[Draft] "General rules for Associations" to replace GA#550

[Greater Cesnica]

That's fair. I'll reply in that thread with a version of the draft with those errors fixed.

Thank you!

I made my edits, check the latest reply in that thread.

Also, change the title of your replacement. Be creative.

[Trellania]

Dame Allania Trueblood wanders in. Despite looking and dressed exactly the same as the one discussing the repeal, this one is missing the mask and cat ears, instead wearing a set of gloves with metal claws on them. She stops to look over the proposal.

Member Nations may prohibit and order the dissolution of associations that promote or pursue:

1. the non-recognition of civil and political rights on the basis of distinctions of sex, ethnicity, language, religion, political opinions, personal and social conditions,
2. the infliction of physical and psychological harm among their members or towards non-members,
3. the violation of international and local laws by their members,
4. the implementation of political aims through actions of a military or terrorist nature,

Dame Allania reaches down the top of her medieval-style dress, pulls out a cell phone, and taps on it a bit. After a couple moments, it buzzes and she smiles. "Ambassador, does this not, to quote your repeal, 'prevent member Nations and the WA itself from intervening to support organizations that fight for the improvement of living conditions in a Nation (e.g., associations for freedom of speech, for the rights of minorities, resistance movement against invading or tyrannical governments) and contrast organizations that make them worse (e.g., through repression of dissidents, state terrorism and genocide of minorities) because of yadda yadda, thus: a) allowing corrupt governments to declare any political and non-political association that does not really seek to subvert the established order (e.g., by preparing a revolution or carrying out acts of guerrilla or terrorism) as an organization "involved in the commission of a crime", even if this subversion aims to improve the living conditions of the general population?'" The knight stops to take a moment to catch her breath. That was quite the amount of text to read aloud in one go. "After all, if such a nation declares such organizations against the law, then they would be within their rights under this to persecute those groups."

The knight then smiles. "Trellania will be opposing both this and the repeal."

[Brezzia]

The gray ambassador raises his papers slightly and bows his head slightly.

"After all, if such a nation declares such organizations against the law, then they would be within their rights under this to persecute those groups."

"Noting that clause 3 of this proposal allows the prohibition and the dissolutions of associations "that promote or pursue the violation of international and local laws by their members", a Member Nation cannot arbitrarily declare an organizations against the law attributing crimes to its members that do not correspond to the aims of this association, because this clause does not allow the prohibition and the dissolutions of associations "that violates international and local laws". If you are wondering if this poses a risk of impunity for criminals, "that is the fault of your law enforcement."

The knight stops to take a moment to catch her breath. That was quite the amount of text to read aloud in one go.

The Brezzian delegation admits its inability to formulate a correct clause. This delegation hopes that the new draft is an improvement over the previous one.

"Trellania will be opposing both this and the repeal."

Brezzia acknowledges and respects the position of The Kingdom of Trellania.

Dame Allania Trueblood wanders in. Despite looking and dressed exactly the same as the one discussing the repeal, this one is missing the mask and cat ears, instead wearing a set of gloves with metal claws on them.

This delegation advises against the use of sharp accessories that could cause damage to people and things, in particular to the furniture of this assembly."

The gray ambassador, whose brown suit blends in with the desk, ends his speech.

[Trellania]

"Noting that clause 3 of this proposal allows the prohibition and the dissolutions of associations "that promote or pursue the violation of international and local laws by their members", a Member Nation cannot arbitrarily declare an organizations against the law attributing crimes to its members that do not correspond to the aims of this association, because this clause does not allow the prohibition and the dissolutions of associations "that violates international and local laws". If you are wondering if this poses a risk of impunity for criminals, "that is the fault of your law enforcement."

"Ambassador, the part about Clause 3 in this is already covered by existing World Assembly legislation. I refer you to WA #2 Rights and Duties of WA States. Since all members of this assembly agree to cede their sovereignity to what international law, as imposed by this assembly, dictates, the national laws should already match the international laws. The existing resolution you are trying to replace does not need to be reworked because of that aspect. Unless, ambassador, you are admitting guilt in practicing noncompliance?"

The Brezzian delegation admits its inability to formulate a correct clause. This delegation hopes that the new draft is an improvement over the previous one.

"It does not, ambassador. This new draft remains as much at guilt of one of the very reasons you cite for repealing existing legislation as the current resolution does. I see absolutely no reason to bother with replacing it."

