[ABANDONED] Right To Independence Referenda

[Daarwyrth]

OOC: I got this idea while drafting "Protections During Territorial Transitions" after a discussion on this topic with a few posters. However, I realise that this may be a difficult subject regarding WA regulation and legislation, and so I will fully understand if the general sentiment will be against this idea, and I won't push submission of it in that case. Nonetheless, feedback and commentary are welcome, in particular to the numbers that have been named in the draft. Are they okay, should they be higher or lower? Please, let me know your thoughts!

---

CURRENT DRAFT:

Right To Independence Referenda
Category: Civil Rights | Strength: Significant

---

Firm in its belief that member states have the right to protect the stability of their unity as sovereign states, yet equally adamant about the rights of inhabitants of member nations to separate themselves from that unity if such would be their wish;

The General Assembly hereby:

1. Grants the citizens and inhabitants of all member nations the right to initiate a referendum on the subject of the secession of a territory, region or other administrative division, and its reformation as a sovereign, independent state, if a petition regarding the organisation of such a referendum is demonstrably supported by at least 40% of that territory, region or administrative division, and has been formally submitted to the appropriate government authorities;
   
   
2. Requires all member nations to legally recognise a petition for an independence referendum, and to cooperate in good faith with the organisation of such a referendum if it has been called for per the right bestowed by Clause 1;
   
   
3. Establishes that an independence referendum has to have a simple majority of more than 50% of the total amount of votes cast during the referendum voting in favour of secession, in order to formally and legally enact secession and/or independence;
   
   
4. Forbids all member nations from declaring an independence referendum that has been initiated as per the right bestowed by Clause 1 as invalid or illegal, unless such would be appropriate, proportionate and absolutely necessary in the prevention of national and/or international threats, significant instability or conflict;
   
   
5. Demands that all member nations formally acknowledge the sovereignty of a state that has been formed as a result of a referendum on secession as per the right bestowed by Clause 1, unless such a state can be objectively considered as a threat to national and/or international security and stability, or has demonstrably been proven to be an entity with malicious motives;
   
   
6. Prohibits member nations from enacting any state punishment, reprisal, or persecution against inhabitants that initiated a referendum for independence as per the right bestowed by Clause 1.

[Nationalist Northumbria]

Nationalist Northumbria supports this proposal, will take it as an endorsement of the cause, and devote all national energies to ensure it reaches vote and passes.

[Vivolkha]

Vivolkha officially supports the principle behind this proposal, though it has reservations with the following clause:

[...] unless such a state can be objectively considered as a threat to national and/or international security and stability, or has demonstrably been proven to be an entity with malicious motives

as it could be potentially abused to arbitrarily deny sovereignty to the would-be state.

[Daarwyrth]

Vivolkha officially supports the principle behind this proposal, though it has reservations with the following clause:

[...] unless such a state can be objectively considered as a threat to national and/or international security and stability, or has demonstrably been proven to be an entity with malicious motives

as it could be potentially abused to arbitrarily deny sovereignty to the would-be state.

Dame Maria vyn Nysen, WA Representative of Daarwyrth: "I see your point, Ambassador, and when our delegation was drafting this initial version of the proposal, we did have a lengthy discussion on the potential implications of this line. Because we can't forget about the potential rise of a terrorist state, that claimed independence through a referendum. The acknowledgement of such a state could have dangerous implications for the international community, which is why we wanted to include this consideration into the text of the proposal draft.

Naturally, we are open to suggestions to a more delicate or different phrasing of this concern, so that the risk of abuse would be more limited."

[Honeydewistania]

Who decides how unstable is unstable enough?

[Daarwyrth]

Who decides how unstable is unstable enough?

Vyn Nysen: "A valid point. We had been considering the inclusion of an impartial oversight committee for this purpose, but we also entertained the involvement of the WA courts for this matter, or the creating of an international court for this purpose. What do you think of these ideas, Ambassador?"

[Molopovia]

Ambassador Broska Tarlishak: While this resolution is something I am all for, I am curious as to why you chose 40% as the percentile in Clause 1.

[Daarwyrth]

Ambassador Broska Tarlishak: While this resolution is something I am all for, I am curious as to why you chose 40% as the percentile in Clause 1.

Vyn Nysen: "Our delegation fully realises it is an arbitrary number. We felt that it would be a little too cumbersome to demand 50% or more, but too easy-going to have it be below 30%. As such, we decided on 40%, yet we are fully open to suggestions on a better percentile."

[Hannasea]

"So people can vote for an independence referendum but can't actually vote for anything (in a proposal that is inexplicably not classified as Furtherment of Democracy)."

Daniella Russel, MA PhD
Representing the office of:
Ambassador Brittany Hepburn
Semi-Permanent Representative to the World Assembly

[Daarwyrth]

"So people can vote for an independence referendum but can't actually vote for anything (in a proposal that is inexplicably not classified as Furtherment of Democracy)."

