[Passed] - Bail conditions arrangements

[Goobergunchia]

Motivation

This is largely about bail reform. Note that I have not taken out cash bail, but I have made it exceptional difficult to do so, so it should take care of a majority of the issues with cash bail (especially in the US) with commercial bail lenders. The conditions for imposing cash bail are extremely tight although it does still allow it - restricted severely to "serious" cases (I didn't use the word "felony") and only if restrictions on conduct are deemed "grossly" insufficient, only if a suspect is likely to be able to afford it, and only as an alternative to not getting bailed (and having to stay in jail).

Obviously a court can refuse bail altogether and make this moot, but I consider that worse. The resolution allows cash bail but solely as an alternative to not granting bail together and subject to highly specific conditions.

This has been worded so that it does not directly address restrictions on travel outside of the WA state, for space reasons - the rest will go into a separate resolution on "right to leave a state" as a replacement to GA#279.

Category: regulation/legal reform (I don't really like using the "regulation/legal reform" category as I consider bail to be a civil rights issue more than a legal one per se, but it seems to fit this category better, there are no non-operative clauses anyway)

Last call

The World Assembly (WA),

Noting that the right to a fair trial and due process have been long-standing concerns for the WA;

Recognizing that no regulations govern bail arrangements, especially excessive cash bail that discriminates against the poor;

1. Hereby defines:
   
   
   1. “Bail” to mean conditions imposed on the conduct of a suspect in return for releasing a suspect from custody prior to a hearing, such as, in order of severity:
      
      1. own recognizance;
      2. restrictions of conduct, such as, merely as examples, curfews or confinement to particular residence(s) or workplace(s);
      3. the pledge of cash or items of monetary value ("cash bail") which may be forfeited if a suspect fails to return to court;
   2. “Charges” to mean the offences for which a suspect has been duly charged with;
   3. “Court” to mean a competent judicial body adjudicating on criminal matters in the WA state ("that WA state") where the suspect is facing the charges;
   4. “Hearing” to mean a court hearing, including pre-trial proceedings, trials, and appeals;
   5. “Suspect” to mean any individual facing charges, or who has been convicted but has not exhausted all appeals, according to the judicial process of the relevant WA state;
2. Hereby requires that a suspect may not be denied bail by a court unless:
   
   1. the suspect is found to have a prima facie case to answer or is duly indicted; and
   2. the suspect is charged with a "serious" criminal offence as defined by the laws of that WA state; and
   3. the suspect satisfies at least one of the conditions in the following sub-clauses:
      
      1. The suspect is deemed by the court to be:
         
         1. hostis humani generis;
         2. charged by that WA state with an offence pursuant to aut dedere aut judicare; or
         3. at extreme risk of:
            
            1. absconding;
            2. self-harm;
            3. endangering the safety or welfare of anyone else; or
      2. The suspect has a demonstrable track record of:
         
         1. repeatedly failing to meet all conditions of bail determined by a court; or
         2. attempt(s) to interfering with witnesses or otherwise obstructing the course of justice;
3. Hereby requires a court to consider imposing bail conditions other than cash bail only if less severe alternatives are deemed grossly inadequate for the purpose of bail and solely as an alternative to not granting bail altogether;
   
4. Hereby requires a court, if it decides to impose cash bail, to:
   
   1. Ensure that it is used only if the court deems the suspect to be extremely likely to abscond and has the means and incentives to do so; and
   2. Satisfy itself that the amount of cash bail should reflect the financial circumstances of the suspect; and
      
      1. likely for the suspect to raise such funds without facing financial ruin; and
      2. not exceeding the maximum penalty and/or restitution required if the suspect is convicted and all appeals exhausted;
   3. Inform the suspect of the cheapest means to raise such funds, such as (as an example) through charities, if the WA state permits cash bail and permits funds to be raised via commercial means;
      
   4. Inform the suspect, if the suspect is a citizen of another state, to potentially seek assistance from that other state to help fund the cash bail;
5. If a suspect that utilized commercial means to raise funds for bail is acquitted (or vacated) of the offence(s), the full commercial cost of the bail should be compensated for;
   
