[PASSED] Repeal GA#27: Freedom of Assembly

[Sedgistan]

Repeal “Freedom of Assembly”
Category: Repeal | Resolution: GA#27

The General Assembly,

Applauding the efforts of General Assembly Resolution #27 to establish and safeguard the fundamental right to freely associate and assemble,

Regretting the many loopholes that the resolution presents which could allow despotic governments to clamp down on free assembly, such as the lack of a definition or qualifier for “harm” in clause 3, potentially obligating governments to forbid protests or demonstrations based on minor, technical and irrelevant harms, such as increased taxes on the most wealthy in society,

Believing, despite this, that there are also many situations in which the resolution protects assemblies which cause severe threats to public safety, as detailed below,

Noting that Clause 1 of the resolution establishes the right to “peacefully assemble, associate, and protest to promote, pursue, and express any goal, cause, or view”,

Concerned, however, that Clause 1 allows denizens to abuse the rights granted by it to evade incarceration, punishment, or other repercussions for their crimes - a significant hindrance to the execution of justice, by extending the right to assemble to “all individuals” regardless of their criminal status,

Worried that clause 2 of the resolution does not prevent protests which cause harm to members of the public, for example protests organised on a public highway, those which would block the route of emergency vehicles, or protests that take place in dangerous or unhealthy conditions, as clause 2 states governments may only restrict the freedom of assembly when “individuals organizing are trespassing on private property and/or if circumstances beyond the control of the Government threaten the safety of those organizing”,

Saddened that, while it bars those who call for violence via direct action from its protections, the resolution shields those who do so via calls for deliberate inaction, such as by urging law enforcement officers to refrain from protecting individuals of a certain racial group,

Appalled that clause 3 does not extend its prohibition to demonstrations that call for violence against the imprisoned, accused or convicted, only applying its protections to the nebulously defined group of “innocent people”,

Believing that more detailed and comprehensive legislation is required to address the issues raised in this resolution,

Hereby repeals General Assembly Resolution #27 “Freedom of Assembly”.

Co-authored by Maowi

The General Assembly,

Applauding the efforts of General Assembly Resolution #27 to establish and safeguard the fundamental right to freely associate and assemble,

Noting that clause 1 of the resolution establishes the right to “peacefully assemble, associate, and protest to promote, pursue, and express any goal, cause, or view”,

Concerned, however, that clause 1 allows denizens to abuse the rights granted by it to evade incarceration, punishment, or other repercussions for their crimes - a significant hindrance to the execution of justice, by extending the right to assemble to “all individuals” regardless of their criminal status,

Worried that clause 2 of the resolution does not prevent protests which cause harm to members of the public, for example protests organised on a public highway, those which would block the route of emergency vehicles, or protests that take place in dangerous or unhealthy conditions, as clause 2 states governments may only restrict the freedom of assembly when “individuals organizing are trespassing on private property and/or if circumstances beyond the control of the Government threaten the safety of those organizing”,

Regretting the many loopholes that the resolution presents which could allow despotic governments to clamp down on free assembly, such as the lack of a definition or qualifier for “harm” in clause 3, potentially obligating governments to forbid protests or demonstrations based on minor, technical and irrelevant harms, such as increased taxes on the most wealthy in society,

Saddened that the resolution does not acknowledge that deliberate inaction, such as failure by law enforcement officers to protect individuals of a certain racial group, can be incredibly damaging and that assembly for the purpose of calling for such inaction ought not to fall under its protections,

Appalled that clause 3 does not extend its prohibition to demonstrations that call for violence against the imprisoned, accused or convicted, only applying its protections to the nebulously defined group of “innocent people”,

Believing that more detailed and comprehensive legislation is required to address the issues raised in this resolution,

Hereby repeals General Assembly Resolution #27 “Freedom of Assembly”.