Brezzia acknowledges and respects the position of The Kingdom of Trellania.

The dame nods in reply.

This delegation advises against the use of sharp accessories that could cause damage to people and things, in particular to the furniture of this assembly."

"Ambassador, I think we both agree my tongue is far shaper than any claws I choose to strap on."

[Brezzia]

"Ambassador, the part about Clause 3 in this is already covered by existing World Assembly legislation. I refer you to WA #2 Rights and Duties of WA States. Since all members of this assembly agree to cede their sovereignity to what international law, as imposed by this assembly, dictates, the national laws should already match the international laws. The existing resolution you are trying to replace does not need to be reworked because of that aspect. Unless, ambassador, you are admitting guilt in practicing noncompliance?"

This delegation is ready to admit errors if it has made any. This is why we have submitted our proposal to this assembly.

"It does not, ambassador. This new draft remains as much at guilt of one of the very reasons you cite for repealing existing legislation as the current resolution does. I see absolutely no reason to bother with replacing it."

This delegation was referring only to the drawing up of the text. We are aware of Trellanian opposition to our proposal.

"Ambassador, I think we both agree my tongue is far shaper than any claws I choose to strap on."

Dame Ambassador, this delegation does not agree.

[Trellania]

This delegation is ready to admit errors if it has made any. This is why we have submitted our proposal to this assembly.

"Right now, if I were you, I would be more concerned with what the international courts have to say than the issues of this proposal.

"In particular, when you violated Article 6 of Rights and Duties of WA States during the discussion of your repeal attempt. The article states, and I quote, 'Every WA Member State has the duty to refrain from fomenting civil strife in the territory of another NationState, and to prevent the organization within its territory of activities calculated to foment such civil strife.' In the discussion of your repeal effort, your delegation stated, 'The Workers' Council Republic of Brezzia openly advocates the world revolution of the proletarians and the liberation from the shackles of capitalism.'"

Dame Allania pauses, to let the words sink in.

"I can see why you would be concerned about the idea of nations not being in compliance with a World Assembly resolution given that your delegation has openly, in these very halls, admitted to noncompliance yourselves.

"But your noncompliance is not evidence enough to support the issue of a replacement. Your replacement does nothing important not already covered by the existing resolution or other legislation already passed by this assembly."

This delegation was referring only to the drawing up of the text. We are aware of Trellanian opposition to our proposal.

"My point, ambassador, is that there is almost nothing in the new clauses about organizations not already covered by existing legislation, making the replacement unnecessary."

Dame Ambassador, this delegation does not agree.

"You are free to disagree. But I think you have bigger issues than how sharp my tongue is right now."

[Brezzia]

Unable to distinguish the Gray Ambassador from the chairs in the hall, the Brezzian delegation sends their young Deputy Ambassador to speak to the assembly.

"Right now, if I were you, I would be more concerned with what the international courts have to say than the issues of this proposal.

"In particular, when you violated Article 6 of Rights and Duties of WA States during the discussion of your repeal attempt. The article states, and I quote, 'Every WA Member State has the duty to refrain from fomenting civil strife in the territory of another NationState, and to prevent the organization within its territory of activities calculated to foment such civil strife.' In the discussion of your repeal effort, your delegation stated, 'The Workers' Council Republic of Brezzia openly advocates the world revolution of the proletarians and the liberation from the shackles of capitalism.'"

Dame Allania pauses, to let the words sink in.

"I can see why you would be concerned about the idea of nations not being in compliance with a World Assembly resolution given that your delegation has openly, in these very halls, admitted to noncompliance yourselves.

"But your noncompliance is not evidence enough to support the issue of a replacement. Your replacement does nothing important not already covered by the existing resolution or other legislation already passed by this assembly."

"La historia nos absolverá!"
Representatives of the socialist nations applaud this famous quote.

"My point, ambassador, is that there is almost nothing in the new clauses about organizations not already covered by existing legislation, making the replacement unnecessary."

"We wonder then why, if the previous resulutions satisfy our requests so broadly, this assembly considered it appropriate to legislate on this matter. Indeed, we believe that our replacement proposal adequately covers the provisions of GA#550 resolution, if repealed, and resolves our concerns. Were the ambassadors bewitched by the excessive use of the word freedom in GA#550?"

"You are free to disagree. But I think you have bigger issues than how sharp my tongue is right now."