6. Hereby directs a court:
   
   1. To apply leniency in granting bail towards anyone charged for a first-time alleged offence, or for crimes that are not violent in nature;
   2. To not revoke bail unless due to extreme changes in circumstances, such as (merely as an example) if the suspect is duly convicted of another offence when out on bail;
7. Hereby deems it an offence for anyone:
   
   1. In a capacity as law enforcement officer or as a prosecutor to offer bail conditions as part of a plea-bargain;
   2. To coerce or entice a suspect into declining to apply for bail;
8. Hereby clarifies that this resolution does not:
   
   1. Prohibit a suspect from voluntarily declining to apply for bail for any reason;
   2. Prohibit a WA state from restricting or banning cash bail (or commercial forms of cash bail) altogether;
   3. Interfere with a court's decision not to grant bail altogether;
9. The judiciary of the WA state is responsible for interpretation of this resolution.

Char count: 4,477

[Simone Republic]

Reserved for future drafts, if any.

Draft 3

Draft 3

The World Assembly (WA),

Noting that the right to a fair trial and due process have been long-standing matters of interest to the esteemed assembly;

Recognizing that no regulations govern bail arrangements, especially excessive cash bail that discriminates against the poor;

1. Defines:
   
   
   1. “Bail” to mean the pledge of cash or items of monetary value or restrictions on the conduct of a suspect in return for releasing a suspect from custody prior to a hearing, which may be forfeited if a suspect fails to return to court for a hearing;
   2. “Charges” to mean any serious criminal offences for which a suspect has been charged with committing;
   3. “Court” to mean a court adjudicating on criminal matters pursuant to the constitution (codified or otherwise) of the WA state where the suspect is facing the charges;
   4. “Hearing” to mean a court hearing, including pre-trial proceedings, trials, and appeals;
   5. “Suspect” to mean any individual facing charges, or who has been convicted but has not exhausted all appeals, according to the judicial process of a WA state;
2. Requires that no suspect may be denied bail by a court unless:
   
   1. the suspect is found to have a prima facie case to answer and/or is indicted (as the case may be); and
   2. the suspect is charged with a "serious criminal offence" as defined by the laws of the relevant WA state; and
   3. the suspect satisfies at least one of the conditions in clause (2)(c)(i) or (2)(c)(ii):
      
      1. The suspect is deemed by WA resolutions and/or the court to be:
         
         1. hostis humani generis; or
         2. at extreme risk of absconding; or
         3. at extreme risk of endangering the safety or welfare of any member of the public; or
         4. at extreme risk of self-harm;
         5. charged by a WA state with an offence pursuant to aut dedere aut judicare;
      2. The suspect has a demonstrable track record of:
         
         1. repeatedly failing to meet all conditions of bail determined by a court;
         2. attempt(s) to interfering with witnesses or otherwise obstructing the course of justice;
   4. A court, if it chooses to impose conditions on bail, to consider restrictions on conduct of the suspect over the imposition of pledges of item of monetary value (hereafter,"cash bail") unless the court deems it strictly absolutely necessary to impose cash bail;
3. Requires a court, if it chooses to impose the following restrictions of conduct, shall consider the following mitigating factors:
   
   1. If it chooses to require regular reporting to legal enforcement officers (such as to police stations), to consider if a suspect is capable of making such regular trips (for physical or financial reasons);
   2. If it requires residing at a particular address within that WA state, to ensure suitable accommodation is available for the suspect;
   3. If it restricts movements, such as curfews or travel to particular locations (or not to travel outside the WA state), if it affects the employment of the suspect or if the suspect has other mitigating personal or family circumstances;
4. Requires a court, if it decides to impose cash bail, shall:
   
   1. Ensure that it is used only if the court deems the suspect to be extremely likely to abscond and has the means and incentives to do so; and
   2. Satisfy itself that restrictions of conduct to be grossly inadequate for the purpose of bail; and
   3. Satisfy itself that the amount of cash bail should reflect the financial circumstances of the suspect and which should be:
      
