Page 1 of 2

[DRAFT] Promoting Prisoner Work and Skills

PostPosted: Fri May 13, 2022 2:22 pm
by Princess Rainbow Sparkles
Updated May 18, 2022

Promoting Prisoner Work and Skills

~*~*~*~ Advancement of Industry ~*~*~*~ Labor Deregulation ~*~*~*~


The World Assembly:

Recognizing that many Member Nations use incarceration as a tool for both criminal punishment and reform, and

Wanting to promote employment and the acquisition of labor skills by imprisoned individuals, and

Hoping that more incarcerated individuals will acquire valuable experience that will aid them once their debt to society is paid,


Therefore, the General Assembly resolves as follows:

Article I: Definitions
  1. A prisoner is a person who is serving a sentence of incarceration following a criminal conviction.
  2. Work means performing physical or mental labor in exchange for pay.
  3. Working full-time means working at least the same number of hours per week as the average laborer within that national jurisdiction, or two thirds of waking hours, whichever is greater.
  4. An approved training program is any training program that teaches a work-related skill, technique, or ability.
  5. Leisure activities means non-work rest, relaxation, or entertainment for prisoners provided, permitted, or facilitated by a Member Nation's prison system.

Article II: Central Mandate
Every prisoner in every member nation must be permitted to work full-time throughout their incarceration, except as provided in the Exceptions below.

Article III: Exceptions
A prisoner may be exempted from the Central Mandate as follows:
  1. At the discretion of prison security officers, if there is clear and convincing evidence that the prisoner would pose a substantial flight or safety risk if permitted to work.
  2. To allow for basic prison administrative tasks, including but not limited to time spent admitting a person into prison, processing legally required paperwork, security measures, health evaluations, preparing the person for discharge, etc.
  3. If there is substantial evidence that the prisoner suffers from a mental or physical disability or injury which medically precludes performing any work.
  4. As a punishment for bad behavior in the institution.
  5. If the prisoner is an imprisoned youth, as defined by international or local national law, if the youth is expected to attend school full-time or otherwise not expected to work at that age.

Article IV: Obligations and Rights of Member Nations
For individuals subject to the Central Mandate and not exempted under an Exception, the following provisions apply:
  1. Member nations shall ensure that every prisoner has access to either approved training programs or full-time work, or both, throughout their incarceration.
  2. A member nation may permit a prisoner to perform work for the state, so long as the member nation is satisfied that doing so will not endanger the state or public.
  3. A member nation must permit, ensure, and allow that a prisoner works or trains full-time for any businesses willing to employ them, so long as security and public safety measures are in place.
  4. Member nations must allow prisoners to be paid a fair wage for their work, in light of their abilities, work quality, and financial needs.
  5. Member nations may require prisoners to contribute a portion of their wages to the administrative costs of their incarceration, the costs of any prison work and training programs, and to any restitution owed to their victims.
  6. Time spent participating in an approved training program counts as time spent working, except that prisoners are not entitled to pay while being trained.
  7. To incentivize able prisoners to improve their skills and repay their social debts, member nations are encouraged to make a prisoner's participation in leisure activities contingent on their willingness to accept full-time work.


Promoting Prisoner Work and Skills

~*~*~*~ Advancement of Industry ~*~*~*~ Labor Deregulation ~*~*~*~


The World Assembly:

Recognizing that many Member Nations use incarceration as a tool for both criminal punishment and reform, and

Wanting to promote employment and the acquisition of labor skills by imprisoned individuals, and

Hoping that incarcerated individuals will acquire valuable experience that will aid them once their debt to society is paid,


Therefore, the General Assembly resolves as follows:

Article I: Definitions
  1. A prisoner is a person who is serving a sentence of incarceration following a criminal conviction.
  2. Work means performing physical or mental labor in exchange for pay.
  3. Working full-time means working at least the same number of hours per week as the average laborer within that national jurisdiction, or two thirds of waking hours, whichever is greater.
  4. An approved training program is any educational program focused on teaching a work-related skill, technique, or ability.
  5. Leisure activities means non-work rest or relaxation for prisoners provided, permitted, or facilitated by a Member Nation's prison system.

