[SECOND DRAFT] Bill of Attainder Ban

[Sky View]

Whereas, A Bill, Act, or Writ of Attainder circumvents a nations judicial system, and;

Whereas, A Bill, Act, or Writ of Attainder’s main use is on political dissenters, and;

Whereas, A Bill, Act, or Writ of Attainder is definded as, but not limited to; A legislative act that singles out an individual or group for punishment without a trial, and

Whereas, Any reigning Monarch, Dictator or executive head(s) my issue a Writ of Attainder, convicting a person without due process of law namely not bringing that person before a court to be tried, however that nation may define its courts, unless outlined otherwise by a NationStates Constitution or Legal Tradition, and;

Whereas, Any Legislative body may pass a motion caring a Bill, or Act, of Attainder convicting a person without due process of law, namely not bringing that person before a court to be tried. However that nation may define its courts, unless outlined otherwise by a NationStates Constitution or Legal Tradition and;

Whereas, A writ of Habeas Corpus, as outlined in General Assembly Resolution #67. Does not reverse the ruling handed down by a non-judicial officer. Namely A Monarch or Legislative Body, but rather implements such judicial principles as banning double jeopardy and holding limit laws, and;

Whereas, A person is criminalized by a Bill, Act, or Writ of Attainder, not simply held without “cause”, and;

Whereas, Any “cause” can be “manufactured”, and;

Whereas, this body has seen fit to Ban the use of Ex Post Facto Laws and implement a ban on double jeopardy and holding limit laws, and is a furtherance of those goals but should not be considered built upon on them and;

Whereas, A Bill, Act, or Writ of Attainder, is not mentioned or provided for expressly in the Resolutions now on the books of the World Assembly.

Therefore be it Resolved, By this General Assembly that All Bills, Acts, and Writs of Attainder in member nations are now null and void. And a NationState upon entering null and void their Bills, Acts, and Writes of Attainder, and;

Be it further resolved that, All persons held on a Bill, Act, or Write of Attainder, in all member nations now or upon joining are to be placed into the Legal Court System as outlined by that NationStates Constitution or Legal Tradition, for the crime they were incriminated with by that Bill, Act, or Writ of Attainder to be tried by due process of law as that NationState may have by Constitution or Legal Tradition provided for, and;

Be it further resolved, that a no government of any kind, Monarch, Legislator, or Judge of any member NationState may issue a Bill, Act, or Writ of Attainder or any article with the same intent.

Whereas, A Bill, Act, or Writ of Attainder circumvents a nations judicial system, and;

Whereas, A Bill, Act, or Writ of Attainder’s main use is on political dissenters, and’

Whereas, Any reigning Monarch, Dictator or executive head(s) my issue a Writ of Attainder, convicting a person without due process of law namely not bringing that person before a court to be tried, however that nation may define its courts, unless outlined otherwise by a NationStates Constitution or Legal Tradition, and;

Whereas, Any Legislative body may pass a motion caring a Bill, or Act, of Attainder convicting a person without due process of law, namely not bringing that person before a court to be tried. However that nation may define its courts, unless outlined otherwise by a NationStates Constitution or Legal Tradition and;

Whereas, A writ of Habeas Corpus, as outlined in General Assembly Resolution #67. Does not reverse the ruling handed down by a non-judicial officer. Namely A Monarch or Legislative Body, but rather implements such judicial principles as banning double jeopardy and holding limit laws, and;

Whereas, A person is criminalized by a Bill, Act, or Writ of Attainder, not simply held without “cause”, and;

Whereas, Any “cause” can be “manufactured”, and;

Whereas, this body sees fit to Ban the use of Ex Post Facto Laws and implement a ban on double jeopardy and holding limit laws as outlined in General Assembly Resolution # 67 entitled Habeas Corpus, and;

Whereas, A Bill, Act, or Writ of Attainder, is not mentioned or provided for expressly in the Resolutions now on the books of the World Assembly.

