[LAST CALL] Enforcing Sterilisation Standards on Spacecraft

[Ignis Cinere]

Enforcing Sterilisation Standards on Earth-origin Manned Spacecraft

SHOCKED at the lack of legislation regarding the sterilisation of Earth-origin manned spacecraft,

ACKNOWLEDGING that many a WA nation has a space program,

WANTING to ensure public safety by sterilising returning spacecraft so as to remove all potentially harmful alien organism species that may or may not have arrived on Earth via spacecraft,

Defines, for the purposes of this resolution,
a. Spacecraft as any sort of manned craft intentionally launched into space and has landed on or had contact with non-Earth objects, and successfully made reentry through the Earth’s atmosphere,
b. Sterilisation as the complete removal, containment, and/or disinfection of any foreign, non-Earth origin organisms found on the craft,

Hereby,
MANDATES that WA member nations with space programs

a. purchase at least basic sterilisation equipment on a scale suitable to that of their space program,
b. establish sterilisation procedures and protocol, and enforce them upon the relevant parties,
c. spread awareness about the danger of potentially harmful alien organisms on the ecosystem and/or the human race,
d. collectively create a committee, concerned with establishing and enforcing sterilisation standards of said returning spacecraft across all involved nations, to be named the Spacecraft Sterilisation Standard Organisation (S.S.S.O.)

SHOCKED at the lack of legislation regarding the sterilisation of manned spacecraft,

ACKNOWLEDGING that many a WA nation has a space program,

WANTING to ensure public safety by sterilising returning spacecraft so as to remove all potentially harmful alien organism species that may or may not have arrived on a planet or other celestial bodies inhabited by a sapient species via spacecraft,

Defines, for the purposes of this resolution,
a. Spacecraft as any sort of manned craft intentionally launched into space or otherwise manufactured fully or partially in space, and has landed on or had contact with foreign objects, and successfully made reentry through the above-mentioned planets’ or celestial bodies’ atmosphere,
b. Sterilisation as the complete removal, containment, and/or disinfection of any foreign, non-sapient, unapproved organisms found on the craft,
c. Unapproved as without the explicit written permission or approval of the relevant authorities to bring back certain organisms upon the spacecraft, such as the nations' space program management committee or government,

Hereby,
MANDATES that WA member nations with space programs
a. purchase at least basic sterilisation equipment on a scale suitable to that of their space program,
b. establish sterilisation procedures and protocol, and enforce them upon the relevant parties,
c. spread awareness about the danger of potentially harmful alien organisms on the ecosystem and the dominant sapient race(s) inhabiting the planet, if either is applicable,
d. additionally burden the IASA (International Aero-Space Administration) with the duty of establishing and enforcing sterilisation standards of said returning spacecraft across all WA nations with a space program.

[Bears Armed]

OOC
WA nations are not automatically on 'Earth', and precedent says that using the planet's name is therefore "illegal" under the rule against RL references.
And we're not all "human", neither...

But congratulations on having the sense to post your draft here, instead of just going straight to submitting it...

[Kenmoria]

(OOC: It is the WA that creates committees, not member states. Additionally, I recommend reusing the International Aero-Space Administration (IASA) rather than making a new committee.)

[BlackLight Covenant]

IC: "Besides the fact that this proposal is quite human- and Earth-centric, which could no doubt be taken as an insult by some, this proposal does appear to have some issues that require mending, ambassador...which, I do suppose, is the reason why we are all here at the moment. One of the main issues that I see right now legislation-wise is your definition of a spacecraft, as it requires a vessel to have been built on a planet's surface. How would this work for spacecraft that have been entirely constructed in space yet are fully capable of engaging in planetary landings, like the smaller vessels of our space fleet? Under the current definition, such vessels do not appear to count as spacecraft, meaning that they would be exempt from this legislation regardless of the fact that they are just as capable of spreading non-native organisms onto a planet."