Article II: Central Mandate
Every prisoner in every member nation must be permitted to work full-time throughout their incarceration, except as provided in the Exceptions below.

Article III: Exceptions
A prisoner may be exempted from the Central Mandate as follows:
  1. At the discretion of prison security officers, if there is clear and convincing evidence that the prisoner would pose a substantial flight or safety risk if permitted to work.
  2. To allow for basic prison administrative tasks, including but not limited to time spent admitting a person into prison, processing legally required paperwork, security and health evaluations, preparing the person for discharge, etc.
  3. If there is substantial evidence that the prisoner suffers from a mental or physical disability or injury which medically precludes performing any work.
  4. As a punishment in conjunction with administrative segregation and isolation, for bad behavior.
  5. If the prisoner is an imprisoned youth, as defined by international or local national law, if the youth is expected to attend school full-time or otherwise not expected to work at that age.

Article IV: Obligations and Rights of Member Nations
For individuals subject to the Central Mandate and not exempted under an Exception, the following provisions apply:
  1. Member nations shall ensure that every prisoner has access to either approved training programs or full-time work, or both, throughout their incarceration.
  2. A member nation may permit a prisoner to perform work for the state, so long as the member nation is satisfied that doing so will not endanger the state or public.
  3. A member nation must permit, ensure, and allow a prisoner to work for any businesses willing to employ them, so long as suitable security and public safety measures are in place for such work.
  4. Member nations must allow prisoners to be paid a fair wage for their work, in light of their characteristics, financial needs, and abilities.
  5. Member nations may require prisoners to contribute a portion of their wages to the administrative costs of their incarceration, the costs of any prison work and training programs, and to any restitution owed to their victims.
  6. Time spent participating in an approved training program counts as time spent working, except that prisoners are not entitled to pay while being trained.
  7. To incentivize able prisoners to improve their skills and repay their social debts, member nations must make a prisoner's participation in leisure activities contingent on their willingness to accept full-time work.


Promoting Prisoner Work and Skills

~*~*~*~ Advancement of Industry ~*~*~*~ Labor Deregulation ~*~*~*~


The World Assembly:

Recognizing that many Member Nations use incarceration as a tool for both criminal punishment and reform, and

Wanting to promote employment and the acquisition of labor skills by imprisoned individuals, and

Hoping that incarcerated individuals will acquire valuable experience that will aid them once their debt to society is paid,


Therefore, the General Assembly resolves as follows:

Article I: Definitions
  1. A prisoner is a person who is serving a sentence of incarceration following a criminal conviction.
  2. Work means performing physical or mental labor in exchange for pay.
  3. Working full-time means working at least the same number of hours per week as the average laborer within that national jurisdiction, or three quarters of waking hours, whichever is greater.
  4. An approved training program is any educational program focused on teaching a work-related skill, technique, or ability to a proficiency level of at least minimal competence.

Article II: Central Mandate
  1. Every prisoner in every member nation must work full-time throughout their incarceration, except as provided in the Exceptions below.
  2. Any time a prisoner spends in an approved training program counts as time spent working full-time.

Article III: Exceptions
A prisoner may be exempted from the Central Mandate as follows:
  1. At the discretion of prison security officers, if there is clear and convincing evidence that the individual would pose a substantial flight or safety risk if permitted to work.
  2. To allow for basic prison administrative tasks, including but not limited to time spent admitting a person into prison, processing legally required paperwork, basic medical evaluations, preparing the person for discharge, etc.
  3. If the prisoner establishes that they suffer from a mental or physical disability or injury which medically precludes performing any work.
  4. As a punishment in conjunction with administrative segregation and isolation, for bad behavior.
  5. If a prisoner is an imprisoned youth, as defined by international or local national law, if the youth is expected to attend school full-time or otherwise not expected to work full-time at that age.