Therefore be it Resolved, By this General Assembly that All Bills, Acts, and Writs of Attainder in member nations are now null and void. And a NationState upon entering null and void their Bills, Acts, and Writes of Attainder, and;

Be it further resolved that, All persons held on a Bill, Act, or Write of Attainder, in all member nations now or upon joining are to be placed into the Legal Court System as outlined by that NationStates Constitution or Legal Tradition, for the crime they were incriminated with by that Bill, Act, or Writ of Attainder to be tried by due process of law as that NationState may have by Constitution or Legal Tradition provided for, and;

Be it further resolved, that a no government of any kind, Monarch, Legislator, or Judge of any member NationState may issue a Bill, Act, or Writ of Attainder or any article with the same intent.

[Aabceef]

Whereas, A Bill, Act, or Writ of Attainder circumvents a nations judicial system, and;

Whereas, A Bill, Act, or Writ of Attainder’s main use is on political dissenters, and’

Whereas, Any reigning Monarch, Dictator or executive head(s) my issue a Writ of Attainder, convicting a person without due process of law namely not bringing that person before a court to be tried, however that nation may define its courts, unless outlined otherwise by a NationStates Constitution or Legal Tradition, and;

Whereas, Any Legislative body may pass a motion caring a Bill, or Act, of Attainder convicting a person without due process of law, namely not bringing that person before a court to be tried. However that nation may define its courts, unless outlined otherwise by a NationStates Constitution or Legal Tradition and;

Whereas, A writ of Habeas Corpus, as outlined in General Assembly Resolution #67. Does not reverse the ruling handed down by a non-judicial officer. Namely A Monarch or Legislative Body, but rather implements such judicial principles as banning double jeopardy and holding limit laws, and;

Whereas, A person is criminalized by a Bill, Act, or Writ of Attainder, not simply held without “cause”, and;

Whereas, Any “cause” can be “manufactured”, and;

Whereas, this body sees fit to Ban the use of Ex Post Facto Laws and implement a ban on double jeopardy and holding limit laws as outlined in General Assembly Resolution # 67 entitled Habeas Corpus, and;

Whereas, A Bill, Act, or Writ of Attainder, is not mentioned or provided for expressly in the Resolutions now on the books of the World Assembly.

Therefore be it Resolved, By this General Assembly that All Bills, Acts, and Writs of Attainder in member nations are now null and void. And a NationState upon entering null and void their Bills, Acts, and Writes of Attainder, and;

Be it further resolved that, All persons held on a Bill, Act, or Write of Attainder, in all member nations now or upon joining are to be placed into the Legal Court System as outlined by that NationStates Constitution or Legal Tradition, for the crime they were incriminated with by that Bill, Act, or Writ of Attainder to be tried by due process of law as that NationState may have by Constitution or Legal Tradition provided for, and;

Be it further resolved, that a no government of any kind, Monarch, Legislator, or Judge of any member NationState may issue a Bill, Act, or Writ of Attainder or any article with the same intent

.

This could be very problematic since it lacks many required defintions such as an explicit definition of what a "Writ of Attainder" is. It also requires a foundation laying out the basic structure of what a fair impartial judicial system is and the right to a fair trial; all resolutions which have been either rejected or repealed in the past. I personally find the language of this resolution overly pedantic, cumbersome, and unclear. What exactly are your goals and aims for this resolution? What is this resolution supposed to solve? I suggest you go read some of the previous passed resolutions as reference for how a resolution should be written.

[The Emmerian Unions]

Whereas, A writ of Habeas Corpus, as outlined in General Assembly Resolution #67.

Illegal. House of Card violation!

[NERVUN]

Whereas, A writ of Habeas Corpus, as outlined in General Assembly Resolution #67.

Illegal. House of Card violation!

I want to say no. It seems to me that this is a finding, not building on it. Just noting that the current resolution does not cover it.
(Note, this is not an opinion of the Sec. (I.e. mods), just my quick glance at it).

[Grays Harbor]

unless outlined otherwise by a NationStates Constitution or Legal Tradition, and;

There is no "nationstates constitution" we are aware of.

[Artichokeville]

(Note, this is not an opinion of the Sec. (I.e. mods), just my quick glance at it).

Nerv, in such a situation you go IC, mention that your Ambassador's been in the Strangers Bar for a long, long session and then give an opinion.