Daniella Russel, MA PhD
Representing the office of:
Ambassador Brittany Hepburn
Semi-Permanent Representative to the World Assembly

Vyn Nysen: "Madam, could you clarify what you mean with this? Is your comment directed at our proposal text or the fact that there are dictatorships in the World Assembly?

Also, since this resolution proposal grants rights to citizens and inhabitants of member nations, and imposes restrictions on governments, we considered the Civil Rights category as a similarly appropriate one. We do however see the point you're making regarding this remark, and will consider changing the category if more comments of this kind will arise."

[Hannasea]

Vyn Nysen: "Madam, could you clarify what you mean with this? Is your comment directed at our proposal text or the fact that there are dictatorships in the World Assembly?

Also, since this resolution proposal grants rights to citizens and inhabitants of member nations, and imposes restrictions on governments, we considered the Civil Rights category as a similarly appropriate one. We do however see the point you're making regarding this remark, and will consider changing the category if more comments of this kind will arise."

"You can simplify your proposal by deleting everything from the word "on":

The General Assembly hereby:

1. Grants the citizens and inhabitants of all member nations the right to initiate a referendum

"What the referendum is about, the citizens and inhabitants can decide. Whether their taxes are too high, their civil liberties too restricted, their chips in the wrong color packaging, etc."

Daniella Russel, etc.

[Daarwyrth]

Vyn Nysen: "Madam, could you clarify what you mean with this? Is your comment directed at our proposal text or the fact that there are dictatorships in the World Assembly?

Also, since this resolution proposal grants rights to citizens and inhabitants of member nations, and imposes restrictions on governments, we considered the Civil Rights category as a similarly appropriate one. We do however see the point you're making regarding this remark, and will consider changing the category if more comments of this kind will arise."

"You can simplify your proposal by deleting everything from the word "on":

The General Assembly hereby:

1. Grants the citizens and inhabitants of all member nations the right to initiate a referendum

"What the referendum is about, the citizens and inhabitants can decide. Whether their taxes are too high, their civil liberties too restricted, their chips in the wrong color packaging, etc."

Daniella Russel, etc.

Vyn Nysen: "We understand your nations point of view on referenda and admire your dedication to the process of democracy, yet it is not our intent with this resolution proposal to mandate all member nations to allow referenda.

This proposal is specifically about referenda on the topic of secession and independence. It seems more than logical to us that the content of what citizens can vote on would be limited to the subject of secession and independence."

[Hannasea]

"You have not explained why. Freedom is one thing: either you have it, or you don't. This proposal recognises the "rights of inhabitants of member nations to separate themselves from that unity if such would be their wish", but it does not address why they should not be allowed to enact any policy outcome so long as it is their wish.

"This contradiction can be easily addressed by simply removing the words from "on" onwards and recognizing a general right to organize referenda."

Daniella Russel, etc.

[Daarwyrth]

"You have not explained why. Freedom is one thing: either you have it, or you don't. This proposal recognises the "rights of inhabitants of member nations to separate themselves from that unity if such would be their wish", but it does not address why they should not be allowed to enact any policy outcome so long as it is their wish.

"This contradiction can be easily addressed by simply removing the words from "on" onwards and recognizing a general right to organize referenda."

Daniella Russel, etc.

Vyn Nysen: "As I said, Ambassador, your commentary and remarks are appreciated, yet this topic you speak of is not the intent or purpose of this resolution proposal. This proposal is on referenda regarding independence and secession and only that topic. If you desire to see a resolution that mandates citizens in all member nations have access to referenda, then by all means, we encourage your delegation to draft one. Yet do note that there are nations in the World Assembly that function as a dictatorship, and by existent WA legislation have a right to be such."

[Hannasea]

Vyn Nysen: "As I said, Ambassador,

"Who?"

Daniella looks around, bemused.

This proposal is on referenda regarding independence and secession and only that topic. If you desire to see a resolution that mandates citizens in all member nations have access to referenda, then by all means, we encourage your delegation to draft one. Yet do note that there are nations in the World Assembly that function as a dictatorship, and by existent WA legislation have a right to be such."

"Then your proposal is worthless. You are trying to give people the right to make choices but only if those choices conform to a very narrow set of predetermined outcomes. It is the 'you can have any color you want so long as it is black' of legislation. It is worthless.

"You should, with very considerable amounts of shame, abandon this."

Daniella Russel, etc.

[Daarwyrth]

Vyn Nysen: "As I said, Ambassador,

"Who?"

Daniella looks around, bemused.

