NationStates

Motivation

This is to repeal GA136, which was one of the original repeals that Cretox State proposed. As mentioned several times on the WALL discord and the TNP MoWAA discord, I have permission to re-use Cretox's drafts.

Cretox's original draft is below:
viewtopic.php?f=9&t=536122

Note that I am doing a semi-replacement, "Coroners' Inquest and Proof of Death Procedures"
viewtopic.php?f=9&t=547171

There's also a semi-replacement where recovery is mentioned:
viewtopic.php?f=9&t=549521

Certain parts of GA136 have already been superseded by GA703 (Consular Protection Arrangements). The first replacement inserts the WA into war between two warring WA states to extract the dead from a warzone.

The replacement focuses more on making sure that deaths include death certificates even if from foreign countries (and even if the countries are at war) to make it easier to sort out probate and inheritance matters, but it does also grant permission for PASA to handle death related administrative matters in the event of war.

Revised Draft 2

The World Assembly (WA),

Commending the body of existing WA law that seeks to make armed conflict more humane and less crushingly deleterious to those civilians who find themselves caught between opposing armed forces;

Believing that when it comes to handling the dead in times of war, the WA ought to either regulate the subject competently (say ensuring the repatriation of dead bodies, through any means necessary) or not regulate it at all;

Concerned that GA 136 "Convention on Wartime Deceased" is far too vague and sloppily written to actually ensure respect for the dead, through:

1. demanding "that states take appropriate measures to prevent the desecration of deceased civilians, military personnel, and any others who may fall on the field of battle" without actually defining what an "appropriate measure" is, and
2. prohibiting "the needless dismembering of deceased combatants on the field of battle" without actually defining what "needless dismembering" is;

Annoyed that this poor language extends to the target's nonbinding clauses as well, through:

1. recommending "that appropriate measures be taken to ensure the repatriation of the deceased to their nation of origin" without defining what makes a measure "appropriate," and
2. suggesting "that nations make provisions for the proper burial or other post-death rituals" without defining how extensive these provisions should be;

Frustrated that the target's prohibition of "needless dismembering" and definition of desecration "as the act of defiling, profaning, or otherwise mutilating and causing undue trauma" potentially includes ritual burials entirely in line with a nation's customs, as well as voluntary organ donations and the like;

Confused as to why a resolution espousing respect for national customs would go ahead and try to override those customs, and;

Noting that this body already protects civilians during wartime from the worst excesses of armed conflict that affect them when they're actually alive, through well-written resolutions such as GA 317 "Wartime Looting and Pillage" and GA 703 "Consular Protection Arrangements", and that further resolutions on administration matters for the deceased are in progress in the WA;

Hereby repeals GA 136, "Convention on Wartime Deceased."

Co-author: Cretox State

Support regardless of actual text.

Bump for further feedback before this goes to submission.

On and off this draft has been around since June 2023 and there doesn't seem to be much feedback.

Cretox is now attributed as a co-author as per the new branding rule.

Simone Republic wrote:Aware of the nature of war as an often-necessary evil, but an evil nevertheless;

"Describing war as 'necessary' is a non-starter to the Democratic Stellar Union, and we will oppose any repeal with this language."

Puzzled at what exactly the target means when it "CONDEMNS" those who engage in desecration of the dead on the field of battle;

"We read the clause as a direct criticism of entities which violate the resolution, and therefore not adding any new policy. We do not see how this is a problem, and therefore view this specific argument as a weak one."

Starman of Stardust wrote:

Simone Republic wrote:Aware of the nature of war as an often-necessary evil, but an evil nevertheless;

"Describing war as 'necessary' is a non-starter to the Democratic Stellar Union, and we will oppose any repeal with this language."

Puzzled at what exactly the target means when it "CONDEMNS" those who engage in desecration of the dead on the field of battle;

"We read the clause as a direct criticism of entities which violate the resolution, and therefore not adding any new policy. We do not see how this is a problem, and therefore view this specific argument as a weak one."

(OOC)

Both lines have been axed as they were from Cretox.

(IC)

"War is necessary and not even evil," says a bear, eating its fourth wolf in the Assembly raw.

"Barfleur respectfully opposes this proposal. I find that 'needless dismembering,' when read in connection with the definition of desecration, adequately protects genuine cultural and medical practices, while properly condemning the intentional mistreatment of the deceased. 'Appropriate' simply means necessary and proportionate, and we find that associated repeal argument to be unconvincing. In short, any flaws in GA#136 simply do not rise to the level of warranting repeal."