[DRAFT] On Private Prisons

[Vicitania]

The World Assembly,

Shocked by the extreme nature of servitude and confinement taking place in private prisons,

Sickened by private prison owners' profiting off of convicts' forced labour,

Hereby,

Defines private prison as a place of confinement for convicted criminals that is owned or leased in any amount by a private entity, be they an individual, group of individuals, or corporation,

Prohibits any private entity from collecting a profit off of a private prison,

Mandates that all private prisons be adequately audited by the government within a reasonable amount of time.

[Tinhampton]

Audited on what?

The WA already has a resolution allowing prison labour to be used, whether or not the state owns all of it.

[Hsaaz]

Audited on what?

The WA already has a resolution allowing prison labour to be used, whether or not the state owns all of it.

With all respect that is due to Tinhampton,

Although it is true that according to General Assembly Resolution no. 23 ("Ban On Slavery And Trafficking") that the World Assembly does not prohibit the use of prison labor "given as sentence in the course of a fair trial," it does not appear to the Hsa'azi delegation to the World Assembly that this draft ("On Private Prisons") prohibits the use of all prison labor. Rather, it prohibits only those activities which employ prison labor and produce goods to be sold: for example, furniture making. Groundskeeping, laundering, cooking, and other activities necessary to the daily operation of a prison which employ prisoner labor, but which provide no revenue to the prison, would not be prohibited by this draft. Furthermore, the draft as it stands only prohibits such labor that does produce goods to the extent that it provides the prison's operator with a profit.

This said, we agree with Tinhampton that the draft would be improved if its operative clause regarding audits be elaborated as to the kinds of audits to be conducted and their proposed frequency.

[Vicitania]

Audited on what?

The WA already has a resolution allowing prison labour to be used, whether or not the state owns all of it.

With all respect that is due to Tinhampton,

Although it is true that according to General Assembly Resolution no. 23 ("Ban On Slavery And Trafficking") that the World Assembly does not prohibit the use of prison labor "given as sentence in the course of a fair trial," it does not appear to the Hsa'azi delegation to the World Assembly that this draft ("On Private Prisons") prohibits the use of all prison labor. Rather, it prohibits only those activities which employ prison labor and produce goods to be sold: for example, furniture making. Groundskeeping, laundering, cooking, and other activities necessary to the daily operation of a prison which employ prisoner labor, but which provide no revenue to the prison, would not be prohibited by this draft. Furthermore, the draft as it stands only prohibits such labor that does produce goods to the extent that it provides the prison's operator with a profit.

This said, we agree with Tinhampton that the draft would be improved if its operative clause regarding audits be elaborated as to the kinds of audits to be conducted and their proposed frequency.

Yes, that is precisely how it was designed. Thank you, Hsaaz

[Araraukar]

OOC: You're both missing the point that if a previous resolution allows something, yours cannot prohibit it, without being illegal for contradiction. Note that I'm not saying yours specifically does that as I'm too tired to check the previous resolutions (just waiting for the drunken idiot outside to either pass out and die in the cold, or otherwise stop being noisy, before crawling back to bed and going back to sleep), but that if that's the case, then that's your immediate problem.

[Hsaaz]

OOC: You're both missing the point that if a previous resolution allows something, yours cannot prohibit it, without being illegal for contradiction. Note that I'm not saying yours specifically does that as I'm too tired to check the previous resolutions (just waiting for the drunken idiot outside to either pass out and die in the cold, or otherwise stop being noisy, before crawling back to bed and going back to sleep), but that if that's the case, then that's your immediate problem.

OOC: Since this only prohibits prison labor in part, could it not be considered a clarification of GAR #23? Does such a clarification require GAR #23's repeal and replacement?

[Imperium Anglorum]

The provisions of GA 23 state—

prison labour or community service given as sentence in the course of a fair trial;

this isn't too hard an issue, one need merely constrain the ability for prison labour to be given as a sentence.

EDIT. GA 23 says that prison labour is not part of forced labour and that forced labour must be prohibited. It does not say that prison labour is okay. Can someone textually explain to me this supposed contradiction?

[Hsaaz]

The provisions of GA 23 state—

prison labour or community service given as sentence in the course of a fair trial;

this isn't too hard an issue, one need merely constrain the ability for prison labour to be given as a sentence.

