General Assembly Q&A

[Kitzerland]

Why would anybody want to repeal GAR#1? It just establishes the WA.

Somebody wanting to restart the WA?

The worlds biggest National Sovereignist.

[BestNationEvar]

I don't know if it was asked or not, I don't have the time to sift through 80 some pages of forums so forgive me.

1. If I had a proposal fail to gain enough approvals, can I edit it and resubmit it?

2. If the answer to one is yes then can I resubmit if it is the exact same as the first?

[Tinfect]

I don't know if it was asked or not, I don't have the time to sift through 80 some pages of forums so forgive me.

1. If I had a proposal fail to gain enough approvals, can I edit it and resubmit it?

2. If the answer to one is yes then can I resubmit if it is the exact same as the first?

Yes, and Yes. But keep in mind that if it isn't getting enough approvals, but isn't being removed from the queue by Moderation, while it's probably legal, it's also probably not well received. Consider throwing it on this forum for Drafting before submission.

[Imperium Anglorum]

Note that you will basically need to run a campaign to get anything to vote, since you need to get through the Delegate approval process. There are fewer than 100 delegates which regularly check the proposal submission lists, so it won't reach quorum by itself. You need to tell people that it exists for it to get to vote.

[Separatist Peoples]

I don't know if it was asked or not, I don't have the time to sift through 80 some pages of forums so forgive me.

1. If I had a proposal fail to gain enough approvals, can I edit it and resubmit it?

2. If the answer to one is yes then can I resubmit if it is the exact same as the first?

You should look into the debate surrounding your proposal. At the moment, it's been marked as illegal, so if you resubmit it as is, it will just be removed again. You should edit the relevant portions if you wish to submit it.

[Araraukar]

Attention GA Council members:

Since you guys seem to prefer not jumping directly to proper legal challenges now and I was told to use this thread to get your attention on specific questions in specific threads...

8. Further tasks the GAO with releasing the financial transaction records to national anti-laundering enforcement divisions when presented with a lawful warrant and a credible assessment of potential laundering efforts.

You need a warrant to get GAO to release information? I'm not sure member nations are allowed to issue warrants on WA committees.

"Nations would be empowered to provide a warrant to the committee. That was implicit. The entirety of this bureaucratic plan was to collect information in one secure place: the World Assembly. It then distributes that information to national law enforcement information, but only that information specifically requested by those specialized investigative divisions that nations are required to create. This ensures that the transactional information of all states is accessible by law enforcement, but only that which is strictly necessary. "

"In this way, member states can track transactions that are being used to launder money for criminal organizations even if those transactions leave their jurisdictional borders. The State of Blackacre can track transactions to The State of Greenacre that they suspect are being used to launder money and be funneled to the pro-Greenacre terrorist organization known as the Blackacre Liberation Front, because it's unlikely that Greenacre would supply this information in the first place. It protects the businesses of both Blackacre and Greenacre from unnecessary intrusion by law enforcement by narrowing the information released to only those transactions named in the warrant, and lets Blackacre make arrests within it's jurisdiction without having to rely on Greenacre's non-forthcoming cooperation."

Are 1) member nations allowed/able to issue warrants on a WA committee and 2) can a resolution require them to do so.

---

Additionally, does the Significant strength of International Security require an increase in both police and military spending? The rules for the category say "International Security - A resolution to improve world security by boosting police and military budgets."

Relevant mod rulings here: viewtopic.php?p=28207797#p28207797

And the one linked to in the above: viewtopic.php?p=2877431#p2877431

Both of those rulings say that the spending on both police and military doesn't have to be spelled out but it must be implied. In the current proposal at debate I honestly can't see any way that military would be even remotely concerned, unless 1) it was actively involved in criminal activity, in which case it wouldn't be receiving funding, or 2) the nation was completely policed by the military, which are probably be going to be as rare cases as the ones with no police forces.

And IA, before you jump up and down on my post for daring to post it, last time you agreed with me.