      1. deemed sufficient to deter the suspect from absconding; and
      2. plausible for the suspect to raise the funds necessary without facing financial ruin; and
      3. not exceeding the maximum penalty and/or restitution required if the suspect is convicted and all appeals exhausted;
   4. Inform the suspect of the cheapest means to raise such funds, such as through non-profit organizations, if the WA state permits cash bail and permits bail funds to be raised via commercial means;
   5. Inform the suspect, if the suspect is a citizen of another state, to potentially seek assistance from that other state to help fund the cash bail;
5. If a suspect that utilized commercial means to raise funds for bail is acquitted (or vacated) of the offence(s), the full commercial cost of the bail should be compensated for;
   
6. Directs a court:
   
   1. To apply leniency in granting bail towards anyone charged for a first-time alleged offence, or for crimes that are not violent in nature;
   2. To not revoke bail unless due to extreme changes in circumstances, such as if the suspect is duly convicted of another offence when out on bail;
   3. To consider mandatory treatment in lieu of denying bail in the case of clause (2)(a)(i)(4);
7. Deems it an offence for anyone:
   
   1. In a capacity as law enforcement officer or as a prosecutor to offer bail conditions as part of a plea-bargain;
   2. To coerce or entice a suspect into declining to apply for bail;
8. Clarifies that:
   
   1. Nothing in this resolution prohibits a suspect from voluntarily declining to apply for bail for any reason;
   2. Nothing in this resolution prohibits a WA state from banning cash bail altogether;
   3. The judiciary of the WA state is responsible for interpretation of this resolution.

Draft 2

The World Assembly (WA),

Noting that the right to a fair trial and due process have been long-standing matters of interest to the esteemed assembly;

Recognizing that no regulations govern bail arrangements, especially excessive cash bail that discriminates against the poor;

1. Defines:
   
   
   1. “Bail” to mean the pledge of cash or items of monetary value or restrictions on the conduct of a suspect in return for releasing a suspect from custody prior to a hearing, which may be forfeited if a suspect fails to return to court for a hearing;
   2. “Charges” to mean any serious criminal offences for which a suspect has been charged with committing;
   3. “Court” to mean a court adjudicating on criminal matters pursuant to the constitution (codified or otherwise) of the WA state where the suspect is facing the charges;
   4. “Hearing” to mean a court hearing, including pre-trial proceedings, trials, and appeals;
   5. “Suspect” to mean any individual facing charges, or who has been convicted but has not exhausted all appeals, according to the judicial process of a WA state;
2. Requires:
   
   1. No suspect may be denied bail by a court unless the suspect is found to have a prima facie case to answer and/or is indicted (as the case maybe) and also satisfies at least one of the conditions in clause (2)(a)(i) or (2)(a)(ii):
      
      1. The suspect is deemed by WA resolutions and/or the court to be:
         
         1. hostis humani generis; or
         2. at extreme risk of absconding; or
         3. at extreme risk of endangering the safety or welfare of any member of the public; or
         4. at extreme risk of self-harm;
         5. charged by a WA state with an offence pursuant to aut dedere aut judicare;
      2. The suspect has a demonstrable track record of:
         
         1. repeatedly failing to meet all conditions of bail determined by a court;
         2. attempt(s) to interfering with witnesses or otherwise obstructing the course of justice;
   2. A court, if it chooses to impose conditions on bail, to consider restrictions on conduct of the suspect over the imposition of pledges of item of monetary value (hereafter,"cash bail") unless the court deems it strictly absolutely necessary to impose cash bail;
3. Requires a court, if it chooses to impose the following restrictions of conduct, to consider the following mitigating factors:
   
   1. If it chooses to require regular reporting to legal enforcement officers (such as to police stations), to consider if a suspect is capable of making such regular trips (for physical or financial reasons);
   2. If it requires residing at a particular address within that WA state, to ensure suitable accommodation is available for the suspect;
   3. If it restricts movements, such as curfews or travel to particular locations (or not to travel outside the WA state), if it affects the employment of the suspect or if the suspect has other mitigating personal or family circumstances;
4. Requires a court, if it decides to impose cash bail, to:
   
   1. Ensure that it is used only if the court deems the suspect to be extremely likely to abscond and has the means and incentives to do so; and
   2. Satisfy itself that restrictions of conduct to be grossly inadequate for the purpose of bail; and
   3. Satisfy itself that the amount of cash bail should reflect the financial circumstances of the suspect and which should be:
      
