NationStates

"I'm aware," Asgeir starts, "that this will not win me many friends in this Assembly, but I feel it of great enough importance to still bring this proposal forward. With the passage of GA#649 and two competing repeal drafts - one of which has already been submitted - we are nearing the completion of the 'repeal, replace, repeal' cycle once more. I'm tired of reading and voting on the same bills over and over, so my office has drafted a bit of a blocker. "

Permit Qualified Immunity

---

Category: International Security || Strength: Mild || Proposed by: Heidgaudr

---

The General Assembly,

Recognizing that many jurisdictions provide legal immunity to government officials when performing the duties of their office reasonably, often called "qualified immunity";

Noting that determining the reasonableness of an action is subjective, and those whose duty is to grant or deny requests for qualified immunity are often motivated to protect the requesting government officials regardless of the lawfulness of their actions;

Lamenting that despite the potential for abuse, qualified immunity still provides crucial protection to well-behaving officials necessary for the functioning of a modern legal system;

Cognizant of multiple attempts by the World Assembly to either regulate or ban qualified immunity, which have all ended in dismal failure;

Seeking to settle this debate in a single, conclusive stroke;

Hereby

Defines qualified immunity as a form of sovereign immunity where government officials cannot be held legally liable for actions undertaken as part of their office;

Prohibits the World Assembly from making any law which would regulate or ban qualified immunity;

Recommends members enact regulations to prevent the abuse of qualified immunity.

-=Old Drafts=-

"Strongly opposed. The World Assembly should absolutely restrict qualified immunity, and that you disagree with the current legislation which does so does not mean that we should be completely closing off the opportunity to restrict qualified immunity."

"GA #649 has not even been repealed at this stage, and it would be wise to wait to see the outcome of that repeal first."

~Alexander Nicholas Saverchenko-Colleti,
World Assembly Ambassador,
The Communal Union of the Ice States.

“I must echo the comments of his Excellency the ambassador for the Communal Union of the Ice States. Qualified immunity, though useful in some situations, can often be a tool with which nefarious governments oppress their peoples, by removing access to judicial remedy. By standing neutral on such tyranny, the General Assembly would be to tacitly support it.”

(OOC: For the sake of disclosure, I am currently also working on a potential replacement for GA #649, albeit at a pace only slightly quicker than a geriatric glacier.)

The Ice States wrote:"Strongly opposed. The World Assembly should absolutely restrict qualified immunity, and that you disagree with the current legislation which does so does not mean that we should be completely closing off the opportunity to restrict qualified immunity."

"GA #649 has not even been repealed at this stage, and it would be wise to wait to see the outcome of that repeal first."

~Alexander Nicholas Saverchenko-Colleti,
World Assembly Ambassador,
The Communal Union of the Ice States.

Kenmoria wrote:“I must echo the comments of his Excellency the ambassador for the Communal Union of the Ice States. Qualified immunity, though useful in some situations, can often be a tool with which nefarious governments oppress their peoples, by removing access to judicial remedy. By standing neutral on such tyranny, the General Assembly would be to tacitly support it.”

"Certainly, abuse of qualified immunity is tyranny. But how and where do we draw the line? It is an incredibly nuanced and nation-specific question that, in my estimation, the World Assembly will never be able to adequately answer - as evidenced by the slew of repeal-and-replaces we have voted on over the years. This vicious cycle muddies the waters of what is and isn't acceptable, with the answer changing every few months, which in turn makes governance even more difficult and costly. The workers of the Associated Communities are dissatisfied and I seek to assuage their concerns."

---

Kenmoria wrote:(OOC: For the sake of disclosure, I am currently also working on a potential replacement for GA #649, albeit at a pace only slightly quicker than a geriatric glacier.)

I look forward to it.

Qualified immunity is a term invented by the U.S Supreme Court and isn't used anywhere else that I know of. The more correct term is "Sovereign Immunity".

I am likely to support whatever Kenmoria comes up with (possibly in conjunction with Magecastle, my issue with his resolution is not the intent but a drafting error concerning "public interest") on a repeal of GAR#649.

As the Institute for Justice puts it, "Qualified immunity means that government officials can get away with violating your rights as long as they violate them in a way nobody thought of before." This is another transplant of US law which gets into severe problems outside.

No. Also, I refer to WayNeacTea's quote. It's "sovereign immunity" or "head of state immunity". Qualified immunity is the one they give to cops.