[Separatist Peoples]

Military police are involved in police action all the time. And I don't see why issuing warrants wouldn't be allowed. I don't know how they'd enforce them, but what rule do you think that would violate?

[Araraukar]

Military police are involved in police action all the time.

...in money laundering? And the proposal wants a separate division to be formed, I doubt military police would get invited. (If it was Mild, I wouldn't have an issue with that part of it.)

And I don't see why issuing warrants wouldn't be allowed.

But there's no court system on the WA's end to process them.

I don't know how they'd enforce them

Exactly.

but what rule do you think that would violate?

If I thought it clearly broke a rule, I'd have made an actual legality challenge. You guys wanted unclear points to be raised here so you could go give your separate non-ruling opinions in the drafting thread in question. I'm really trying to work with how you (not just you, SP) want things done.

[Separatist Peoples]

Military police are involved in police action all the time.

...in money laundering? And the proposal wants a separate division to be formed, I doubt military police would get invited. (If it was Mild, I wouldn't have an issue with that part of it.)

The ruling you've linked to supports that interpretation, from what I can see. Just my personal opinion, though. It doesn't seem relevant whether that's likely. Even if that was the case, that would be a crap reason to limit stronger IS proposals, just because the military traditionally doesn't engage in those roles.

But there's no court system on the WA's end to process them.

That is definitely not how warrants work. Warrants are orders from courts to hand something over. A warrant from a member state would order WA personnel to do something. No WA court involved.

but what rule do you think that would violate?

If I thought it clearly broke a rule, I'd have made an actual legality challenge. You guys wanted unclear points to be raised here so you could go give your separate non-ruling opinions in the drafting thread in question. I'm really trying to work with how you (not just you, SP) want things done. [/quote]
That's fair. I must have misunderstood. My personal opinion is that this isn't an issue. I'm curious what others think, though.

[Christian Democrats]

I'm curious what others think, though.

I'm inclined to say that a proposal in that category is legal if it enhances military or police spending.

[Sierra Lyricalia]

Attention GA Council members:

Since you guys seem to prefer not jumping directly to proper legal challenges now and I was told to use this thread to get your attention on specific questions in specific threads...

"Nations would be empowered to provide a warrant to the committee. That was implicit. The entirety of this bureaucratic plan was to collect information in one secure place: the World Assembly. It then distributes that information to national law enforcement information, but only that information specifically requested by those specialized investigative divisions that nations are required to create. This ensures that the transactional information of all states is accessible by law enforcement, but only that which is strictly necessary. "

"In this way, member states can track transactions that are being used to launder money for criminal organizations even if those transactions leave their jurisdictional borders. The State of Blackacre can track transactions to The State of Greenacre that they suspect are being used to launder money and be funneled to the pro-Greenacre terrorist organization known as the Blackacre Liberation Front, because it's unlikely that Greenacre would supply this information in the first place. It protects the businesses of both Blackacre and Greenacre from unnecessary intrusion by law enforcement by narrowing the information released to only those transactions named in the warrant, and lets Blackacre make arrests within it's jurisdiction without having to rely on Greenacre's non-forthcoming cooperation."

Are 1) member nations allowed/able to issue warrants on a WA committee and 2) can a resolution require them to do so.

---

[3)] Additionally, does the Significant strength of International Security require an increase in both police and military spending? The rules for the category say "International Security - A resolution to improve world security by boosting police and military budgets."

In order of ease:

3. Not necessarily; well-written IS/Sig drafts will tend to affect military as well as police budgets, just because of the subject matter. I can imagine the possibility of finding legal a draft which only affects police yet is classed "significant."

But that's a flight of fancy we don't need to make for this in my opinion, because the proposal in question is explicitly targeting "organized criminal activity, including international gangs, terrorist organizations, and criminal syndicates, [that] fundamentally destabilizes and undermines the authority of nations" (my emphasis) and nothing in its Clause 3 indicates that the new national law enforcement division is to be exclusively a civilian agency. Indeed, such an agency will have to at least liase with military forces to track the ultimate disposition of certain funds suspected to be destined for terrorist or other paramilitary groups; in at least some of the contemplated cases, once the investigators have done their work on the finance side there will be follow-up work for military forces.