      1. deemed sufficient to deter the suspect from absconding; and
      2. plausible for the suspect to raise the funds necessary without facing financial ruin; and
      3. not exceeding the maximum penalty and/or restitution required if the suspect is convicted and all appeals exhausted;
   4. Inform the suspect of the cheapest means to raise such funds, such as through non-profit organizations, if the WA state permits cash bail and permits bail funds to be raised via commercial means;
   5. Inform the suspect, if the suspect is a citizen of another state, to potentially seek assistance from that other state to help fund the cash bail;
5. If a suspect that utilized commercial means to raise funds for bail is acquitted (or vacated) of the offence(s), the full commercial cost of the bail should be compensated for;
   
6. Directs a court:
   
   1. To apply leniency in granting bail towards anyone charged for a first-time alleged offence, or for crimes that are not violent in nature;
   2. To not revoke bail unless due to extreme changes in circumstances, such as if the suspect is duly convicted of another offence when out on bail;
   3. To consider mandatory treatment in lieu of denying bail in the case of clause (2)(a)(i)(4);
7. Deems it an offence for anyone:
   
   1. In a capacity as law enforcement officer or as a prosecutor to offer bail conditions as part of a plea-bargain;
   2. To coerce or entice a suspect into declining to apply for bail;
8. Clarifies that:
   
   1. Nothing in this resolution prohibits a suspect from voluntarily declining to apply for bail for any reason;
   2. Nothing in this resolution prohibits a WA state from banning cash bail altogether;
   3. The judiciary of the WA state is responsible for interpretation of this resolution.

Char count: 4,812

Draft 1

The World Assembly (WA),

Noting that the right to a fair trial and due process have been long-standing matters of interest to the esteemed assembly;

Recognizing that no regulations govern bail arrangements, especially excessive cash bail that discriminates against the poor;

Hererby defines:
“Bail” to mean the pledge of either items of monetary value and/or conduct of the suspect in return for releasing a suspect from custody prior to a hearing, which may be forfeited if a suspect fails to return to court for a hearing;
“Charges” to mean any felony offences for which a suspect has been charged with committing;
“Court” means a court adjudicating on criminal matters pursuant to the constitution (codified or otherwise) of the WA state where the suspect is facing the charges;
“Hearing” means a court hearing, including pre-trial proceedings, trials, and appeals;
“Suspect” means any individual facing charges, and/or who has been convicted but has not exhausted all appeals, according to the judicial process of a WA state;
Hereby requires:
No suspect may be denied bail by a court unless the suspect is found to have a prima facie case to answer and/or is indicted (as the case maybe) and in addition satisfies at least one of the conditions specified in clause (2)(a)(i) and/or (2)(a)(ii):
The suspect is deemed by WA resolutions and/or the court to be:
hostis humani generis; and/or
at extreme risk of absconding;
at extreme risk of endangering the safety or welfare of any member of the public, including anyone perceived to have been harmed by the suspect under the terms of the applicable charges;
at extreme risk of self-harm, as verified by at least two competent and independent professionals appointed by the court;
The suspect has a track record of:
repeatedly failing to meet all conditions of bail determined by a court;
attempt(s) to (or convicted of the offences of) interfering with witnesses or otherwise obstructing the course of justice;
Hereby grants discretion to a court to set the conditions of bail, including:
Pledge of items of monetary value such as cash, indemnities and/or physical property of value (hereafter, for convenience, “cash bail”) and/or
Conduct of the suspect, such as (merely as examples):
Reporting to legal enforcement officers (such as to police stations) on a regular basis;
Residing at a particular address within that WA state;
Restrictions on movements, such as curfews, travel to distant areas or travel to particular locations)
Not contacting specified persons, such as the alleged victims under the charges;
Surrendering all passports heled by the suspect;
Attending rehabilitation programs for addiction of recreational or prescription drugs;
If cash bail is imposed:
Excessive bail shall never be required;
Bail shall be calculated to take into account the financial circumstances of the suspect which shall be:
sufficient to deter the suspect from absconding; and
plausible for the suspect to raise the funds necessary but short of financial ruin in the event the suspect is found not guilty of the charges; and
not exceeding the maximum penalty and/or restitution required if the suspect is convicted and all appeals exhausted;
If the WA state permits bail funds to be raised via commercial means, a court should make the suspect aware of the cheapest means to raise such funds, such as through non-profit organizations;
If the suspect is a citizen of another WA state, a court should make the suspect aware of the potential for the other WA state to provide a guarantee and/or funds in lieu of cash bail, at the discretion of that other WA state;
Hereby deems it an offence for anyone:
In a capacity as law enforcement officer or as a prosecutor to offer bail conditions as part of a plea-bargain agreement;
To coerce or entice a suspect into declining to apply for bail;
Hereby clarifies that:
Nothing in this resolution prohibits a suspect from voluntarily (and not coerced into) declining to apply for bail for any reason.
The judiciary of the relevant WA state is responsible for interpretation of this resolution.