Article IV: Obligations and Rights of Member Nations
If a prisoner is subject to the Cet
  1. Member Nations shall ensure that every prisoner has access to either approved training programs or full-time work, or both, throughout their incarceration, except as provided in the Exceptions.
  2. Member Nations must allow prisoners to work for any businesses willing to employ them and may allow prisoners to perform work for the state, so long as the Member Nation is satisfied that suitable security and public safety measures are in place for such work and that the prisoners are capable of performing it according to applicable standards and regulations.
  3. Member Nations must ensure that prisoners are paid a fair wage for their labor, in light of their characteristics and abilities.
  4. Member Nations may require prisoners to contribute a portion of their wages to the administrative costs of their incarceration, the costs of any prison work and training programs, and to any restitution owed to their victims.
  5. Member Nations may not require a prisoner to pay up-front to participate in an approved training program, but may require the prisoner to repay the full cost of their participation from future wages.

PostPosted: Fri May 13, 2022 2:32 pm
by Bagiussia
Princess Rainbow Sparkles wrote:three quarters of waking hours, whichever is greater

((24-8):4)*3=12
I'm probably dumb now, but I think it's a bit too much.
Princess Rainbow Sparkles wrote:Every prisoner in every member nation must work full-time throughout their incarceration, except as provided in the Exceptions below.

IMHO, this is a somewhat unnecessary thing. On the ground, they will better figure out what to do with convicts.


Maybe it is OK to simply oblige the nations to carry out educational work with prisoners and give them certain skills?

PostPosted: Fri May 13, 2022 3:01 pm
by Princess Rainbow Sparkles
Bagiussia wrote:
Princess Rainbow Sparkles wrote:three quarters of waking hours, whichever is greater

((24-8):4)*3=12
I'm probably dumb now, but I think it's a bit too much.

I didn't think it was unreasonable but then again I grew up farming. Happy to adjust this standard if folks have a better one in mind.
Bagiussia wrote:
Princess Rainbow Sparkles wrote:Every prisoner in every member nation must work full-time throughout their incarceration, except as provided in the Exceptions below.

IMHO, this is a somewhat unnecessary thing. On the ground, they will better figure out what to do with convicts.


Maybe it is OK to simply oblige the nations to carry out educational work with prisoners and give them certain skills?

I have to disagree with you here. The point of this proposal is to avoid prisons deciding "on the ground" that the best thing to do with convicts is let them sit in a hole until they die or get released.

I think education programs are certainly very valuable and I included provisions for them, but I also think there's only so much you can learn in a classroom. At some point you learn a lot more from baling hay than from reading a book about baling hay. Giving prisoners an opportunity to earn wages also serves a bunch of other goods.

If you have ideas for strengthening the education bit or other exceptions I'd like to hear them.

PostPosted: Fri May 13, 2022 4:43 pm
by Goobergunchia
We are concerned as to how the draft proposal interacts with "Protecting Imprisoned Youths" and suggest it be narrowed so as to exclude persons below the age of majority.

Madeleine Kofelgas
Deputy WA Ambassador
Moderately Liberal Unitary Republic of Goobergunchia

PostPosted: Fri May 13, 2022 5:20 pm
by Fachumonn
Support in principle.

PostPosted: Fri May 13, 2022 8:32 pm
by The Forest of Aeneas
Ambassador Cecilia Maro. 'Is this not effectively forced labour? :eyebrow: The Forest of Aeneas will oppose as-is should this come to vote. While we would fully support ensuring access to voluntary work for prisoners, we are opposed to requiring prisoners to work full-time, even if against their will.'

'Furthermore, is flight or safety in III.a not meant to refer to health or safety?'

PostPosted: Fri May 13, 2022 9:23 pm
by Morover
A long-haired woman enters the chambers, wearing traditional Morovian garb - not that of Morover's historical delegations to the World Assembly, but rather the clothing that ambassadors to Morover from the portion of the tribe Morii which was not incorporated into the nation upon the unification of the continent. Not that it matters, since only the most politically or historically savvy would be aware of the significance, but it is a unique and lovely change of pace from the rest of the Morovian ambassadors.