The General Assembly,

Applauding the efforts of General Assembly Resolution #27 to establish and safeguard the fundamental right to freely associate and assemble,

Regretting the many loopholes that the resolution presents which could allow despotic governments to clamp down on free assembly, such as the lack of a definition or qualifier for “harm” in clause 3, potentially obligating governments to forbid protests or demonstrations based on minor, technical and irrelevant harms, such as increased taxes on the most wealthy in society,

Believing, despite this, that there are also many situations in which the resolution protects assemblies which cause severe threats to public safety, as detailed below,

Noting that Clause 1 of the resolution establishes the right to “peacefully assemble, associate, and protest to promote, pursue, and express any goal, cause, or view”,

Concerned, however, that Clause 1 allows denizens to abuse the rights granted by it to evade incarceration, punishment, or other repercussions for their crimes - a significant hindrance to the execution of justice, by extending the right to assemble to “all individuals” regardless of their criminal status,

Worried that clause 2 of the resolution does not prevent protests which cause harm to members of the public, for example protests organised on a public highway, those which would block the route of emergency vehicles, or protests that take place in dangerous or unhealthy conditions, as clause 2 states governments may only restrict the freedom of assembly when “individuals organizing are trespassing on private property and/or if circumstances beyond the control of the Government threaten the safety of those organizing”,

Saddened that the resolution does not acknowledge that deliberate inaction, such as failure by law enforcement officers to protect individuals of a certain racial group, can be incredibly damaging and that assembly for the purpose of calling for such inaction ought not to fall under its protections,

Appalled that clause 3 does not extend its prohibition to demonstrations that call for violence against the imprisoned, accused or convicted, only applying its protections to the nebulously defined group of “innocent people”,

Believing that more detailed and comprehensive legislation is required to address the issues raised in this resolution,

Hereby repeals General Assembly Resolution #27 “Freedom of Assembly”.

The General Assembly,

Applauding the efforts of General Assembly Resolution #27 to establish and safeguard the fundamental right to freely associate and assemble,

Regretting the many loopholes that the resolution presents which could allow despotic governments to clamp down on free assembly, such as the lack of a definition or qualifier for “harm” in clause 3, potentially obligating governments to forbid protests or demonstrations based on minor, technical and irrelevant harms, such as increased taxes on the most wealthy in society,

Believing, despite this, that there are also many situations in which the resolution protects assemblies which cause severe threats to public safety, as detailed below,

Noting that Clause 1 of the resolution establishes the right to “peacefully assemble, associate, and protest to promote, pursue, and express any goal, cause, or view”,

Concerned, however, that Clause 1 allows denizens to abuse the rights granted by it to evade incarceration, punishment, or other repercussions for their crimes - a significant hindrance to the execution of justice, by extending the right to assemble to “all individuals” regardless of their criminal status,

Worried that clause 2 of the resolution does not prevent protests which cause harm to members of the public, for example protests organised on a public highway, those which would block the route of emergency vehicles, or protests that take place in dangerous or unhealthy conditions, as clause 2 states governments may only restrict the freedom of assembly when “individuals organizing are trespassing on private property and/or if circumstances beyond the control of the Government threaten the safety of those organizing”,

Disappointed that the resolution allows denizens to impede the proper function of government under the pretence of an assembly, as Clause 2 does not extend its provisions to public property, or to assemblies which prevent the government from functioning, such as occupying the legislative assembly of a member state,

Saddened that the resolution does not acknowledge that deliberate inaction, such as failure by law enforcement officers to protect individuals of a certain racial group, can be incredibly damaging and that assembly for the purpose of calling for such inaction ought not to fall under its protections,

Appalled that clause 3 does not extend its prohibition to demonstrations that call for violence against the imprisoned, accused or convicted, only applying its protections to the nebulously defined group of “innocent people”,

Believing that more detailed and comprehensive legislation is required to address the issues raised in this resolution,

Hereby repeals General Assembly Resolution #27 “Freedom of Assembly”.

