[DRAFT] Improving rehabilitation of prisoners

[Maowi]

OOC:

The World Assembly hereby:

Change all the bolded words above this to -ing verbs, e.g. notifies --> notifying (although I think you mean noting?)

Commands governments to improve infrastructure and safety system in penitentiary establishments.

1.) Governments must fund infrastructure in prisons to avoid unsanitary conditions.
2.) Governments must either build new prisons or implement law of "split sentences" to reduce overcrowding.
3.) Prison workforce must go through mandatory annual retraining to ensure their qualification.

This seems problematic for nations with good prison systems already. Making member nations solve a problem which might not exist is...frustrating for them. You could change 1) to command member nations to ensure that prisoners are living in sanitary conditions, by funding infrastructure if necessary. Again, 2) would be annoying for member nations with good conditions. I might be wrong, but off the top of my head doesn't that resolution 'Treatment of Inmates' (or something like that) deal with prisoners' living space?

(Also, you're using list code wrong. You want:

Code: Select all

[i]Commands[/i] governments to improve infrastructure and safety system in penitentiary establishments.
[list=1][*] Governments must fund infrastructure in prisons to avoid unsanitary conditions.


[*] Governments must either build new prisons or implement law of "split sentences" to reduce overcrowding.


[*] Prison workforce must go through mandatory annual retraining to ensure their qualification.[/list]

)

Mandates that governments must take the following actions in order to integrate ex-prisoners ? into the/a/something else community.

1.) Prisons must have weekly exchange of books with government-funded libraries or private libraries who are welcome to fund such project.
2.) Prisoners must be taught practical subjects, such as: cooking and etc. Prisoners must have right to choose their likely subject.
3.) Prisoners must have access to therapy with psychologists. Psychologist can be full worker of a prisoner or volunteer from different projects.

I think you need to tidy up the grammar. It's a bit unclear how far or how stringently you're trying to regulate member nations here.

Implements certain standards to help prisoners to gain job after the release.

1.) Prisoners should have a right to volunteer for in-prison jobs.(For example: Janitor, Chef and etc.)
2.) After release emplyers must be restricted to decline job applications from ex-offenders based solely on their background. Exceptions can be made if ex-offenders' crime is directly connected to the job they are applying for.

Unless you do want 1) to be optional, change should to must or something equivalent. In 2), first of all emplyers --> employers. But also, this could be phrased better, e.g. 'Employers may not decline job applications from ex-offenders based on their criminal backgrounds unless their past crimes are directly connected to the relevant job.' (There's probably a better way, but 'after release' made me think of it as though the employers have just been released )

[Widowed Land]

OOC: Okay, I think I fixed everything you said up there. But what are you thoughts on the resolution(rather than grammar and many typos). Are you finally okay with it now that furloughs are removed? or you have some other thoughts...

[Greater Galactic Protectorate]

"This whole discussion simply shown how utterly pathetic, ineffective and weak the General Assembly is in dealing with even their most basic function, and even on top of the draft presented is simply blatant violation of human rights, national security and sovereignty, seeking to only bring chaos and unrest to unsuspecting nations."

[Marxist Germany]

"This whole discussion simply shown how utterly pathetic, ineffective and weak the General Assembly is in dealing with even their most basic function, and even on top of the draft presented is simply blatant violation of human rights, national security and sovereignty, seeking to only bring chaos and unrest to unsuspecting nations."

"You should not blame an entire body comprised of many ambassadors for any problems arising from this proposal, we have tried our best to give feedback and improve upon the weaknesses of this proposal, instead of going on a rant, how about you enlighten us with your feedback?"

[Greater Galactic Protectorate]

"This whole discussion simply shown how utterly pathetic, ineffective and weak the General Assembly is in dealing with even their most basic function, and even on top of the draft presented is simply blatant violation of human rights, national security and sovereignty, seeking to only bring chaos and unrest to unsuspecting nations."

"You should not blame an entire body comprised of many ambassadors for any problems arising from this proposal, we have tried our best to give feedback and improve upon the weaknesses of this proposal, instead of going on a rant, how about you enlighten us with your feedback?"

"Our nation had been through many times of crisis, and throughout those hard times, there's only one thing that stands true: doomed are those who refuse to admit their faults and weaknesses."

"We'll not participate in this discussion any further."

[Kenmoria]

“I’m going to do this one last time. As always, comments are in red.”

