[DROPPED] On the Right to Legal Counsel

[Stellonia]

[DROPPED]

[Grays Harbor]

This is mostly covered by Resolution 37

[Stellonia]

This is mostly covered by Resolution 37

GA #37 fails to guarantee the right to legal counsel to those who cannot afford or obtain it.

[Ignis Cinere]

"Would you need to fully define a 'fair trial'?"

[Separatist Peoples]

"Lacking counsel prior to the start of a trial is dooming the defendant to failure. Counsel should be available upon arrest, prior to questioning."

[Kenmoria]

“You don’t need to define ‘defendant’, as is it an uncomplicated term with only one meaning.”

[Enjuku]

Enjuku is curious why this resolution only covers criminal trials? Surely a right to counsel should cover defendants in all cases, especially when we consider situations where marginalized defendants face overwhelming odds; think housing courts where tenants must represent themselves in eviction cases against their landlords.

This resolution should, in the least, expand to civil cases where defendants cannot reasonably afford the costs of counsel.

Additionally, Clause 6 assumes that member nations have appeals courts. Every state's judicial system differs, and some court systems may not have an appeals process or a series of higher criminal courts to appeal to. This might infringe on state sovereignty by assuming states must create appeals courts for criminal trials. Perhaps add a clause that hopes for an appeals process, or a committee oversight that recommends judicial reforms based on conviction data?

[Grays Harbor]

This is mostly covered by Resolution 37

GA #37 fails to guarantee the right to legal counsel to those who cannot afford or obtain it.

From 37

FURTHER INSISTS that governmental or charitable mechanisms be set up to provide such representation to those accused otherwise unable to afford it;