(We're apparently covering this in more detail next week in Hack's seminar on WA Modding, Unit III: How Not to Cop the Blame for Anything. Don't forget the thumbscrews.)

[WA Mission of NERV-UN]

Whereas, A writ of Habeas Corpus, as outlined in General Assembly Resolution #67.

Illegal. House of Card violation!

Honored Ambassador, we feel that this would not be a House of Cards violation as we read said clause as a finding, i.e. not building on it. Just noting that the current resolution does not cover it.

Regards,
Katsuyama Masashiro, Capt.
Ambassador

(Note, this is not an opinion of the Sec. (I.e. mods), just my quick glance at it).

Nerv, in such a situation you go IC, mention that your Ambassador's been in the Strangers Bar for a long, long session and then give an opinion.

(We're apparently covering this in more detail next week in Hack's seminar on WA Modding, Unit III: How Not to Cop the Blame for Anything. Don't forget the thumbscrews.)

[Sky View]

unless outlined otherwise by a NationStates Constitution or Legal Tradition, and;

There is no "nationstates constitution" we are aware of.

I've seen resolutions Mention them I don't know of any but they mention them

[Bears Armed]

Whereas, A Bill, Act, or Writ of Attainder circumvents a nations judicial system, and;

Whereas, A Bill, Act, or Writ of Attainder’s main use is on political dissenters, and;

Whereas, A Bill, Act, or Writ of Attainder is definded In English Common Law as, but not limited to in such case that a nation does not follow English Common Law;

Illegal, RL reference.

[Aabceef]

Isn't this wholething pretty much the same as GENERAL ASSEMBLY RESOLUTION # 84

[Krioval]

OOC: It's best to not copy/paste Wikipedia entries when writing proposals.

[Sky View]

OOC: It's best to not copy/paste Wikipedia entries when writing proposals.

I don't copy and paste I find the fact you think that almost insulting

[Sky View]

Isn't this wholething pretty much the same as GENERAL ASSEMBLY RESOLUTION # 84

No, I'm guessing you don't know how a bill of attiender is used. you should look it up in blackstones law dictionary

[Shazbotdom]

"Sometimes the Judicial System needs to be circumvented if the person on trial commits an act that directly threatens the soverignty of the Nation that the event happens in. Such as a homegrown terrorist attack, in which the Supreme Emperor himself presides over the trial instead of a member of the Judiciary and in most cases, has a verdict within 12 hours. The passage of this law would circumvent years of honored tradition within the Empire."

Mr. Antuan D. Flaberghast
10th Level Diplomat
Shazbotdom Ambassador to the WA

[Krioval]

"Sometimes the Judicial System needs to be circumvented if the person on trial commits an act that directly threatens the soverignty of the Nation that the event happens in. Such as a homegrown terrorist attack, in which the Supreme Emperor himself presides over the trial instead of a member of the Judiciary and in most cases, has a verdict within 12 hours. The passage of this law would circumvent years of honored tradition within the Empire."

If I may, does your Supreme Emperor render a verdict without considering the evidence? Further, are there instances in which an accused individual has been acquitted by through such a trial? The Imperial Chiefdom has a strange set of tribal laws that are sometimes enforced in a similar manner, though tribal moots must still abide by appropriate conduct for an evidence-based trial.

Aleksei-kan Volkov
Imperial Chiefdom of Krioval

[Shazbotdom]

"Sometimes the Judicial System needs to be circumvented if the person on trial commits an act that directly threatens the soverignty of the Nation that the event happens in. Such as a homegrown terrorist attack, in which the Supreme Emperor himself presides over the trial instead of a member of the Judiciary and in most cases, has a verdict within 12 hours. The passage of this law would circumvent years of honored tradition within the Empire."

If I may, does your Supreme Emperor render a verdict without considering the evidence? Further, are there instances in which an accused individual has been acquitted by through such a trial? The Imperial Chiefdom has a strange set of tribal laws that are sometimes enforced in a similar manner, though tribal moots must still abide by appropriate conduct for an evidence-based trial.