"Our people defend their revolution every day from the bullets of Capital! Kitty meows and little nails are nothing to us!"

[Trellania]

"We wonder then why, if the previous resulutions satisfy our requests so broadly, this assembly considered it appropriate to legislate on this matter. Indeed, we believe that our replacement proposal adequately covers the provisions of GA#550 resolution, if repealed, and resolves our concerns. Were the ambassadors bewitched by the excessive use of the word freedom in GA#550?"

"I am including the legislation you are trying to repeal in that statement. It covers one bit that was not otherwise covered, as far as is necessary."

[Brezzia]

Draft 4

[Imperium Anglorum]

Can you rename this thread to whatever your chosen title is? The title is too similar to the repeal's title.

[Brezzia]

Can you rename this thread to whatever your chosen title is? The title is too similar to the repeal's title.

Done.

[Bears Armed]

In the definition of 'association' you include "a permanent bond between its members", but then in clause 1 you recognise a right to leave the association at any time: This is contradictory.

[Brezzia]

In the definition of 'association' you include "a permanent bond between its members", but then in clause 1 you recognise a right to leave the association at any time: This is contradictory.

The word "permanent" also means "lasting for a long time".

[Bears Armed]

In the definition of 'association' you include "a permanent bond between its members", but then in clause 1 you recognise a right to leave the association at any time: This is contradictory.

The word "permanent" also means "lasting for a long time".

Not to everybody -- or, I suspect, to most people -- it doesn't: How about saying "potentially long-term", instead?

[Brezzia]

The word "permanent" also means "lasting for a long time".

Not to everybody -- or, I suspect, tomost people -- it doesn't: How about saying "potentially long-term", instead?

I would prefer "long lasting". I am not sure about the "potentially". I want to define the association as a longer bond than an assembly, which can last for minutes or hours, even if the association last just for a week.

[Bananaistan]

OOC: Could you summarise how this is better than the existing resolution please?

[Hulldom]

OOC: Could you summarise how this is better than the existing resolution please?

The entire read I’ve been getting is that wasn’t written by me and therefore it is.

But…on another note, I think it’s people think the current one isn’t strong enough (in various ways) in their own minds.

[Brezzia]

OOC: Could you summarise how this is better than the existing resolution please?

Thanks for your question. I added this list to the first post.

This proposal tries to cover GA#550's flaws:

• clause 3 identifies dangerous associations that must be prohibited and clause 6 encourages international cooperation to do so;
• clause 4 allows the imposition of monetary penalties on associations, while GA#550 allows the "incarceration of an association";
• clause 5 allows the prevention of conflicts of interest.

[Kurogasa]

OOC: Could you summarise how this is better than the existing resolution please?

Thanks for your question. I added this list to the first post.

This proposal tries to cover GA#550's flaws:

• clause 3 identifies dangerous associations that must be prohibited and clause 6 encourages international cooperation to do so;
• clause 4 allows the imposition of monetary penalties on associations, while GA#550 allows the "incarceration of an association";
• clause 5 allows the prevention of conflicts of interest.

So individual nations must allow any and every group to exist unless the GA doesn't like it, so you guys have all the control in it...no thanks, current one is fine.

[Brezzia]

So individual nations must allow any and every group to exist unless the GA doesn't like it, so you guys have all the control in it

Individual nation can prohibit the dangerous groups. GA gives criteria to do so and encourages cooperation.

Requires that Member Nations prohibit associations that promote or pursue:

1. the non-recognition of civil and political rights on the basis of distinctions of sex, ethnicity, language, religion, political opinions, personal and social conditions,
2. the infliction of physical and psychological harm among their members or towards non-members,
3. the perpetration of illegal transportation of objects, substances, information, animals or people for profit, or
4. the implementation of political aims through actions of a military or terrorist nature,

GA prohibiting associazion is not written anywhere.

...no thanks, current one is fine.

Allowing criminal penalties on group of people for "national security reason" is not fine.

[Potted Plants United]

Allowing criminal penalties on group of people for "national security reason" is not fine.

OOC: You don't want terrorists to be punished. Why?

[Brezzia]

Allowing criminal penalties on group of people for "national security reason" is not fine.

OOC: You don't want terrorists to be punished. Why?

OOC: I want terrorists to be punished in regular process. You want innocents to be punished in mass trials. Why?
Please don't make false accusations.