"I'm inclined to agree with Ambassador Maro. Although this technically does avoid contradiction with Resolution 23, due to the exceptions made in clause three, my nation opposes any efforts to globalize forced prison labor. Even assuming it was ethical, this incentivizes bad behavior, especially among those who do not wish to work due to having a life sentence and thus being unable to access any funds they may earn, etc. due to III.d, though weighing isolation from forced labor is a mental task I wish on no one."

"That being said, it is still possible for Morover to support an endeavor similar to this, if instead it is phrased as giving workers the opportunity to work. This is a lovely endeavor, and one that is worth pursuit. We'd also like to see a reduction of hours needed to be given in order to be considered full-time, or perhaps a striking of full-time/part-time shenanigans altogether. We'd also love to see educational opportunities beyond the scope of this proposal currently, including potential in-house programs being allowed, as well as other experiences, including discussions and lessons in philosophy, maths, history, and whatever other subjects any intellectually curious individual may reasonably pursue."

PostPosted: Sat May 14, 2022 6:25 am
by Comfed
There’s a thread for joke proposals.

PostPosted: Sat May 14, 2022 7:47 am
by Sierra Lyricalia
"An inventive proposal, ambassador. We believe most of it consists of good ideas, but we agree with the Morovian ambassador's statement in its entirety. Specifically, I believe Clause II(a) incentivizes nations to outlaw increasing degrees of ordinary, victimless behavior that ought not to be considered crimes, simply for the sake of extracting labor from an ever-growing number of prisoners. This does not lead to a society anyone should want to live in. Even if the wage garnishment in Clause IV(d) is capped to a reasonable proportion, this incentive remains as long as all prisoners are required to work. In that vein, Clause IV(c) ought to be altered from a 'fair' wage - what is fair, exactly? - to some wording describing the average market wage for the applicable sort of work performed by a non-prisoner of equivalent skill level."

"One last bit: IV(e) seems slightly obnoxious - after all, if you're going to claim that prisons are engines for rehabilitating criminals and returning them safely to society, training them in a trade or profession they can succeed at seems like just part of the cost of doing business - but is not a deal-breaker given the attitudes we have come to expect from our fellow WA members, and the need to vote proposals into law."

"Best of luck, ambassador."

PostPosted: Sat May 14, 2022 8:09 am
by Fachumonn
Comfed wrote:There’s a thread for joke proposals.

And how is this a joke proposal? Are you sure we're both reading the same thing?

PostPosted: Sat May 14, 2022 8:45 am
by Juansonia
The Forest of Aeneas wrote:Ambassador Cecilia Maro. 'Is this not effectively forced labour? :eyebrow: The Forest of Aeneas will oppose as-is should this come to vote. While we would fully support ensuring access to voluntary work for prisoners, we are opposed to requiring prisoners to work full-time, even if against their will.'

'Furthermore, is flight or safety in III.a not meant to refer to health or safety?'


the flight in "flight or safety" refers to the risk of prisoner escape.

However, I agree that this draft's wording does constitute forced labor.

In addition, most workdays, even assuming that weekends do not exist, involve less than half of waking time at work.

PostPosted: Sat May 14, 2022 11:23 am
by Anne of Cleves in TNP
“I agree with the other ambassadors on the possibility of forced labor within this proposal. Sure, there are public executions in the Clevesian Empire, but we would NEVER resort to forced labor.”
-Ms. Charlotte Schafer, WA Ambassador for the Clevesian Empire

PostPosted: Sat May 14, 2022 6:17 pm
by Makko Oko
"In our opinion in the Makko Okoan Government, this resolution poses a danger to society and is strictly opposed in its current state. We believe that certain classifications of inmates should be allowed flexibility by the prisons to decide rather or not they may work openly within the nation. One example is Supermax, do you really want to risk a Supermax inmate breaking out of prison via working outside of the prison, or even worse, committing more heinous crimes that got them there in the first place?"