[States of Glory WA Office]

“Charges” to mean any felony offences for which a suspect has been charged with committing;

Neville: 'What is a "felony", Ambassador?' (OOC: Not every nation is the United States!)

The suspect is deemed by WA resolutions and/or the court to be:

1. hostis humani generis

Neville: 'You mean pirates and the like? This is not a term that the WA has used before to my knowledge.'

Hereby grants discretion to a court to set the conditions of bail, including:

1. Pledge of items of monetary value such as cash, indemnities and/or physical property of value (hereafter, for convenience, “cash bail”)

Neville: 'Opposed. Cash bail is an abhorrent practice that disproportionately targets the poor while the rich reap the benefits, and we cannot condone any proposal that would seal the right to implement cash bail into international law.'

Surrendering all passports heled by the suspect;

Neville: ''Held', Ambassador.'

If cash bail is imposed:

1. Excessive bail shall never be required;

Neville: (rolls eyes) 'Well, that's not ripe for abuse at all! It's also completely superfluous as the very next clause places more specific limits anyway.'

[The Ice States]

"We are strongly opposed as long as Section 3a remains in the draft. In capitalist nations, membership of the bourgeoise or otherwise being rich should not be a requirement to not be detained. The ambassador of States of Glory largely summarises our thoughts. We would prefer that the World Assembly reserve the power to restrict or ban such conditions, rather than even partially leaving them up to courts."

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

[Attempted Socialism]

The sheer amount of work-around that you have to do to regulate bail suggests to me that a ban is both easier and more appropriate.

[Simone Republic]

The sheer amount of work-around that you have to do to regulate bail suggests to me that a ban is both easier and more appropriate.

I guess this ultimately depends on what GA want. Do they want an American system where commercial bond companies pay courts, and then the defendants pay them? Or do they go for a European system without bail bonds? The UK has largely scrapped it in favour of electronic tagging.

[States of Glory WA Office]

The sheer amount of work-around that you have to do to regulate bail suggests to me that a ban is both easier and more appropriate.

I guess this ultimately depends on what GA want. Do they want an American system where commercial bond companies pay courts, and then the defendants pay them? Or do they go for a European system without bail bonds? The UK has largely scrapped it in favour of electronic tagging.

OOC: If you simply must allow for cash bail, would it at least be possible to prohibit the commercialisation of bail bonds that we see in the United States?

[Simone Republic]

I guess this ultimately depends on what GA want. Do they want an American system where commercial bond companies pay courts, and then the defendants pay them? Or do they go for a European system without bail bonds? The UK has largely scrapped it in favour of electronic tagging.

OOC: If you simply must allow for cash bail, would it at least be possible to prohibit the commercialisation of bail bonds that we see in the United States?

I am not actually saying that I must allow cash bail. I personally dislike the bail industry and I know that Britain no longer really requires cash bail. (GBP15 million was the highest recent one I think.) I am trying to gauge interest in banning cash bail altogether.

My draft is actually more motivated by Japan where bail is rarely granted.

[Imperium Anglorum]

"Or" means "and/or". Just use "or".

I'd also note that cash bail is returned after meeting some conditions; the government does not keep it unless the bailed person absconds. That's why it's a guarantee. The existence of bail bondsmen indicates liquidity constraint; the high costs of borrowing indicate unreliability of repayment. If you just abolished borrowing for bail payments it punishes illiquid people. The more wealthy are not affected inasmuch as they can borrow by other means.

I would include denial of bail if someone were to commit crimes on bail. See Bail Act 1976 sch 1(2)(c).