This proposal is on referenda regarding independence and secession and only that topic. If you desire to see a resolution that mandates citizens in all member nations have access to referenda, then by all means, we encourage your delegation to draft one. Yet do note that there are nations in the World Assembly that function as a dictatorship, and by existent WA legislation have a right to be such."

"Then your proposal is worthless. You are trying to give people the right to make choices but only if those choices conform to a very narrow set of predetermined outcomes. It is the 'you can have any color you want so long as it is black' of legislation. It is worthless.

"You should, with very considerable amounts of shame, abandon this."

Daniella Russel, etc.

Vyn Nysen: "Respectfully, Madam, you have no business in telling our delegation what to do or to feel. Unless your remarks are meant in a constructive manner, we request that you keep any further remarks on the subject to yourself. You do not have the authority to dictate the worthiness of a proposal."

[Hannasea]

"Yes, I do. I'm right, you're wrong.

"You should drop this, now."

Daniela Russel, etc.

[Honeydewistania]

"The Madam from Hannasea does have a point. It would make more sense to simply allow all referenda. Restricting it to just independence referenda makes no sense unless you’re an opponent of people voting on non-Independence referenda. If the latter is true, then I shall concede defeat."

[Daarwyrth]

"Yes, I do. I'm right, you're wrong.

"You should drop this, now."

Daniela Russel, etc.

Vyn Nysen: "Madam, you have grossly overstepped yourself in this moment. You're an ordinary member of this assembly just like our delegation, with no special powers or any other significant authority. If this is how your delegation is going to conduct itself, then we shall block all further communications from you or your nation. I respectfully ask that you conduct yourself in a more constructive and helpful manner, instead of a despotic one."

Amendment: "I correct myself, your nation is not even a member of the World Assembly, which puts you even in a more precarious situation. It is not our delegation that should be ashamed of poor conduct, but you, Madam."

"The Madam from Hannasea does have a point. It would make more sense to simply allow all referenda. Restricting it to just independence referenda makes no sense unless you’re an opponent of people voting on non-Independence referenda. If the latter is true, then I shall concede defeat."

"Our delegation is by no means an opponent of referenda nor the implementation of such a law across all member nations. We will happily support an effort to give all citizens of member nations the right and access to referenda, yet we believe that this subject is important and valid enough to merit its own proposal.

However, if more viewpoints are expressed saying the same as your delegation, without the despotic tone that the diplomatic team from Hannasea uses, we will consider an adaptation or change."

[Ardiveds]

OOC: I would be interested in knowing the modly opinion on whether what Hannasea was referring to could be a ideology ban. Mandating allowance of referendum in all matters is de facto mandating elections IMO.

[Hannasea]

OOC: I would be interested in knowing the modly opinion on whether what Hannasea was referring to could be a ideology ban. Mandating allowance of referendum in all matters is de facto mandating elections IMO.

OOC: I wouldn't, I don't want mods anywhere near proposal legality questions.

[Daarwyrth]

OOC: I would be interested in knowing the modly opinion on whether what Hannasea was referring to could be a ideology ban. Mandating allowance of referendum in all matters is de facto mandating elections IMO.

OOC: That is exactly why I responded IC'ly with reluctance, because it sounds to me as if it would in essence be an ideology ban Truly, I'd love see a proposal that makes referenda an element of the government of every nation, yet I don't think that is allowed under the ideology ban rule (I could be wrong of course). Which is why I tried to manoeuvre around that rule by limiting the subject of the referenda to a particular niche, in this case to independence and secession.

OOC: I would be interested in knowing the modly opinion on whether what Hannasea was referring to could be a ideology ban. Mandating allowance of referendum in all matters is de facto mandating elections IMO.

OOC: I wouldn't, I don't want mods anywhere near proposal legality questions.

OOC: And yet it is an inherent part of how the World Assembly functions, as can be read in the rules and procedures of the both GA and SC.

[Ardiveds]

OOC: I would be interested in knowing the modly opinion on whether what Hannasea was referring to could be a ideology ban. Mandating allowance of referendum in all matters is de facto mandating elections IMO.

OOC: I wouldn't, I don't want mods anywhere near proposal legality questions.

OOC: They are the final say on legality questions so what you want is irrelevant.
Edit: so for clarification, I'm referring to Gensec as mods. Sorry for the confusion

[Bananaistan]

OOC: Have we gone back in time to 2016 or something?

IC: "This is the most insane thing I have ever seen proposed around here. Nations should have the right to self determination, counties etc not so much."

[Hannasea]

OOC: And yet it is an inherent part of how the World Assembly functions, as can be read in the rules and procedures of the both GA and SC.

OOC: This is simply not true. Proposal legality questions are decided by the Pink Power Rangers. Mods abdicated their role in legality questions over everything but plagiarism/grossly illegal/gameside violations years ago. Trying to have them come back in to decide questions like the ideological ban rule would be disastrous.