PostPosted: Sat May 14, 2022 8:34 pm
by Eggraria
I support this resolution in principle, however I do have concerns about its repealability due to a claim over feasibility (e.g economic strain on member nations who struggle to find guaranteed employment for convicts), as well as the wording seeming to mandate forced labor. I would be certainly more amicable towards a resolution that works to make employment far more accessible by convicts, but notably not mandatory. Revising the clause to make it a requirement that all prisoners be able to secure employment would make for a stronger resolution, as it makes prison labor not mandatory.

As for feasibility, I think making it clear that the labor isn't mandatory can help out immensely. Of course, making the avenue internationally available across the board will help out people immensely, but not everyone will take advantage of that, and thus will be less of a burden on member nations to secure an adequate amount of employment.

Other than that, I think there's possibly concerns about firms that may work with the governments' new programs acting in discriminatory ways towards convicted laborers, but that's for another resolution.

PostPosted: Sun May 15, 2022 1:33 am
by West Barack and East Obama
Dr Justin Obama, Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs: Full support. Forced labour is a very agreeable policy. You do the crime, do the time, and make us some dimes! That’s my motto.

PostPosted: Sun May 15, 2022 4:39 am
by Separatist Peoples
"We see no reason to compel labor for prisoners without an interest in working, nor are we interested in undercutting the job market by flooding it with compelled labor, which likely comes at a lower cost than paying free workers due to the lack of bargaining power prisoners have."

PostPosted: Mon May 16, 2022 8:47 am
by Princess Rainbow Sparkles
Thank you all for the feedback. I hear you loud and clear on the "forced labor" provisions. Obviously I didn't see it that way when I wrote it, but I do understand the objection. Since several folks pointed out the same problem, I won't address each comment on that subject individually. I think I've remedied the problem in the second draft, but if anyone feels there's still a problem or that their earlier concerns were not addressed, please let me know.

I will respond briefly to a few particular comments:

Goobergunchia wrote:We are concerned as to how the draft proposal interacts with "Protecting Imprisoned Youths" and suggest it be narrowed so as to exclude persons below the age of majority.

I've included a specific Exception to address this concern.

Makko Oko wrote:"In our opinion in the Makko Okoan Government, this resolution poses a danger to society and is strictly opposed in its current state. We believe that certain classifications of inmates should be allowed flexibility by the prisons to decide rather or not they may work openly within the nation. One example is Supermax, do you really want to risk a Supermax inmate breaking out of prison via working outside of the prison, or even worse, committing more heinous crimes that got them there in the first place?"

I hope you will see that the proposal contains various provisions addressing public safety risks, including an outright Exception.

Juansonia wrote:
The Forest of Aeneas wrote:Ambassador Cecilia Maro.'Furthermore, is flight or safety in III.a not meant to refer to health or safety?'


the flight in "flight or safety" refers to the risk of prisoner escape.

Yes, that provision was intended to address flight (i.e. escape) and safety (in the sense of public/social safety). Prisoner health concerns are addressed in a different Exception.

Sierra Lyricalia wrote:"An inventive proposal, ambassador. We believe most of it consists of good ideas, but we agree with the Morovian ambassador's statement in its entirety. Specifically, I believe Clause II(a) incentivizes nations to outlaw increasing degrees of ordinary, victimless behavior that ought not to be considered crimes, simply for the sake of extracting labor from an ever-growing number of prisoners. This does not lead to a society anyone should want to live in. Even if the wage garnishment in Clause IV(d) is capped to a reasonable proportion, this incentive remains as long as all prisoners are required to work. In that vein, Clause IV(c) ought to be altered from a 'fair' wage - what is fair, exactly? - to some wording describing the average market wage for the applicable sort of work performed by a non-prisoner of equivalent skill level."