Category: Civil Rights

Strength: Significant



Improving rehabilitation of prisoners


Noting that for prisoners to rehabilitate quicker, their physiological and safety needs must be protected. This flows awkwardly and also seems a bit disengaged from the rest of the proposal.

1. To fullfil such needs prisons must have decent infrastructure. Define ‘decent’; what does this mean? Are you requiring nothing more than a meal once a delay and some barbed wire around the permeter, or hotel-class facilities?
   
2. Prisons must avoid overcrowding in order to spread life supplies equally to prisoners. How? In addition, ‘life supplies’ sounds artificial, so consider replacing it.
   
3. Prison workforce must be qualified for the post they are holding to ensure safety and compliance of prisoners. The ‘prison workforce’ often means the prisoners, not the guards, which should probably be rectified.

Reminding that prisoners need significant help from the government-funded programs to rehabilitate quicker. ‘Reminding’ isn’t the right verb with which to begin a sentence.

1. Prisoners mustn't be denied right to have practical education. Even if they are on death row and will be killed in a few days?
   
2. Prisoners must have access to therapy/counseling. The above comment applies here as well.

Acknowledging the need to employ prisoners/ex-prisoners, to avoid chances of them ever re-offending. This is quite dramatic, as I think some prisoners will re-offend no matter how many employees ask to employ then, so consider toning down the language slightly.

Disturbed by the community who wrongly mocks and spreads stigmas and stereotypes about the prisoners. What community?



The World Assembly hereby: You have active clauses above this line, which makes no sense in terms of formatting. You also have too many line breaks above and below this.



Commands governments to improve infrastructure and safety system in penitentiary establishments. What about private prisoners, which aren’t government-run? I keep asking this and have not got a reply.

1. Member nations must ensure that prisoners are living in sanitary conditions by funding the infrastructure, if necessary. Once again, how are private prisons factored into this?
   
2. Governments must either build new prisons or implement law of "split sentences" to reduce overcrowding, if such problem is noticeable in individual nations. Anything’s noticeable if one is looking to notice it. How about ‘significant’ instead. In this clause, it might be a good idea to also suggest expanding existing prisons, which is cheaper than building new ones.
   
3. Prison workforce must go through mandatory annual retraining to ensure their qualification. This clause still doesn’t make much sense to me, but I don’t have anything major against it.

Mandates that governments must take the following actions in order to integrate ex-prisoners into the community.

1. Prisons must have weekly exchange of books with government-funded libraries or private libraries who are welcome to fund such project. No. This isn’t an international issue, or a national issue, or even a regional issue. The scope on this is far too small.
   
2. Prisoners must be taught practical subjects, such as: cooking and etc. Prisoners must have right to choose their likely subject. As I previously mentioned, what about prisoners who will be killed in a matter of weeks? I think training them would be a waste of time and money.
   
3. Prisoners must have an access to a therapy with psychologists. Though, security measures must be taken in account to ensure safety of the psychologist You should probably have a ‘psychiatrist’ or ‘psychotherapist’, more likely the latter, than a ‘psychologist’.

Implements certain standards to help prisoners to gain job after the release.

1. Prisoners must have a right to volunteer for in-prison jobs.(For example: Janitor, Chef and etc.) This isn’t applicable in maximum security prisons.
   
2. Employers may not decline job applications from ex-offenders based on their criminal background, unless the past crimes are connected to relevant job. This is a good clause, with which I have no issue.

Encourages governments to fund media campaigns, which will serve purpose of spreading information that will reassure employers/population that ex-convicts are capable of holding job posts productively. Although this clause seems slightly odd in light of the view that some ex-convicts shouldn’t hold certain jobs, it is non-mandatory, so isn’t a large concern.

This has improved a lot, which is good, and I like the direction in which this is headed. Although the current draft has some issues, it is a vast improvement over prior ones, which means that a positive trajectory is being demonstrated. Take this feedback into account, along with most other ambassador’s, and this could have a high chance of passing at vote.

[Widowed Land]

"This whole discussion simply shown how utterly pathetic, ineffective and weak the General Assembly is in dealing with even their most basic function, and even on top of the draft presented is simply blatant violation of human rights, national security and sovereignty, seeking to only bring chaos and unrest to unsuspecting nations."

"Your reviews on this resolution SO FAR has showed us how utterly pathetic is your judgment. And nobody will stand here and listen to you, mocking worldwide organization just because you disagree with single resolution. Agreeing or disagreeing is your choice, but to reveal such low diplomacy and make statements like that, furthermore without any arguments, is shameful. But I will have enough dignity not to waste more time on you as you seemed not to care about World Assembly's wellbeing."