[Simone Republic]

"Or" means "and/or". Just use "or".

Changed. There are a few that I kept in case I want the sentence to read that "A and/or B" might mean "A and B" rather than "either A or B".

I'd also note that cash bail is returned after meeting some conditions; the government does not keep it unless the bailed person absconds. That's why it's a guarantee. The existence of bail bondsmen indicates liquidity constraint; the high costs of borrowing indicate unreliability of repayment. If you just abolished borrowing for bail payments it punishes illiquid people. The more wealthy are not affected inasmuch as they can borrow by other means.

I don't plan to abolish borrowing but I am allowing that:

1. The bail should be "reasonably" within the financial means of that person, depending on the circumstances. For someone employed on $15 an hour, perhaps $500 - for obvious reasons I don't specify the amount due to how the multi-verse works - according to a recent report, 57% of Americans can’t afford a $1,000 emergency expense.

2. Absconding is an extremely expensive exercise, so I generally don't believe I need to impose too high a burden. Kim Dotcom (New Zealand) spent millions and millions.

I would include denial of bail if someone were to commit crimes on bail. See Bail Act 1976 sch 1(2)(c).

If convicted, this is added. I just say "may be denied" as that depends I think too much on the seriousness of the offence and I'd leave that to court discretion.

[Simone Republic]

If cash bail is imposed:

1. Excessive bail shall never be required;

Neville: (rolls eyes) 'Well, that's not ripe for abuse at all! It's also completely superfluous as the very next clause places more specific limits anyway.'

That was actually a direct quote from the Eighth Amendment, but anyway.

Bump. I made some minor edits but overall have not changed the numbering of the draft.

The conditions of cash bail have been tightened considerably and there is now a requirement for the court to consider using other means first and only use cash bail as a last resort.

[Sierra Lyricalia]

"In 4(iv), 'for' is quite sufficient. I would remove everything past that point in the clause."

[Simone Republic]

"In 4(iv), 'for' is quite sufficient. I would remove everything past that point in the clause."

Done. Thanks

I have also renumbered it to conform to the 1ai1 convention. So that clause is now 4(d)

[Simone Republic]

Bump on the new edition of the World Assembly branded bumper made by Simone Republic

I have made some wording changes that makes it harder for cash bail to be imposed

[Simone Republic]

Bumpy bumpy

[States of Glory WA Office]

Requires that:

1. No suspect may be denied bail by a court unless the suspect is found to have a prima facie case to answer and/or is indicted (as the case maybe may be) and also satisfies at least one of the conditions in clause (2)(a)(i) or (2)(a)(ii):
   
   1. The suspect is deemed by WA resolutions and/or the court to be:
      
      1. hostis humani generis; or
      2. at extreme risk of absconding; or
      3. at extreme risk of endangering the safety or welfare of any member of the public; or
      4. at extreme risk of self-harm;
      5. charged by a WA state with an offence pursuant to aut dedere aut judicare;
   2. The suspect has a demonstrable track record of:
      
      1. repeatedly failing to meet all conditions of bail determined by a court;
      2. attempt(s) to interfering with witnesses or otherwise obstructing the course of justice;
2. A court, if it chooses to impose conditions on bail, to shall consider restrictions on conduct of the suspect over the imposition of pledges of item of monetary value (hereafter,"cash bail") unless the court deems it strictly absolutely necessary to impose cash bail;

Neville: We have made a few modifications for grammatical reasons.

If a suspect that utilized commercial means to raise funds for bail is acquitted (or vacated) of the offence(s), the full commercial cost of the bail should be compensated for;

Neville: The passive voice is to be avoided in resolutions.

[Simone Republic]

Bump.

[States of Glory WA Office]

Neville: Clause 2d currently reads 'Requires that no suspect may be denied bail by a court unless...A court, if it chooses to impose conditions on bail, to consider restrictions on conduct of the suspect over the imposition of pledges of item of monetary value (hereafter,"cash bail") unless the court deems it strictly absolutely necessary to impose cash bail'. I think mentioning the word 'court' three times is a little overkill.

