External Justifications Act

[Viennaria]

This proposal aims to keep justification of crimes committed in the context of international relations

If enacted, this act will:

Ensure that no crimes committed will see the proper justification in events that have happened outside of the aspect of international relations, whether it be on a website, or in the personal lives of citizens/rulers

Protect the rights of affected nations, both defendant and plaintiff, in ensuring that the only "evidence" used in the influencing of cases will be events proven to have taken place during official international relations, or a region's official communication service. Evidence will not be taken from incidences of citizens'/rulers' personal lives.

Destroy basic excuses used to defend the actions of accused nations, such as I was having a hard day, or He/she texted me something that upset me.

Safegaurd the rights of accused nations, so long as the plaintiff's accusation is of events that have happened outside of the context of official international relations or a region's official communication service

For reasons of recent cases that have been brought to my attention, I see fit to propose the aforementioned act to protect the rights of all World Assembly Member Nations, both accuser and accused, to limit the scope of accusations to only what is relevant in the context of official international relations.

[Atheris]

You can't reference the site. You can reference the name, but you can't reference it being a website or a game, including Discord.

[Viennaria]

You can't reference the site. You can reference the name, but you can't reference it being a website or a game, including Discord.

Thank you for the information

[Silvedania]

What Atheris said. This proposal is a great idea, but it doesn't fit the parameters of the WA's jurisdiction.

[Viennaria]

What Atheris said. This proposal is a great idea, but it doesn't fit the parameters of the WA's jurisdiction.

Is this better? I edited it

[The New California Republic]

This is pretty much unsalvageable, as the subject matter is so completely meta that there's nothing that can be done with it.

[Viennaria]

On the contrary, I believe I may have fixed it.

[Viennaria]

You can't reference the site. You can reference the name, but you can't reference it being a website or a game, including Discord.

Do you believe this fits WA guidelines now?

[Atheris]

You can't reference the site. You can reference the name, but you can't reference it being a website or a game, including Discord.

Do you believe this fits WA guidelines now?

If "For reasons of recent cases that have been brought to my attention, I see fit to propose the aforementioned act to protect the rights of all World Assembly Member Nations, both accuser and accused, to limit the scope of accusations to only what is relevant in the context of official international relations." is part of the proposal, then no, it's not. It's a violation of the Branding Clause. If it's not, then I think it's alright.

[The New California Republic]

On the contrary, I believe I may have fixed it.

No, it hasn't been. The whole premise is flimsy and doesn't make sense now. Even though its previous incarnation was illegal it at least made sense (but unfortunately you have nuked the previous drafts from existence so it's impossible for people to see what I mean. Please preserve the previous drafts in the future). Currently this doesn't make sense.

[Imperium Anglorum]

This proposal aims to keep justification of crimes committed in the context of international relations

If enacted, this act will:

Ensure that no crimes committed will see the proper justification in events that have happened outside of the aspect of international relations, whether it be on a website, or in the personal lives of citizens/rulers

Protect the rights of affected nations, both defendant and plaintiff, in ensuring that the only "evidence" used in the influencing of cases will be events proven to have taken place during official international relations, or a region's official communication service. Evidence will not be taken from incidences of citizens'/rulers' personal lives.

Destroy basic excuses used to defend the actions of accused nations, such as I was having a hard day, or He/she texted me something that upset me.

Safegaurd the rights of accused nations, so long as the plaintiff's accusation is of events that have happened outside of the context of official international relations or a region's official communication service

For reasons of recent cases that have been brought to my attention, I see fit to propose the aforementioned act to protect the rights of all World Assembly Member Nations, both accuser and accused, to limit the scope of accusations to only what is relevant in the context of official international relations.

Due to the highlighted portion, this proposal doesn't do any of the things you claim it does for lack of operative clauses acting on member nations. Use of pronouns breaks the requirement to maintain the perspective of the World Assembly in legislation; when you are writing a proposal, you are not writing what you think, but rather, what the World Assembly would think if it adopted the proposal.

[Tinhampton]

Full support.

[Thermodolia]

Against