[East Meranopirus]

"Prisons must have weekly exchange of books with government-funded libraries or private libraries who are welcome to fund such project."
This to me seems like some next-level micromanaging. How about something milder, like "Prisoners must have access to adequate literature and reading materials". Or just get rid of it. Hell, there might even be nations that ban books (don't quote me on that, there might be a WA resolution against it).

Also, I think you could do entirely without any mention of funding, and instead of using the word "improving", just say "ensuring standards are met regarding..."

[Kenmoria]

"Prisons must have weekly exchange of books with government-funded libraries or private libraries who are welcome to fund such project."
This to me seems like some next-level micromanaging. How about something milder, like "Prisoners must have access to adequate literature and reading materials". Or just get rid of it. Hell, there might even be nations that ban books (don't quote me on that, there might be a WA resolution against it).

(OOC: ‘Freedom to Read and Learn’ sort of disallows banning books by banning member nations from illegalising reading or enabling another to read. However, your main point is correct insofar as that clause is far too local for the World Assembly.)

[Widowed Land]

OOC: I think I addressed every problem that Kenmoria and East Meranopirus presented. Except for private prison stuff, where I kinda don't have an answer... *Screams internally help*

[The Nox]

(OOC: Taking over with my WA puppet, since I prefer IC to OOC. -- Wrapper)

"This whole discussion simply shown how utterly pathetic, ineffective and weak the General Assembly is in dealing with even their most basic function, and even on top of the draft presented is simply blatant violation of human rights, national security and sovereignty, seeking to only bring chaos and unrest to unsuspecting nations."

"We'll not participate in this discussion any further."

"We thank the delegation from the Protectorate for their insight and we sincerely hope that the portal does not collide with their haunches as they egress."

“I’m going to do this one last time. As always, comments are in red.”

"We greatly appreciate your comments and we shall take them into serious consideration as we assist the author with a redraft."

"Prisons must have weekly exchange of books with government-funded libraries or private libraries who are welcome to fund such project."
This to me seems like some next-level micromanaging. How about something milder, like "Prisoners must have access to adequate literature and reading materials". Or just get rid of it. Hell, there might even be nations that ban books (don't quote me on that, there might be a WA resolution against it).

"We understand your objection, and we will recommend to the author that the subsequent draft include verbiage akin to the milder language you suggest, rather than completely removing the requirement from the proposal. We firmly believe that, in order to better educate prisoners and to keep them mentally and emotionally focused, adequate reading materials must be made available consistently. If our goal is to reduce the rate of recidivism, thus reducing prisoner population and alleviating overcrowding, such education and focus is a prime factor in achieving these goals."

[Marxist Germany]

(OOC: Taking over with my WA puppet, since I prefer IC to OOC. -- Wrapper)

"This whole discussion simply shown how utterly pathetic, ineffective and weak the General Assembly is in dealing with even their most basic function, and even on top of the draft presented is simply blatant violation of human rights, national security and sovereignty, seeking to only bring chaos and unrest to unsuspecting nations."

"We'll not participate in this discussion any further."

"We thank the delegation from the Protectorate for their insight and we sincerely hope that the portal does not collide with their haunches as they egress."

“I’m going to do this one last time. As always, comments are in red.”

"We greatly appreciate your comments and we shall take them into serious consideration as we assist the author with a redraft."

"Prisons must have weekly exchange of books with government-funded libraries or private libraries who are welcome to fund such project."
This to me seems like some next-level micromanaging. How about something milder, like "Prisoners must have access to adequate literature and reading materials". Or just get rid of it. Hell, there might even be nations that ban books (don't quote me on that, there might be a WA resolution against it).

"We understand your objection, and we will recommend to the author that the subsequent draft include verbiage akin to the milder language you suggest, rather than completely removing the requirement from the proposal. We firmly believe that, in order to better educate prisoners and to keep them mentally and emotionally focused, adequate reading materials must be made available consistently. If our goal is to reduce the rate of recidivism, thus reducing prisoner population and alleviating overcrowding, such education and focus is a prime factor in achieving these goals."

OOC:I thought you had another WA puppet? Oh well.

[Widowed Land]

OOC: I wonder how many puppets he has....I had many puppets but after usage of them eventually shrinks, they usually cease to exist.