Ascenia wrote:No. Also, I refer to WayNeacTea's quote. It's "sovereign immunity" or "head of state immunity". Qualified immunity is the one they give to cops.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_immunity

Seeing as how police officers are acting as agents of the state the definition I have was correct. “Qualified” immunity is a made up definition by the U.S. Supreme Court and is used where else in the world. Not all of us are American.

Sovereign immunity, or crown immunity, is a legal doctrine whereby a sovereign or state cannot commit a legal wrong and is immune from civil suit or criminal prosecution, strictly speaking in modern texts in its own courts. A similar, stronger rule as regards foreign courts is named state immunity.

"Prohibits the World Assembly from banning..." "...something that doesn't flip the World Assembly's superior moral compass..."
Good luck!

Heidgaudr wrote:"Certainly, abuse of qualified immunity is tyranny. But how and where do we draw the line? It is an incredibly nuanced and nation-specific question that, in my estimation, the World Assembly will never be able to adequately answer - as evidenced by the slew of repeal-and-replaces we have voted on over the years. This vicious cycle muddies the waters of what is and isn't acceptable, with the answer changing every few months, which in turn makes governance even more difficult and costly. The workers of the Associated Communities are dissatisfied and I seek to assuage their concerns."

"National sovereignty does not justify the World Assembly protecting tyranny."

~Alexander Nicholas Saverchenko-Colleti,
World Assembly Ambassador,
The Communal Union of the Ice States.

Support.

"We are opposed. We believe everyone should be equally held accountable for their actions."

WayNeacTia wrote:“Qualified” immunity is a made up definition by the U.S. Supreme Court and is used where else in the world. Not all of us are American.

Ms. Gutierrez: Au contraire, Ambassador! As seen in the resolution draft, the definition of "qualified immunity" has been made up by our very own Mr. Trelstad and will, if the draft passes into law, be used in every World Assembly member state. And I was under the impression that Mr. Trelstad is Heidgaudrian.

Maricela Gutierrez wrote:

WayNeacTia wrote:“Qualified” immunity is a made up definition by the U.S. Supreme Court and is used where else in the world. Not all of us are American.

Ms. Gutierrez: Au contraire, Ambassador! As seen in the resolution draft, the definition of "qualified immunity" has been made up by our very own Mr. Trelstad and will, if the draft passes into law, be used in every World Assembly member state. And I was under the impression that Mr. Trelstad is Heidgaudrian.

Wayne was speaking OOC'ly.

---

Chipoli wrote:"We are opposed. We believe everyone should be equally held accountable for their actions."

"Everybody except the World Assembly voters who, because they are more fickle than a hormonal teenage girl, cause chaos across the multiverse by constantly forcing us to rewrite our laws. I agree with you that people should be held accountable, but the World Assembly has proven that it is incapable of holding them accountable for any length of time."

The Ice States wrote:

Heidgaudr wrote:"Certainly, abuse of qualified immunity is tyranny. But how and where do we draw the line? It is an incredibly nuanced and nation-specific question that, in my estimation, the World Assembly will never be able to adequately answer - as evidenced by the slew of repeal-and-replaces we have voted on over the years. This vicious cycle muddies the waters of what is and isn't acceptable, with the answer changing every few months, which in turn makes governance even more difficult and costly. The workers of the Associated Communities are dissatisfied and I seek to assuage their concerns."

"National sovereignty does not justify the World Assembly protecting tyranny."

~Alexander Nicholas Saverchenko-Colleti,
World Assembly Ambassador,
The Communal Union of the Ice States.

"Your opposition is noted."

I honestly believe this is a real world violation. Qualified immunity is a term only defined by SCOTUS. I suggest changing that first sentence to "sovereign immunity" and redefine this in the resolution as "qualified immunity", then take the Pepsi challenge as to whether or not that would constitute a real world violation.

Heidgaudr wrote:"Everybody except the World Assembly voters who, because they are more fickle than a hormonal teenage girl, cause chaos across the multiverse by constantly forcing us to rewrite our laws. I agree with you that people should be held accountable, but the World Assembly has proven that it is incapable of holding them accountable for any length of time."

Ms. Gutierrez: "I beg your pardon, Mr. Trelstad! Being young and allegedly hormonal does not necessarily make m—er, teenage girls in general, fickle."

Ms. Gutierrez: "In any case, even if the World Assembly is exceptionally fickle in some negative way not necessarily defined in comparison to people of certain ages or sexes—even if it is, that potential problem exists for all possible laws and topics. Why decide to keep the World Assembly out of this particular matter? Are there ways in which the legislative back-and-forth specifically on immunity is particularly problematic for member states?"