With all respect to Imperium Anglorum:

Would it be possible for the following additions to the proposed draft ("On Private Prisons") to overcome any questions of contradiction with GA 23?

The World Assembly,

Recognizing it has previously approved the legitimate use of prison labour as a corrective punishment in GA 23,

Believing, however, the pursuit of profit to be antithetical to the legitimate purposes of a correctional facility, which are punishment and rehabilitation,

Shocked by the extreme nature of servitude and confinement taking place in private prisons,

Sickened by private prison owners' profiting off of convicts' forced labour,

Hereby,

Defines private prison as a place of confinement for convicted criminals that is owned or leased in any amount by a private entity, be they an individual, group of individuals, or corporation,

Prohibits any private entity from collecting a profit off of a private prison,

Mandates that all private prisons be adequately audited by the government within a reasonable amount of time.

[Separatist Peoples]

The provisions of GA 23 state—

prison labour or community service given as sentence in the course of a fair trial;

this isn't too hard an issue, one need merely constrain the ability for prison labour to be given as a sentence.

With all respect to Imperium Anglorum:

Would it be possible for the following additions to the proposed draft ("On Private Prisons") to overcome any questions of contradiction with GA 23?

The World Assembly,

Recognizing it has previously approved the legitimate use of prison labour as a corrective punishment in GA 23,

Believing, however, the pursuit of profit to be antithetical to the legitimate purposes of a correctional facility, which are punishment and rehabilitation,

Shocked by the extreme nature of servitude and confinement taking place in private prisons,

Sickened by private prison owners' profiting off of convicts' forced labour,

Hereby,

Defines private prison as a place of confinement for convicted criminals that is owned or leased in any amount by a private entity, be they an individual, group of individuals, or corporation,

Prohibits any private entity from collecting a profit off of a private prison,

Mandates that all private prisons be adequately audited by the government within a reasonable amount of time.

Ooc: prefatory clauses are not operative, and do not trigger the Contradiction rule.

[Hsaaz]

OOC: Of course, but as I (and the draft's author understand), this is restraining the use of prison labor by private actors in some part, which is viewed by others who have replied as a contradiction of GA 23's language. Does preempting these concerns with a prefatory clause alleviate that concern?

[Desmosthenes and Burke]

OOC: Of course, but as I (and the draft's author understand), this is restraining the use of prison labor by private actors in some part, which is viewed by others who have replied as a contradiction of GA 23's language. Does preempting these concerns with a prefatory clause alleviate that concern?

In short, no. If the actual active clause contradicts the prior resolution, no amount of prefatory clauses can save it. The active clauses must accord with the prior resolutions.

Whether your proposal does or not seems to depend on how broadly Gen Sec interprets GA 23 (about which I offer no opinion). Personally, I agree with IA. Side-step the issue entirely and limit the imposition of labour as a sentence if that is what you are worried about. That has the added benefit of keeping the state from doing the same thing (at least I cannot think of any reason why the State profiting from prison labour is any more acceptable than a private enterprise doing so).

[Hsaaz]

OOC: Of course, but as I (and the draft's author understand), this is restraining the use of prison labor by private actors in some part, which is viewed by others who have replied as a contradiction of GA 23's language. Does preempting these concerns with a prefatory clause alleviate that concern?

In short, no. If the actual active clause contradicts the prior resolution, no amount of prefatory clauses can save it. The active clauses must accord with the prior resolutions.

Whether your proposal does or not seems to depend on how broadly Gen Sec interprets GA 23 (about which I offer no opinion). Personally, I agree with IA. Side-step the issue entirely and limit the imposition of labour as a sentence if that is what you are worried about. That has the added benefit of keeping the state from doing the same thing (at least I cannot think of any reason why the State profiting from prison labour is any more acceptable than a private enterprise doing so).

OOC: Limiting prison labour would certainly be in contradiction to GA 23, would it not? It seems like a repeal is need for GA 23 before anything like this can move forward.

[Imperium Anglorum]

I re-read my remarks and don't see how GA 23 enshrines prison labour at all. Just move to prohibiting it. If you're actually concerned about prison labour and only that, put your proposal in such terms rather than the weaker terms of trying to prohibit private prisons generally (which was already repealed).