2. I don't see how a resolution would be limited from requiring nations to issue warrants. The last question is therefore:

1. May nations execute warrants on WA agencies?

As a matter of general practice and in a vacuum, no. HOWEVER. It's reasonable for a resolution to require a WA agency to comply with a nation seeking certain explicitly defined types of information. I read "warrant" as a means not only of requiring WA action, but also restricting the circumstances under which nations may ask for financial transaction information. In other words, Officer Jimbo can't just rattle off an email to the GAO and get this stuff, even if he's the official national liason to the GAO; like all police in well-adjusted societies, he's gotta go to a judge and show good cause. Under those carefully limited circumstances the WA may require itself to cough up such sensitive information.

If this resolution came before us in its current state, I would find no reason to declare it illegal.

[Willania Imperium]

If we find a proposal that we like, how do we sign it?

[Excidium Planetis]

If we find a proposal that we like, how do we sign it?

Only WA Delegates can approve proposals. You are not a WA Delegate.

[Bears Armed Mission]

If we find a proposal that we like, how do we sign it?

Only WA Delegates can approve proposals. You are not a WA Delegate.

But if at least 6% of the WA Delegates approve ("sign") it then the proposal goes to a vote by all of the WA's members...

[Nehushtan]

Hello, I've recently joined and have been browsing through the WA Gen Forum. I would love to participate in debates and give input on drafts etc, but just would like a few tips on how to best go about transitioning from new member to a recognized participant, as well as anything else you think I should know off the top.

[Bears Armed]

1/ Read the GA rules, which are stickied near the top of the forum, and maybe skim the 'Passed Resolutions' thread (ditto) as well, and read some of the other threads, so that you have some idea of how things work.

2/ Name your ambassador, and have them start posting in threads. Don't assume that everybody who's been around for longer than you automatically knows what they're talking about, but try to be polite and if several "veterans" all tell you something then take the possibility that they're right seriously.

That's basically it....

[Nehushtan]

Alright, and thanks. Will do.

[Wallenburg]

Alright, and thanks. Will do.

Also, don't forget to have fun. After all, this is just a game. A good way to build your ambassador's character, get to know other players, and feel more at home in the GA is to post in the World Assembly Strangers' Bar thread.

[Nehushtan]

Ohh. I was wondering what that was for. Sure!

[Wallenburg]

"Gun Control Act" was discarded by the WA for rule violations after garnering 158 votes in favor and 528 votes against.

What just happened?

[Christian Democrats]

"Gun Control Act" was discarded by the WA for rule violations after garnering 158 votes in favor and 528 votes against.

What just happened?

A deleted proposal that didn't reach quorum was promoted to the floor for a vote. Then, it was discarded.

[Wallenburg]

"Gun Control Act" was discarded by the WA for rule violations after garnering 158 votes in favor and 528 votes against.

What just happened?

A deleted proposal that didn't reach quorum was promoted to the floor for a vote. Then, it was discarded.

How did it reach the floor if it didn't even reach quorum?

[Christian Democrats]

A deleted proposal that didn't reach quorum was promoted to the floor for a vote. Then, it was discarded.

How did it reach the floor if it didn't even reach quorum?

A flaw in the new code that is being written for the General Assembly.

[Araraukar]

A flaw in the new code that is being written for the General Assembly.

...so very nice of everyone involved to keep the rest of us in the loop of there being changes afoot that can obviously affect the functioning of this part of the game...

[Separatist Peoples]

A flaw in the new code that is being written for the General Assembly.

...so very nice of everyone involved to keep the rest of us in the loop of there being changes afoot that can obviously affect the functioning of this part of the game...

Right. In the future, we'll keep you apprised of all the changes we make before we're done working them all out. Its best for us to share things with the public before they're ready. Or procedure is hammered out.