[Araraukar]

Already headed down that road. Thanks for stealing my thunder.

OOC: Pfft, we've tried to get him to do that ever since he posted this thing, and you just walz around, all modded up, and reap the benefits of our wearing his pigheadedness down.

OOC: I wonder how many puppets he has....I had many puppets but after usage of them eventually shrinks, they usually cease to exist.

OOC: You can re-found a nation just by logging onto it, if it has expired in the last 10 years or so.

The infrastructure and overcrowding bits still need to be removed. Rehabilitation isn't hinged on either and they're just confusing leftovers, now. Also, right now you have mixed preamble and active clauses in your preamble. Don't do that.

Also, not even every SCHOOL offers every subject possible, so why should prisons?

[Widowed Land]

The infrastructure and overcrowding bits still need to be removed. Rehabilitation isn't hinged on either and they're just confusing leftovers, now. Also, right now you have mixed preamble and active clauses in your preamble. Don't do that.

Also, not even every SCHOOL offers every subject possible, so why should prisons?

OOC: Practical subjects and academic ones aren't the same. That clause doesn't mean subjects like physics or Geography and etc... You can rehabilitate one if he lives in bad conditions aye? And same for overcrowding, it's too big of a problem (if it exists in a nation). And preamble doesn't have an active clause, does it? Idk if it has please quote it.


P.S. Pigheadedness... An insult or a compliment?

[Kenmoria]

The infrastructure and overcrowding bits still need to be removed. Rehabilitation isn't hinged on either and they're just confusing leftovers, now. Also, right now you have mixed preamble and active clauses in your preamble. Don't do that.

Also, not even every SCHOOL offers every subject possible, so why should prisons?

OOC: Practical subjects and academic ones aren't the same. That clause doesn't mean subjects like physics or Geography and etc...

(OOC: It doesn’t matter, as having all practical subjects is still a very broad spectrum that will be impossible for some small prisons to manage.

You can rehabilitate one if he lives in bad conditions aye? And same for overcrowding, it's too big of a problem (if it exists in a nation).

One can rehabilitate in almost any conditions, if one really wants to do so. It seems odd to target two things that are only tangentially related to rehabilitation. They certainly help, but aren’t vital.

And preamble doesn't have an active clause, does it? Idk if it has please quote it.

Almost all of your numbered subclasses in the preamble wouldn’t look out of place in active clauses, and some would fit better there.)

[Widowed Land]

OOC: I think preamble has no active subclauses anymore... So yea. Resolution says about overcrowding and infrastructure that if problem is significant in individual nations(and then operative clause), so I don't see problem for nations which don't have such issues to be unhappy with the clause.

[Kenmoria]

OOC: I think preamble has no active subclauses anymore... So yea. Resolution says about overcrowding and infrastructure that if problem is significant in individual nations(and then operative clause), so I don't see problem for nations which don't have such issues to be unhappy with the clause.

(OOC: In that case, try linking the two issues to rehabilitation explicitly in the preamble, so that your proposal has a more consistent logic. Something like, ‘Recognising that the likelihood of rehabilitation can be affected by numerous factors, such as the sanitation of the prison, the chance of overcrowding, the quality of infrastructure, the level of staff training, or the access to education’ would work, though you may want a shorter list.)

[East Meranopirus]

Going to give some comprehensive feedback this time instead of just a smattering of points. Notes in red.

Category: Civil Rights

Strength: Significant



Improving rehabilitation of prisoners


Noting that for prisoners to rehabilitate quicker, their physiological and safety needs must be protected.

1. Low infrastructure usually causes lots of problems. What problems? You need to elaborate on this to make a convincing preamble
   
2. Overcrowding in prisons often hinders the equal share of food/hygiene supplies.
   
3. Considering there might be chance of unqualified workers taking offices, even vital ones.

Reminding that prisoners need significant help from the government-funded programs to rehabilitate quicker. Suggest using "recognising" instead of "reminding"

1. Education right is too important to be denied in prisons. Read this to yourself. It doesn't make sense. Try "Education should be a right for all prisoners"
   
2. Rehabilitation cannot take place without prisoners having access to therapy/counseling.
   
3. This and operative clause linked to this clause does not concern prisoners with death sentence.Placement isn't very logical here. Either put it in the "reminding" clause or move it down to your operative clauses.

Acknowledging the need to employ prisoners/ex-prisoners, which might reduce the chances of them ever re-offending.