"One last bit: IV(e) seems slightly obnoxious - after all, if you're going to claim that prisons are engines for rehabilitating criminals and returning them safely to society, training them in a trade or profession they can succeed at seems like just part of the cost of doing business - but is not a deal-breaker given the attitudes we have come to expect from our fellow WA members, and the need to vote proposals into law."

First off, I agree re: IV(e) and removed that provision. Well, there's still an IV(e), but it's a completely different provision now.

With respect to the former point, I completely agree re: forced labor and removed the hard "must work" language from the central mandate. I still believe in incentivizing prisoners to work if they can (for a variety of reasons, including obtaining skills for post-incarceration and paying restitution) so I included a mild mechanism for that incentive through access to leisure activities. Hopefully that is an acceptable compromise on the issue.

I did not go into the fair wage issue in this draft, although I'm open to making that the focus of a future re-draft if some brilliant standard or consensus forms. Honestly I am not sure how much I want to tinker with the amorphous requirement of "fair" pay. Market wages seems like the wrong standard to me. Market wages build in the demands of workers with priorities such as paying for food, housing, and the ability to provide for dependents. Prisoners don't have those needs - at least not while they are incarcerated - so market pay isn't an intuitive metric for me. Anyway, I'm definitely open to further suggestion on this, just not sure exactly how to proceed.

PostPosted: Mon May 16, 2022 8:55 am
by Separatist Peoples
"Conditioning the only pleasure convicts are likely to find while incarcerated on working is as coercive as forcing them to work on pain of punishment. Removing positive stimuli is as coercive as adding negative stimuli to incarcerated persons. Any inventive should be the offer of additional benefits, not the removal of baseline benefits."

PostPosted: Mon May 16, 2022 9:01 am
by Princess Rainbow Sparkles
Separatist Peoples wrote:"Conditioning the only pleasure convicts are likely to find while incarcerated on working is as coercive as forcing them to work on pain of punishment. Removing positive stimuli is as coercive as adding negative stimuli to incarcerated persons. Any inventive should be the offer of additional benefits, not the removal of baseline benefits."

What compromise do you suggest? A crooked investor who steals the life savings of his retiree clients should generally be expected to work and pay restitution if able; or at least should not be permitted to sit around watching soap operas all day.

PostPosted: Mon May 16, 2022 9:10 am
by Separatist Peoples
Princess Rainbow Sparkles wrote:
Separatist Peoples wrote:"Conditioning the only pleasure convicts are likely to find while incarcerated on working is as coercive as forcing them to work on pain of punishment. Removing positive stimuli is as coercive as adding negative stimuli to incarcerated persons. Any inventive should be the offer of additional benefits, not the removal of baseline benefits."

What compromise do you suggest? A crooked investor who steals the life savings of his retiree clients should generally be expected to work and pay restitution if able; or at least should not be permitted to sit around watching soap operas all day.

"This belies a fundemental mistake of civil and criminal remedies. The victim of fraud has a civil claim against the fraudster, which the fraudster may be able to repay, but cannot be forced into effective servitude to repay if he is without those resources. You cannot get blood from a stone. Criminal punishment addresses the sins of the convict against the state, and does not include any specific obligation to make the victim whole. Your victim of fraud should pursue a civil remedy."

PostPosted: Mon May 16, 2022 9:28 am
by Princess Rainbow Sparkles
Separatist Peoples wrote:"This belies a fundemental mistake of civil and criminal remedies. The victim of fraud has a civil claim against the fraudster, which the fraudster may be able to repay, but cannot be forced into effective servitude to repay if he is without those resources. You cannot get blood from a stone. Criminal punishment addresses the sins of the convict against the state, and does not include any specific obligation to make the victim whole. Your victim of fraud should pursue a civil remedy."

I disagree with your bleak and unimaginative assessment of the purposes of the criminal law. I could explain criminal contempt proceedings to you but what's the point? It seems we once again arrive at an impasse where you are opposed to my concept and are unwilling or unable to offer anything constructive to my project. If you want another word you can have it or we can leave it at that.