[Simone Republic]

(IC)

Bump on the official World Assembly Bumper

I am sticking to permitting cash bonds since Donald Trump used a commercial bonds provider for the Georgia case, but it has been restricted severely to "serious" cases (I didn't use the word "felony") and only if restrictions on conduct are deemed insufficient.

Obviously a court can refuse bail altogether and make this moot, but I consider that worse.

There is some simplification of the definition of bail and cash bail to simplify the resolution a bit.

The following text regarding restrictions of conduct has been removed for character count reasons:

[*]Hereby requires a court, if it chooses to impose the following restrictions of conduct, to consider the following mitigating factors:

1. If it chooses to require regular reporting to legal enforcement officers (such as to police stations), to consider if a suspect is capable of making such regular trips (for physical or financial reasons);
2. If it requires residing at a particular address within that WA state, to ensure suitable accommodation is available for the suspect;
3. If it restricts movements, such as curfews or travel to particular locations (or not to travel outside the WA state), if it affects the employment of the suspect or if the suspect has other mitigating personal or family circumstances;

[Youtube Inc]

Well written, as usual.
I personally think bail is pretty dumb as a concept but that's just an opinion this is a really good proposal.
Y'all take notes please

[Shamian]

Shamian will be voting *Against* this proposal, on the basis that nations which do not currently utilise a bail system will be forced to adopt the concept should this proposal pass - regardless of whether it is compatible with their legal system or not.

As there are far better ways of dealing with the situation than extortion of monies/bonds from the accused, forcing nations to completely change their legal framework to accommodate such an archaic concept is a regressive move by the WA.

[Kaprein]

Shamian will be voting *Against* this proposal, on the basis that nations which do not currently utilise a bail system will be forced to adopt the concept should this proposal pass - regardless of whether it is compatible with their legal system or not.

As there are far better ways of dealing with the situation than extortion of monies/bonds from the accused, forcing nations to completely change their legal framework to accommodate such an archaic concept is a regressive move by the WA.

Article 8b of the resolution states that this resolution does not "Prohibit a WA state from restricting or banning cash bail (or commercial forms of cash bail) altogether;". This resolution only affects WA members who already have a system of cash bail in place. If a nation does not use cash bail, this resolution is irrelevant to them, due to that article.

Harry Adler, Permanent Representative of Kaprein to the World Assembly

[Zestsrealia]

Section 2-c-i-3-iii is a little too vague for our liking, who makes such determinations. Not to mention in the Bill of Rights for the United Socialist States of Zestsrealia, we deal with bail in section VIII and IX, and we are afraid that our very Constitution would come into conflict with the Bill before the General Assembly. Please could anyone address these concerns?



Regards,
Damian E. Robbins
General Secretary of the United Socialist and Syndicalist Party of Zestsrealia
Premier of the United Socialist States of Zestsrealia

[Simone Republic]

Section 2-c-i-3-iii is a little too vague for our liking, who makes such determinations. Not to mention in the Bill of Rights for the United Socialist States of Zestsrealia, we deal with bail in section VIII and IX, and we are afraid that our very Constitution would come into conflict with the Bill before the General Assembly. Please could anyone address these concerns?

2(C)(I)(3)(III) is pursuant to 2(C)(I) also determined by the court.

Sorry can you quote back which part of your constitution is an issue?

[Zestsrealia]

Section 2-c-i-3-iii is a little too vague for our liking, who makes such determinations. Not to mention in the Bill of Rights for the United Socialist States of Zestsrealia, we deal with bail in section VIII and IX, and we are afraid that our very Constitution would come into conflict with the Bill before the General Assembly. Please could anyone address these concerns?

2(C)(I)(3)(III) is pursuant to 2(C)(I) also determined by the court.

Sorry can you quote back which part of your constitution is an issue?

c. the suspect satisfies at least one of the conditions in the following sub-clauses:

i. The suspect is deemed by the court to be:

1. hostis humani generis;

2. charged by that WA state with an offence pursuant to aut dedere aut judicare; or

3. at extreme risk of:

i. absconding;

ii. self-harm;

iii. endangering the safety or welfare of anyone else; or (This last point is the issue, by welfare do you just mean physical threats of violence, economic, psychological? And who makes that determination, and can individual WA nations draw up their own laws to make such determinations, or will that be dictated by the General Assembly of the WA?)