NationStates

Repeal "Prohibit Private Prisons"
Category:Repeal | Proposed by: Germany

---

The World Assembly,

Applauding the efforts of this assembly to improve the standards and conditions of incarceration by prohibiting private prisons in the aforementioned resolution;

Quoting clause 2 which states " Further defines a "private prison" as a prison that is entirely owned and operated or primarily owned and operated by a nongovernmental corporation, a private individual, or any other private actor or actors";

Noting that the aforementioned clause states that a prison can only be considered private if it is wholly or primarily owned by a private proprietor;

Recognising that this therefore means governments can exploit this loophole through purchasing 51% of a private prison to avoid the ban;

Further Noting that a government can own a prison and lease it to a private proprietor as the resolution does not prohibit this;

Further Quoting clause 3 which states "Requires all member states and their political subdivisions, within two calendar years of this resolution's passage and in perpetuity thereafter, to discontinue their use of private prisons for the incarceration of individuals convicted of crimes and serving criminal sentences";

Observing that the aforementioned clause does not ban private prisons in member states but instead, allows them to operate as long as they receive criminals convicted in foreign non-member countries;

Discerning that member states can arrest individuals and place them in private prisons whilst they await their trial due to the aforementioned clause stating "discontinue their use of private prisons for the incarceration of individuals convicted of crimes and serving criminal sentences";

Concerned that the resolution does not prohibit private prisons in member states but only bars member states from incarcerating their own convicts in them;

Believing that this resolution ought to be repealed and replaced by a resolution that regulates private prisons, or prohibits them properly;

Hereby,

Repeals GA#468 "Prohibit Private Prisons".

United Massachusetts wrote:Opposed. Strongly so.

Marxist Germany wrote:

United Massachusetts wrote:Opposed. Strongly so.

"Ambassador, there is nothing stopping the delegation from Christian Democrats to write up a better replacement, wouldn't you want a full ban on private prisons?"

United Massachusetts wrote:"Ambassador, we do not believe it wise to risk a replacement. Further, it remains our opinion that if the government is the main owner of a prison, the perverse incentives of a free market are kept in check."

United Massachusetts wrote:"Ambassador, we do not believe it wise to risk a replacement. Further, it remains our opinion that if the government is the main owner of a prison, the perverse incentives of a free market are kept in check."

Imperium Anglorum wrote:

United Massachusetts wrote:"Ambassador, we do not believe it wise to risk a replacement. Further, it remains our opinion that if the government is the main owner of a prison, the perverse incentives of a free market are kept in check."

So the government couldn't possibly make themselves an profit maximising state-owned enterprise? An interesting assessment.

North Johen Ezermard wrote:You may include the harms of banning private prisons instead of just stating the flaws of the original resolution, such as the fact that it limits the economic freedom of member nations. I believe this will increase the chance of gaining support from not only those who find the original resolution in need for an improvement, but also other member nations who may not be satisfied with the passed resolution at all.

Araraukar wrote:"Support in the hopes of a proper ban
You should write it yourself, if you can
Might ask the author if they'd be willing
To re-consider their text and helping
If not, take notice of the opposition
As you'll need to change their disposition."

OOC: Blame UM for the rhyming. He encouraged me.

Marxist Germany wrote:"Unfortunately there will be no proper ban, this is a repeal only effort, the ambassador of CD can write up their own replacement."

Marxist Germany wrote:Further Quoting clause 3 which states "Requires all member states and their political subdivisions, within two calendar years of this resolution's passage and in perpetuity thereafter, to discontinue their use of private prisons for the incarceration of individuals convicted of crimes and serving criminal sentences";

Observing that the aforementioned clause does not ban private prisons in member states but instead, allows them to operate as long as they receive criminals convicted in foreign non-member countries;

Concerned that the resolution does not prohibit private prisons in member states but only bars member states from incarcerating their own convicts in them;

Christian Democrats wrote:I am afraid that the idea of a "real ban" eludes me. Under any capitalist or mixed economic system, private industry will almost certainly play some role in the nation's prisons. The government, of course, has to award contracts for a wide variety of prison goods and services, including food, water, power, uniforms, beds, cleaning supplies, vehicles, security cameras, etc. There's hardly such a thing as a wholly public prison.

Christian Democrats wrote:I don't see the problem. If foreign nations want to send their prisoners to World Assembly nations, such prisoners, by virtue of their new residence, will gain World Assembly rights.

Araraukar wrote:

Christian Democrats wrote:I don't see the problem. If foreign nations want to send their prisoners to World Assembly nations, such prisoners, by virtue of their new residence, will gain World Assembly rights.

OOC: But are they "inhabitants" if they're held against their will and are citizens of a foreign nation?