"This also brings me to my next point, namely the fact that your proposal forces a space vessel to undergo sterilization to ensure that no foreign organisms are capable of latching on to the vessel before infesting whatever planet they land upon. Now, this is perfectly fine in theory, as interplanetary contagion is definitely not something one wants to see, but this is where the Earth-based focus of this proposal seems to become a proper issue. After all, your proposal currently aims to prevent alien organisms from contaminating Earth. What about inhabited planets that aren't Earth, however? Or non-inhabited planets that might still house their own ecosystem, regardless of how barren said planets might be? In its current form, this seems like something that will be quite easy to exploit for nations more willing to cut corners and costs when it comes to spaceflight; after all, they only have to make sure that their spacecraft are sterilized when attempting to land on Earth, not on a planet or other celestial body in general."

"Last but not least, you should probably reword the clause about spreading awareness of the dangers of interplanetary contamination, as this clause presents a loophole due to a blend of its current requirements and the human-centric writing that this proposal is currently filled with. After all, it forces nations to spread awareness about the dangers alien contamination presents towards a planet's ecosystem and/or towards human life. After all, if a species is not human, or alternatively, does not identify itself as human, then whatever government is in charge could exploit this current wording to educate only about the dangers for human life, whilst downplaying the threat it might pose to their own species, and completely ignoring the part about potential threats towards a native ecosystem due to the and/or part."

"So in short, modify your definition of what a spacecraft is, reword the clause about spreading awareness, get rid of the human- and Earth-centric writing that currently haunts your proposal, and then this concept of yours should be well on its way towards becoming a working version of itself, ambassador."

(OOC: might also wanna check whether this contradicts or duplicates any currently active resolution with regards to things such as the definition of a spacecraft, as I don't exactly know whether such a thing has already been defined in the past.)

[Ignis Cinere]

(OOC: It is the WA that creates committees, not member states. Additionally, I recommend reusing the International Aero-Space Administration (IASA) rather than making a new committee.)

OOC: Ah thanks! Could you possibly point out the resolution where the IASA first appeared?

[Ignis Cinere]

OOC
WA nations are not automatically on 'Earth', and precedent says that using the planet's name is therefore "illegal" under the rule against RL references.
And we're not all "human", neither...

But congratulations on having the sense to post your draft here, instead of just going straight to submitting it...

OOC: Oh, I didn’t know that counted as a RL ref... thanks for pointing it out! Could you perhaps suggest a neutral way to refer to planets that this GA resolution is concerned with? And how should I rephrase the human part?
EDIT: would intelligent species work? Or is that still too specific?

[Kenmoria]

OOC
WA nations are not automatically on 'Earth', and precedent says that using the planet's name is therefore "illegal" under the rule against RL references.
And we're not all "human", neither...

But congratulations on having the sense to post your draft here, instead of just going straight to submitting it...

OOC: Oh, I didn’t know that counted as a RL ref... thanks for pointing it out! Could you perhaps suggest a neutral way to refer to planets that this GA resolution is concerned with? And how should I rephrase the human part?
EDIT: would intelligent species work? Or is that still too specific?

(OOC: The convention is to use ‘sapient species’ to refer to humans or other intelligent alien species. You could mention ‘inhabited planets’, or just refer to those WA member states that have space programs, rather than planets that do.

(OOC: It is the WA that creates committees, not member states. Additionally, I recommend reusing the International Aero-Space Administration (IASA) rather than making a new committee.)

OOC: Ah thanks! Could you possibly point out the resolution where the IASA first appeared?

That was GA 451, International Aero-Space Administration.)

[Araraukar]

OOC: Ah thanks! Could you possibly point out the resolution where the IASA first appeared?

That was GA 451, International Aero-Space Administration.)

OOC: If you're going to re-use the committee, don't refer to the resolution, though, just use the committee instead. Referring to the resolution that established it, would create a House of Cards violation (if the original resolution was repealed, your reference would be null). A committee, on the other hand, doesn't stop existing as long as ANY resolution uses it. (Of course it loses the tasks given to it by the repealed resolution, but it doesn't just vanish.)

Now, what exactly is this proposal trying to do?

Avoid invasive species being spread? There's a resolution or two on that topic already.

Prevent scientific samples from other biospheres being brought onto planets with their own biospheres? For the most part a useless worry, since something evolved to Environment A over billions of years, will overcome something evolved to Environment B so many times out of total that it's useless to apply numbers to it. You could always require proper quarantine regulations to be followed, to reduce the risk further.

Something else? What else?

This could also ban tansporting foodstuffs from planet to planet, as well as prevent terraforming process.