low control over detained people. This list doesn’t quite work, as you have a combination of nouns and adjectives.

Acknowledges, that there's some chances of unqualified people might work in prisons. These unqualified workers could overwhelm their authority and start discrimination against prisoners. Discrimination is probihited by extant GA law, and I fail to see how being underqualified could cause overwhelming of authority.

Reminds, that some prisoners may rehabilitate faster than the others, and government should sanction good behavior. What about private prisons? They don’t involve the government.


Consulting, that governments should fund the infrastructure in jails. The above comment applies here as well. Also, jails and prisons are different things.

Observing, that nations that can afford to build new prisons, should act so to avoid overpopulation. This isn’t an active clause, and you should probably make it one.

[Widowed Land]

Mandating, to let the detainee out of a prison for three days after outstandingly good behavior.(For example: Cleaning kitchens, toilets, cells; Having healthy relationships with other prisoners; Having no rule broken since the arrest)
1.) Prisoner will be judged by a psychologist;
2.) During three days of freedom, convict will be reunited with the family;
3.) Prisoner will be under a surveillance and will be prohibited to exit the house;
4.) Only time a detainee can leave the house is for medical reasons, with escort of police;
5.) There will be no sanctioning for criminals who were detained for a murder and terrorism;
6.) Consent from the family and prisoner is needed, without consent no such actions will take place.

OOC: What about prisoners without family? Will they not have the option to leave prison?

"Where will they go? Or who will take responsibility for them? Who'll watch after them? I know that clause says police will maintain surveillance, but family(adult members of family) are responsible to keep the prisoner alive and in house"

[The New Nordic Union]

OOC: What about prisoners without family? Will they not have the option to leave prison?

"Where will they go? Or who will take responsibility for them? Who'll watch after them? I know that clause says police will maintain surveillance, but family(adult members of family) are responsible to keep the prisoner alive and in house"

OOC: Home? To friends? To partners to whom they are not married (or otherwise related)? And, if all of that does not count... why discriminate against them only because they do not have family? Seems a bit absurd. It surely will not aid them in rehabilitation.

[Sierra Lyricalia]

OOC: You should be getting the idea that mandatory furlough for all prisoners who can manage to keep their noses clean just long enough to get a shot at escaping is just not going to fly. It's 100% a non-starter.

However, there are things you can try instead. Mandate that nations set aside funding (backed by the WAGF if necessary) for pilot programs to improve prisoners' professional skills, encouraging the careful application of limited release. There's a wealth of possibility here that your heavy-handed "I'm right and if you disagree that makes you a sadistic Thin Blue Line jackbooted creep" attitude is not helping you achieve.

Inspiration:

There is also an initiative involving a carefully vetted group of 200 inmates who are allowed to leave each day for jobs with an outside firm. Inmates travel without supervision on public transportation; they must check in upon arrival at work, and at other points during the day.

Mr. Parisi said only one inmate had failed to return at the appointed time, and he showed up a few days later.

[Widowed Land]

"Where will they go? Or who will take responsibility for them? Who'll watch after them? I know that clause says police will maintain surveillance, but family(adult members of family) are responsible to keep the prisoner alive and in house"

OOC: Home? To friends? To partners to whom they are not married (or otherwise related)? And, if all of that does not count... why discriminate against them only because they do not have family? Seems a bit absurd. It surely will not aid them in rehabilitation.

Good point.

[Widowed Land]

OOC: You should be getting the idea that mandatory furlough for all prisoners who can manage to keep their noses clean just long enough to get a shot at escaping is just not going to fly. It's 100% a non-starter.

However, there are things you can try instead. Mandate that nations set aside funding (backed by the WAGF if necessary) for pilot programs to improve prisoners' professional skills, encouraging the careful application of limited release. There's a wealth of possibility here that your heavy-handed "I'm right and if you disagree that makes you a sadistic Thin Blue Line jackbooted creep" attitude is not helping you achieve.

Inspiration:

There is also an initiative involving a carefully vetted group of 200 inmates who are allowed to leave each day for jobs with an outside firm. Inmates travel without supervision on public transportation; they must check in upon arrival at work, and at other points during the day.

Mr. Parisi said only one inmate had failed to return at the appointed time, and he showed up a few days later.

OOC: I took in account what you've proposed and added corresponding clause. I hope it is what you have meant