[Submitted] Repeal for Ban on the Death Penalty

[Siokania]

So I have officially started the process to repeal the ban on the Death Penalty. the text is located below. I already have submitted the repeal and one of the mods has ruled that it is legal to him.

Directed to the World Assembly on the Issue of the Death Penalty Ban,
Recognizing the moral and ethical qualms to the death penalty to many people and nations within our organization but also recognizing there are many nation that make use of the Death Penalty within their borders,
Whereas the Right of a Nation includes that of creating and enforcing laws within our national borders and thus impedes with National Sovereignty ,
Whereas the Ban on the Death Penalty can severely hamper the ability of a nation to enforce laws on the most severe of crimes such as murder and treason including while not at a time of war,
Whereas we dispute the fact that the death penalty unjustly targets the mentally-ill, members of minority community, or those from a disadvantaged backgrounds as there is no empirical evidence that shows such a bias,
Whereas a system can be setup that fairly and justly administers the punishment as allowed under the law while still complying to international standards on the treatment of prisoners within our systems of law.
Therefore, we motion to repeal the Ban on the Death Penalty from the records.

I want to know what peoples' feelings will be on this repeal process and how best we can move forward in respect to national sovereignty.

[The Crowned Republic]

About "in respect to national sovereignty"..

I'd also actually argue that this is illegal in its current form, namely from

"Directed to the World Assembly on the Issue of the Death Penalty Ban,"

...

"Therefore, we motion to repeal the Ban on the Death Penalty from the records."

As far as I understand, resolutions must represent the decision of the World Assembly, not that of a particular nation placing such upon it. As it is it seems you wrote that your nation has advised the World Assembly to repeal this resolution, despite it having to be written in the name of the World Assembly (in the event that it passes with a majority of it).

For example: https://www.nationstates.net/page=WA_pa ... /council=1 - This isn't written by the author to the WA but in the name of it ("The General Assembly, ...")

[Outer Sparta]

If you're basing your entire argument on national sovereignty, you need to try again. Also, is this a proper repeal or not? If it isn't, then it's not legal.

[Asterguard]

Basing general assembly resolutions largely off of National Sovereignty is admissible, but I don't recommend it at all. It might get blocked by the major regional delegates and when that happens a good chunk of the inhabitants will just vote no based off of their delegates vote, which is displayed...
I think the ban on death penalty should be removed, but I can't really think of an argument besides national sovereignty. I see that a previous post has been made on this in the General Assembly forum below this. It was dropped based off of the title, and I think the same should be done here.
Furthermore, you should wait at least a few months for responses to come in instead of submitting it after only 2 or less. This would allow people who have experience with this sort of thing to make suggestions that could help you actually get this passed. I would honestly suggest joining The North Pacific and their World Assembly Affairs ministry, where you can co-author with other proposal writers and gain the necessary experience to write one. You could also pick up a lot of good tips and get your name out there

Good luck anyhow!

[Gatchina]

Happy to approve this

[Tsaivao]

Whereas the Right of a Nation includes that of creating and enforcing laws within our national borders and thus impedes with National Sovereignty (as in accordance with General Assembly Resolution 2, Section 1, Articles 1 and 2.),

Whereas a system can be setup that fairly and justly administers the punishment as allowed under the law while still complying to international standards on the treatment of prisoners within our systems of law (in accordance with General Assembly Resolution 37),

OOC: Wouldn't these examples show usage of first-person pronouns in reference to oneself as a nation, rather than the WA itself? This would make the proposal illegal if that's the case, wouldn't it?

This is a really well-written proposal even if I highly disagree with it, but I think these two mistakes could threaten the legality of the proposal

EDIT: Appears that this proposal got sniped for the exact reason I mentioned. Oh well.