[Draft] Repeal: “A Ban On Forced Disappearances”

[Little Podemitas]

Hello Grays Harbor,

Could you please elaborate more on this proposal regarding the Illegal vote of "Honest Mistake"?

This way maybe I could change some arguments.

Thank you.

Text of Repeal:

The World Assembly,

Noting that the resolution fails to define the term of “forced disappearance” correctly. Such a term does not exist as there has never been any proof or witnesses of any nation carrying out such actions.

Also noting the following inconsistencies:

Article 1 is misleading, since the only possible disappearance of individuals is due to death from natural cause, accident or simply their right to self-isolation.

Article 2 (a) increases substantially the bureaucracy of all nations while at the same time not providing any added value (“forced disappearances” do not exist). (b) also violates the right of privacy of individuals.

Article 4, It is a fact that all Nations already protect their citizens, making this article futile.

Article 7, many Nations do not have monetary systems, as their citizens are all equally rich, thus making this clause inapplicable.

The World Assembly hereby repeals “A Ban On Forced Disappearances”.

[The Sheika]

Looking at the original proposal, it looks as though it defines what a forced disappearance is;

Defines a Forced Disappearance as a political tactic, where a government or government sponsored entity conceals the fate, or existence of an individual or a group of individuals who were required by said government to vanish from public view,

An example of this is as follows;
Let's say you are locked into a war of information and disinformation with a country that you strongly disagree with, whether it be due to their economy, a lack of civil liberties, and so on. Some citizens in that country are aware of your political system and prefer it over what they currently experience. Let's say one of them is quite vocal and well known, making speeches or printing propaganda against the regime in charge of their nation. The administration of said nation decides that person is too much trouble to allow them to remain in the public eye and decide that making them go away is the solution. One day that person of interest is going about living life normally, the next they are gone without a trace. No reason is given, they are just gone. Some speculate it was the government, but no real proof can be found or it may be treacherous for any to attempt to look into it further. That is just an example of a forced disappearance.

Article 2 was meant to disclose individuals who experienced something like what was depicted above, which can happen in nations ruled by an iron fist that demand absolute loyalty under the penalty of "or else". It may not happen in your nation, it may not happen in your allies nations, but it can happen.

Article 4 comes across to me as a means to keep those who may be under protective relocation from being identified to whoever may be looking for them. Think of it like a witness relocation program protecting those who they have relocated.

In regards to article 7, even if some nations do not use a monetary system, some kind of compensation could be made whether it be food or other goods of substantial value.

These are just some examples, I am sure that other members whether they be part of GenSec or not could provide better feedback than I.

[Kenmoria]

Hello Grays Harbor,

Could you please elaborate more on this proposal regarding the Illegal vote of "Honest Mistake"?

This way maybe I could change some arguments.

Thank you.

(OOC: Welcome to the General Assembly. Though I am not Grays Harbor, I can attempt to clarify the ruling. According to the GA rules, a repeal can be marked as illegal if it makes a mistake in the interpretation of the target resolution’s clauses. This is referred to as the honest mistake rule.

Hopefully, with drafting, your arguments can be improved and refined to the point where they are not only legal, but also persuasive.)

[Little Podemitas]

OOC: Thank you for all your advices!

Actually the logic of my character (of my oppressive regime) is more kind of denying that this is happening.

That is why he says that "forced disappearance" does not make sense

The reasoning on the other articles is basically saying that since the disappearances of citizens do not exist, then there is no point of having a system to track it (article 2). Mentioning the fact that it increases bureaucracy is actually just an excuse and is really ironic since it is a communist nation with a very heavy administration machine.

Let me think how to improve the whole thing, suggestions are welcome . It is my first proposal though.

[Kenmoria]

OOC: Thank you for all your advices!

Actually the logic of my character (of my oppressive regime) is more kind of denying that this is happening.

That is why he says that "forced disappearance" does not make sense

The reasoning on the other articles is basically saying that since the disappearances of citizens do not exist, then there is no point of having a system to track it (article 2). Mentioning the fact that it increases bureaucracy is actually just an excuse and is really ironic since it is a communist nation with a very heavy administration machine.

Let me think how to improve the whole thing, suggestions are welcome . It is my first proposal though.

(OOC: That point makes sense from the context of a dictatorial nation, but ultimately won’t work in a GA proposal. The interpretation of the rules often takes into account a ‘reasonable nation’, which tyrannical nations often aren’t. Writing a repeal relies on finding flaws in how clauses might be loopholed, errors in wording result in ambiguity, or other objective mistakes in the text.)

[Sierra Lyricalia]

OOC: Thank you for all your advices!

Actually the logic of my character (of my oppressive regime) is more kind of denying that this is happening.

That is why he says that "forced disappearance" does not make sense

The reasoning on the other articles is basically saying that since the disappearances of citizens do not exist, then there is no point of having a system to track it (article 2). Mentioning the fact that it increases bureaucracy is actually just an excuse and is really ironic since it is a communist nation with a very heavy administration machine.

Let me think how to improve the whole thing, suggestions are welcome . It is my first proposal though.

OOC: I admire your commitment to role-playing! Unfortunately GA rules do prohibit clear mischaracterization of target resolutions when writing a repeal. Mild exaggeration or weaselly wording are fair game, though. So while you can't claim that the topic of the resolution flat out doesn't exist, you could say (for example) that prohibiting a forced disappearance the way the target resolution does means that certain terrorist or insurgent groups will be able to forcibly free their leaders from custody, thus undermining public safety in member states. Mind you, that's not a good argument necessarily, but it is a legal one. So that kind of thing is permissible.

Good luck!