PostPosted: Mon May 16, 2022 9:30 am
by Separatist Peoples
Princess Rainbow Sparkles wrote:
Separatist Peoples wrote:"This belies a fundemental mistake of civil and criminal remedies. The victim of fraud has a civil claim against the fraudster, which the fraudster may be able to repay, but cannot be forced into effective servitude to repay if he is without those resources. You cannot get blood from a stone. Criminal punishment addresses the sins of the convict against the state, and does not include any specific obligation to make the victim whole. Your victim of fraud should pursue a civil remedy."

I disagree with your bleak and unimaginative assessment of the purposes of the criminal law. I could explain criminal contempt proceedings to you but what's the point? It seems we once again arrive at an impasse where you are opposed to my concept and are unwilling or unable to offer anything constructive to my project. If you want the another word you can have it or we can leave it at that.

"There is nothing bleak about the correct remedy being placed in the hands of the correct entity, especially as criminal contempt proceedings are designed to defend the dignity of the court and not provide relief to victims per se. Nonetheless, I am always happy to register my opposition via politics rather than discussion when an author is unwilling to engage in good faith."

PostPosted: Mon May 16, 2022 9:40 am
by Morover
"Given the changes, Morover lends its tentative support. We will send a copy of this over to our legal analysts to find any other, more minute issues we have with it. We may pursue greater educational opportunities for the incarcerated in a future proposal. Thank you, ambassador."

PostPosted: Mon May 16, 2022 9:48 am
by Princess Rainbow Sparkles
Separatist Peoples wrote:
Princess Rainbow Sparkles wrote:I disagree with your bleak and unimaginative assessment of the purposes of the criminal law. I could explain criminal contempt proceedings to you but what's the point? It seems we once again arrive at an impasse where you are opposed to my concept and are unwilling or unable to offer anything constructive to my project. If you want the another word you can have it or we can leave it at that.

"There is nothing bleak about the correct remedy being placed in the hands of the correct entity, especially as criminal contempt proceedings are designed to defend the dignity of the court and not provide relief to victims per se. Nonetheless, I am always happy to register my opposition via politics rather than discussion when an author is unwilling to engage in good faith."

I already asked you what compromise you wanted and you responded by touting a distinction between criminal and civil law that I'm pretty sure is wrong (or, at least, very incomplete). What good faith engagement from me are you looking for?

Can we agree that restitution to victims is a legitimate facet of the criminal law? Or that promoting rehabilitation and a successful re-entry to society is a legitimate facet of the criminal law? If so, then you're just being unimaginative about the concept and how to fairly achieve its aims. Put aside your predispositions about what criminal law should and should not do. What exactly is wrong with conditioning the use and enjoyment of prison leisure offering on the agreement to work and thereby both engage in rehabilitation and earn money toward paying restitution. Surely, as I have agreed, we should not say you must work. But if you won't work (for instance, to repay the family whose money you stole), why is it so unreasonable to say "that's fine, but then you cannot enjoy the prison television and game room"?

Morover wrote:"Given the changes, Morover lends its tentative support. We will send a copy of this over to our legal analysts to find any other, more minute issues we have with it. We may pursue greater educational opportunities for the incarcerated in a future proposal. Thank you, ambassador."

Thank you! I appreciate the support. Please let me know if you think of any other ways to improve this proposal!

PostPosted: Mon May 16, 2022 10:03 am
by Bananaistan
"We are fundamentally opposed to the central requirement that member states must arrange work for delinquent citizens who have committed some heinous counter-revolutionary act. If work was so important, they should have desisted from engaging in fascism and other crimes against the people.

"Surely even our misguided friends in the so-called liberal democracies must also baulk at this imposition which sees the "dead hand" of the state being obliged to so grossly interfere with the labour market for the benefit of a select few criminals.

"I've said it before and I'll say it again. This assembly should spend less time worrying about the rights of murderers, rapists and kiddy fiddlers."