Disturbed by the community who wrongly mocks and spreads stigmas and stereotypes about the prisoners.



The World Assembly hereby:



Commands governments to improve infrastructure and safety system in penitentiary establishments.

1. Member nations must ensure that prisoners are living in sanitary conditions by funding the infrastructure, if necessary. I don't think it's necessary to mention funding here, it's already assumed that if they need adequate infrastructure, they have to fund it.
   
2. Governments must either build new prisons/expand existing ones or implement the law of "split sentences" to reduce overcrowding, if such problem is significant in individual nations. First, you need to define "split sentences" because a lot of people won't know what it means exactly. Second, I think it's better if you change it to this: "Governments must ensure prisons do not reach overcapacity by expanding prison capacity or implementing split sentences.
   
3. Prison workers must go through mandatory annual retraining to ensure their qualification.

Mandates that governments must take the following actions in order to integrate ex-prisoners into the community.

1. Prisoners must have access to an adequate literature and reading materials. I changed my mind a little on this: try "Prisoners must have free access to literature and media except those that may radicalise prisoners or cause security threats.
   
2. Prisoners must be taught practical subjects, such as: cooking and etc. Prisoners must have right to choose their likely subject.
   
3. Prisoners must have an access to a therapy with psychiatrists. Though, security measures must be taken in account to ensure safety of the psychologist.

Implements certain standards to help prisoners to gain job after the release.

1. Prisoners must have a right to volunteer for in-prison jobs.(For example: Janitor, Chef and etc.) Jobs which have mandate over the security of the prison(such as guard) cannot be uphold by the prisoner. "uphold" should be "held" instead
   
2. Employers may not decline job applications from ex-offenders based on their criminal background, unless the past crimes are connected to relevant job.

Encourages governments to fund media campaigns, which will serve purpose of spreading information that will reassure employers/population that ex-convicts are capable of holding job posts productively. I don't see how this is still needed when the above clause, which is an actual operative clause, already bans employers from declining jobs based on criminal background.

Welcome to correct me, people, if I got anything wrong. I'm still fairly new here.

[Bears Armed]

OOC
Bearing in mind that the current wording refers simply to "prisoners", are this proposal's clauses about education and therapy supposed to apply even to people who are currently imprisoned only because they're awaiting trial?

[Widowed Land]

OOC
Bearing in mind that the current wording refers simply to "prisoners", are this proposal's clauses about education and therapy supposed to apply even to people who are currently imprisoned only because they're awaiting trial?

OOC: clauses like infrastructure improvement and worker qualification affects people who are waiting for a trial. But I don't see need to give those people job or lesson about cooking if they'll have trial in several days and will go free.(those who'll be rendered as guilty will enjoy prerogatives of this resolution)

[Kenmoria]

OOC
Bearing in mind that the current wording refers simply to "prisoners", are this proposal's clauses about education and therapy supposed to apply even to people who are currently imprisoned only because they're awaiting trial?

OOC: clauses like infrastructure improvement and worker qualification affects people who are waiting for a trial. But I don't see need to give those people job or lesson about cooking if they'll have trial in several days and will go free.(those who'll be rendered as guilty will enjoy prerogatives of this resolution)

(OOC: That currently isn’t reflected in the proposal. Although what you say does make sense, the legislative text only says that all prisoners must be offered practical subjects, regardless of whether they are convicted.)

[Widowed Land]

(OOC: That currently isn’t reflected in the proposal. Although what you say does make sense, the legislative text only says that all prisoners must be offered practical subjects, regardless of whether they are convicted.)

OOC: Suggest how should I put that

[Maowi]

(OOC: That currently isn’t reflected in the proposal. Although what you say does make sense, the legislative text only says that all prisoners must be offered practical subjects, regardless of whether they are convicted.)

OOC: Suggest how should I put that

OOC: Remind me who's writing this proposal?

If you want more people to write your own proposal for you, you'll probably have to waive your 'no more co-authors' statement.

But jokes aside, you could write 'prisoners' for one and 'convicted prisoners' for the other, and define them if it appears to be necessary.

[Widowed Land]

OOC: Suggest how should I put that

OOC: Remind me who's writing this proposal?

If you want more people to write your own proposal for you, you'll probably have to waive your 'no more co-authors' statement.

But jokes aside, you could write 'prisoners' for one and 'convicted prisoners' for the other, and define them if it appears to be necessary.

OOC: Someone wanted that change and let that someone suggest the change. I saw no problem with initial form