Aleksei-kan Volkov
Imperial Chiefdom of Krioval

"In matters in which the Supreme Emperor does sit as the Judge in a Trial, he gets no retrial or any appeals. And from the best of my knowledge and information that I looked through before comming to the chamber to discuss this piece of legislation, there have been no instances in which the accused was aquitted by the Supreme Emperor. Although records indicate that there have been only 6 such cases in over a few hundred years of the Empire's history."

Mr. Antuan D. Flaberghast
10th Level Diplomat
Shazbotdom Ambassador to the WA

[Kelssek]

Surely such concerns are already covered by the resolution "Fairness In Criminal Trials", which requires every person charged with an offence to be brought to trial?

MANDATES that all persons charged with criminal offences in the jurisdictions of member nations shall be brought to trial with such reasonable speed as is consistent with both prosecution and defence properly assembling available relevant evidence;

[Enn]

OOC:

Surely such concerns are already covered by the resolution "Fairness In Criminal Trials", which requires every person charged with an offence to be brought to trial?

MANDATES that all persons charged with criminal offences in the jurisdictions of member nations shall be brought to trial with such reasonable speed as is consistent with both prosecution and defence properly assembling available relevant evidence;

Which of course meshes nicely with Habeas Corpus, requiring all people held to be issued with a charge.

Yes, in the RW, there is such a concept as a Bill of Attainder. However, I don't see any need for it to be specified within the WA, given the way these two resolutions work.

[Charlotte Ryberg]

Surely such concerns are already covered by the resolution "Fairness In Criminal Trials", which requires every person charged with an offence to be brought to trial?

MANDATES that all persons charged with criminal offences in the jurisdictions of member nations shall be brought to trial with such reasonable speed as is consistent with both prosecution and defence properly assembling available relevant evidence;

I would stand by the comments of the honoured ambassador to Kelssek: but I feel that that Fairness in Criminal Trials should be sufficient overall.

[Urgench]

This statute unfortunately verges on the nonsensical , since the proliferation within it of arcane usages such as "whereas" makes it akin to gibberish.


In any case the primary purpose of attainder is not to convict persons without trial, it is to deprive (by legislative means) those with great landed or political power and/or wealth of that power and wealth, which might otherwise allow them to evade proper prosecution under the terms of the charges laid upon them.

That the term "attainder" has been developed to mean a variety of summary (normally Royal) proclamation of guilt is an accident of fate, and that in times past such proclamations did in fact involve summary justice without the benefit of trial is essentially coincidental.

We are aware that many member states have, as a basis for understanding the law, a common cultural and historical perspective on issues such as attainder (OOC. ie.. an American one). However it is important to point out that while this common perspective has traditionally demonised the use of attainder, the accretion of generations of intentional and unintentional misunderstandings of the purpose and actual legal nature of attainder has warped this particular point of view and obscured the useful benefits which attainder may have.

Doubtless historically acts of attainder have been abused, and naturally they have been used to circumvent the proper functioning of a fair judicial system to allow tyrannical rulers to sentence their domestic enemies without trial and to benefit by confiscations of their enemies' property, and the WA has already outlawed such practices comprehensively.

However, the proper use of attainder, which is to deprive powerful individuals (normally aristocrats) of the means to break the law and remain unpunished for doing so should continue, in our opinion, to be legal and is not at variance with the functioning of a fair and humane legal system, or for that matter with extant WA law.


Ultimately there exists a matrix of WA resolutions, not confined to those covering habeus corpus and fair criminal trial but including (among others) those on ex post facto laws, and unfair discrimination which fully proscribe the abuse and improper use of attainder, effectively leaving only its proper and fair use legal, we would oppose the complete proscription of this fair and proper use of acts of attainder.

Yours,

[Manticore Reborn]

The humble representative from Manticore Reborn feels that this issue has already been resolved to the satisfaction of this august assembly in World Assembly Resolution #67 and kindly asks the honored lobbyist from Sky View to stop wasting this assembly's time.

The humble representative from the Kingdom of Manticore Reborn yields the floor.

Respectfully,
Hamish Alexander, Thirteenth Earl of White Haven