Co-authored by Maowi

The General Assembly,

Applauding the efforts of General Assembly Resolution #27 to establish and safeguard the fundamental right to freely associate and assemble,

Regretting the many loopholes that the resolution presents which could allow despotic governments to clamp down on free assembly, such as the lack of a definition or qualifier for “harm” in clause 3, potentially obligating governments to forbid protests or demonstrations based on minor, technical and irrelevant harms, such as increased taxes on the most wealthy in society,

Believing, despite this, that there are also many situations in which the resolution protects assemblies which cause severe threats to public safety, as detailed below,

Noting that Clause 1 of the resolution establishes the right to “peacefully assemble, associate, and protest to promote, pursue, and express any goal, cause, or view”,

Concerned, however, that Clause 1 allows denizens to abuse the rights granted by it to evade incarceration, punishment, or other repercussions for their crimes - a significant hindrance to the execution of justice, by extending the right to assemble to “all individuals” regardless of their criminal status,

Worried that clause 2 of the resolution does not prevent protests which cause harm to members of the public, for example protests organised on a public highway, those which would block the route of emergency vehicles, or protests that take place in dangerous or unhealthy conditions, as clause 2 states governments may only restrict the freedom of assembly when “individuals organizing are trespassing on private property and/or if circumstances beyond the control of the Government threaten the safety of those organizing”,

Disappointed that the resolution allows denizens to impede the proper function of government under the pretence of an assembly, as Clause 2 does not extend its provisions to public property, or to assemblies which prevent the government from functioning, such as occupying the legislative assembly of a member state,

Saddened that, while it bars those who call for violence via direct action from its protections, the resolution shields those who do so via calls for deliberate inaction, such as by urging law enforcement officers to refrain from protecting individuals of a certain racial group,

Appalled that clause 3 does not extend its prohibition to demonstrations that call for violence against the imprisoned, accused or convicted, only applying its protections to the nebulously defined group of “innocent people”,

Believing that more detailed and comprehensive legislation is required to address the issues raised in this resolution,

Hereby repeals General Assembly Resolution #27 “Freedom of Assembly”.

Co-authored by Maowi
[/quote]

Link to original resolution.
OOC: Draft No1, first GA proposal draft ever so comments are very much appreciated. Replacement draft avaliable here.

[Cretox State]

Support.

Saddened that the resolution does not acknowledge that deliberate inaction, such as failure by law enforcement officers to protect individuals of a certain racial group, can be incredibly damaging and that assembly for the purpose of calling for such inaction ought not to fall under its protections,

Does the proposed replacement substantively improve on this deficiency?

[Retired WerePenguins]

OOC: Draft No1, first GA proposal draft ever so comments are very much appreciated. Replacement draft avaliable here.

It looks like some of the objections raised n the repeal are not addressed by the replacement. "protests organised on a public highway" is not directly covered, assuming it does not block emergency vehicles. A p[rotest that blocked every vehicle but emergency vehicles would be fine under the replacement. It doesn't help the repeal when the replacement is guilty of some of the same sins as the original is being accused of.

[Boston Castle]

OOC: yeah, if we’re going to be repealing this, I want to see a replacement first. I have no doubt this has the best of intentions, but a right as fundamental as this needs to spend as little time not enshrined as possible.

[Bananaistan]

OOC: It's good form to link to the target in the OP.

[Wymondham]

OOC: Firstly to the comments around issues raised in the repeal that the replacement does not cover, I will of course liase with Maowi, who is the main author of the replacement, to seek to ensure said issues are fully covered by the replacement which is currently in drafting in its own thread.

OOC: yeah, if we’re going to be repealing this, I want to see a replacement first. I have no doubt this has the best of intentions, but a right as fundamental as this needs to spend as little time not enshrined as possible.

OOC: The draft replacement is already up on the forums, and is linked in the OP, it can be found here.

OOC: It's good form to link to the target in the OP.

OOC: My apologies, is it better to link to the resolution on the GA passed resolutions page on the main site, or the post in the GA resolutions thread on the forums?

[Bananaistan]

OOC: It's good form to link to the target in the OP.

OOC: My apologies, is it better to link to the resolution on the GA passed resolutions page on the main site, or the post in the GA resolutions thread on the forums?

OOC: Either is acceptable but the post in the passed resolutions thread is easier to get for you.

[Kenmoria]

“You capitalise ‘clause’ in your ‘noting’ and ‘concerned’ clauses, but not anywhere else. This needs to be standardised, preferably with the non-capitalised variant. Regardless, this repeal has my full support.”

[Wymondham]

OOC: My apologies, is it better to link to the resolution on the GA passed resolutions page on the main site, or the post in the GA resolutions thread on the forums?

OOC: Either is acceptable but the post in the passed resolutions thread is easier to get for you.

OOC: I have edited it into the OP

“You capitalise ‘clause’ in your ‘noting’ and ‘concerned’ clauses, but not anywhere else. This needs to be standardised, preferably with the non-capitalised variant. Regardless, this repeal has my full support.”

"Our apologies, it appears our ambassdor wrote this at the end of a particularly long word day, the capitaliation error has been corrected with the non-capitalised variant. In the future we shall ensure our ambassador writes his proposals at a more resonable hour."

[Honeydewistania]

"You have a jumble of arguments that are either slamming the resolution for not protecting the right to assembly in certain cases and slamming it for protecting the right to assemble in certain cases. I wonder if it will be beneficial to stick to just one narrative (I recommend the not doing enough one) as some people may support some arguments but oppose others, therefore losing you more support."

[Imperium Anglorum]

Big agree; pick one consistent position to defend in your repeal.

[Wymondham]

"You have a jumble of arguments that are either slamming the resolution for not protecting the right to assembly in certain cases and slamming it for protecting the right to assemble in certain cases. I wonder if it will be beneficial to stick to just one narrative (I recommend the not doing enough one) as some people may support some arguments but oppose others, therefore losing you more support."

"I understand your concerns, I have restructured the resolution to provide a coherent narrative whilst still addressing all of the issues my government perceives with the resolution in question"

[Modessia]

Hmm. As the other members have said, could you immediately put forward new legislation after the old was repealed? Striking this act down without a replacement would be extremely dangerous.

[Wymondham]

Hmm. As the other members have said, could you immediately put forward new legislation after the old was repealed? Striking this act down without a replacement would be extremely dangerous.

OOC: The replacement draft is linked in the OP and can be found here

[Wymondham]

OOC: Bump. Any and all feedback is greatly appreciated as this is my first time in the GA

[Wymondham]

OOC: I've added in the following clause:

Disappointed that the resolution allows denizens to impede the proper function of government under the pretence of an assembly,

[Honeydewistania]

OOC: I've added in the following clause:

Disappointed that the resolution allows denizens to impede the proper function of government under the pretence of an assembly,

How?

[WayNeacTia]

OOC: I've added in the following clause:

How?

That is a legitimate question.

[Wymondham]

OOC: I've added in the following clause:

How?

"Our delegation has expanded the clause to read as follows in an attempt to explain how GA27 allows this to occur"

Disappointed that the resolution allows denizens to impede the proper function of government under the pretence of an assembly, as Clause 2 does not extend its provisions to public property, or to assemblies which prevent the government from functioning, such as occupying the legislative assembly of a member state,

[Wymondham]

OOC: Bump, feedback much appreciated

[Wymondham]

Last call for comments on this - will be submitted for approval at the weekend

[Wymondham]

In respond to feedback via discord the following change has been made

Saddened that the resolution does not acknowledge that deliberate inaction, such as failure by law enforcement officers to protect individuals of a certain racial group, can be incredibly damaging and that assembly for the purpose of calling for such inaction ought not to fall under its protections,

Has been altered to:

Saddened that, while it bars those who call for violence via direct action from its protections, the resolution shields those who do so via calls for deliberate inaction, such as by urging law enforcement officers to refrain from protecting individuals of a certain racial group,

[Wymondham]

This has been submitted for approval here

[Greater Cesnica]

I support this repeal, and have approved it.

[Sierra Lyricalia]

OOC: I have marked this Illegal in the queue for an Honest Mistake: the clause beginning "Disappointed..." asserts that assemblies which result in the occupation of legislative assemblies are protected under the target resolution. The target clearly states that "individuals shall have the right to peacefully assemble" (emphasis added) - non-peaceful assemblies are not protected here and I don't see how anyone could argue that such occupations are "peaceful."

I apologize for not catching this prior to submission; the last time I looked at this thread I don't recall seeing it, but that was a while back.