[DRAFT] Commission on Universal Rights and Treatment

[Ubertas]

This proposal was formerly the International Court of Justice. It has now been revamped and changed in accordance with concerns and suggestions from the broader community!!
This proposal has shifted its focus from being an international arbitration/court-like body to a commission under the WA dedicated to analyzing incidents and offering solutions and potential direction to the international community to work toward achieving. Things are being slowly overhauled to bear with us!

Commission to Organize Universal Rights & Treatment
Proposed by: Ubertas
Co Authors: MLGDogeland & Gudetama

The World Assembly,

Reflecting that throughout the course of history, numerous grave instances have transpired where rights have been breached, injustices have occurred, and serious crimes have been committed;

Believing that the establishment of an international body based on collective action and shared sentiments of justice can ameliorate or prevent the repetition of such actions;

Upholding that the rulings of such a forum will respect the rights, governments, liberties, and domestic policy choices of all members not explicitly ceded to this body; therefore;

This body establishes that:

1. Definitions
   
   1. A "Breach of International Conduct" is behavior consisting of one or more of the following actions:
      
      1. Systematic persecution of an individual or group due to their possession of characteristics defined as protected, such as: skin color, physical characteristics, mental characteristics, religious beliefs, sexual orientation, cultural heritage, or ethnic identity.
      2. Actions defined as war crimes.
      3. Actions where nation(s) or people(s) egregiously infringes on the sovereignty and basic rights of other nation(s) or people(s).
   2. An "Impossible Amelioration of Justice" is a condition where there is a credible lack of infrastructure, will, or due process to deliver swift and commensurate justice to plaintiffs subjected to perceived extraordinary and/or irreparable damage or Breach of International Conduct.
2. The Commission
   
   1. The Commission to Organize Universal Rights & Treatment (hereafter COURT) shall be established as a forum to listen and bring reconciliation to events meeting the Standard of Purview.
3. Standard of Purview
   
   1. The COURT shall only deliberate on instances of a Breach of International Conduct or where there is an Impossible Amelioration of Justice. The determination of whether such an event meets these standards shall be made based on the appropriate World Assembly resolution(s) when applicable or, in the absence thereof, the COURT itself.
      
   2. Member states or victims of a Breach of International Conduct or Impossible Amelioration of Justice may bring cases before the COURT as plaintiffs, or the COURT itself may choose to take up cases by direct petition.
      
   3. Should General Assembly legislation change policies in a way that contradicts past recommendations, plaintiffs, victims, or those accused by the latter may ask the COURT for reassessment of recommendations and/or have the case re-heard.
4. Procedure
   
   1. Member states may participate in, send, or rescind members to the COURT, as determined by their internal procedures.
      
   2. The COURT shall define its own procedures, conduct of participants, and case management systems.
5. Recommendations & Enactment
   
   1. The COURT may recommend, based on the facts of the events, reconciliation, reforms, and collective actions to the international community and coordinate with them to ensure their enactment. These must respect the sovereignty and reserved powers prescribed by the General Assembly, while still delivering appropriate justice.
   2. Member states may consent to coordinate to adopt, implement, enforce, and abide by the recommendations through individual voluntary political, diplomatic, military, economic, legal, or law enforcement measures.

Edit History Moved

[Jiangbei]

The Committee on Justice & International Law shall have one member per member state, alongside their legal officials, aides, judges, private citizens, and governmental personnel.

Slightly ambiguous on what a member means here, is it a particular delegate, or is it just like, each WA member state is also a member of the committee? May also add a clarification it's one vote per member state.

5. The definition of the enumerated categories in Five (5) are subject to interpretation by future GA resolutions, ICJ Justices.

looks like you meant Category 4 not 5

Members may choose to freely disagree with their interpretations as their cultural, political, and domestic affairs dictate.

What does this even mean, can I disagree with your definition of genocide, and what does that do? Does it change anything about how the ICJ charges people with crimes? Or is it just that you can say you disagree but it doesn't change anything?

[Ubertas]

Comments addressed, due to character constraints on the OP I have continued the edit chain here:

Edit History:

1) Addressed Jiangbei's concerns.

The World Assembly,

Understanding that cases of extreme injustice, malicious action, and heinous crimes occasionally may require the coordinated action of member states;

Upholding that the rulings of such a forum will respect the rights, governments, liberties, and domestic policy choices of all members not explicitly ceded to this body; therefore;

This body establishes that:

1. An International Court of Justice (hereafter ICJ), an august body comprised of 9 individuals, serving for 6 years, who:
May be impeached, tried, and removed by a vote from the wider GA for high crimes and misdemeanours as deemed by the General Assembly.
Shall be elected by a Committee on Justice & International Law (hereafter CJIL) from consenting member nations
May pass judgements and opinions by majority vote.

2. Member states may send or rescind members to the CJIL, as determined by their own internal procedures.

3. The Committee on Justice & International Law shall have one member per member state, alongside their legal officials, aides, judges, private citizens, and governmental personnel.

4. The ICJ is empowered to take up and rule upon cases involving:
Genocide
High Crimes Against Sentient Beings
War Crimes

5. The definition of the enumerated categories in Five (5) are subject to interpretation by future GA resolutions, ICJ Justices, and members may choose to freely disagree with their interpretations as their cultural, political, and domestic affairs dictate.

6. The ICJ may recommend punishments, reforms, and collective actions taken to ameliorate the perceived injustice.

7. Member States may, of their own accord and through individual voluntary political, diplomatic, military, economic, legal, or law enforcement measures:
Coordinate to adopt, implement, enforce, and abide by the rulings and recommendations of the ICJ.


2) Addressed Rovhania concerns.

The World Assembly,

Understanding that cases of extreme injustice, malicious action, and heinous crimes occasionally may require the coordinated action of member states;

Acknowledging that while national sovereignty must be respected, widespread perceived failings of the native judicial system, internal policies, or incidents occurring in but not limited to a given nation's border may affect persons beyond their place of occurrence and require a transnational, third-party arbitration;

Upholding that the rulings of such a forum will respect the rights, governments, liberties, and domestic policy choices of all members not explicitly ceded to this body; therefore;

This august body establishes that:

1. An International Court of Justice (hereafter ICJ), an august body comprised of 9 individuals, serving for 6 years, who:
May be impeached, tried, and removed by a vote from the wider GA for high crimes and misdemeanours as deemed by the General Assembly.
Shall be elected by a Committee on Justice & International Law (hereafter CJIL) from consenting member nations
May pass judgements and opinions by majority vote.
Define its procedures of conduct and case management systems

2. Member states may send or rescind members to the CJIL, as determined by their own internal procedures.

3. The Committee on Justice & International Law shall have one member per member state, alongside their legal officials, aides, judges, private citizens, and governmental personnel. The Committee moreover shall:
Determine the standards and procedures for drafting articles of impeachment and removal against a Justice.
Reccomend cases to the ICJ, by their own internally defined procedures.
Determine the benefits, immunities, and ethics of the ICJ

4. Members of the CJIL may reccomend cases to the ICJ, or the ICJ itself may choose to take up cases by direct petition. The ICJ is empowered to take up and rule upon cases involving:
Genocide
High Crimes Against Sentient Beings
War Crimes

5. The definition of the enumerated categories in Five (5) are subject to interpretation by future GA resolutions, ICJ Justices, and members may choose to freely disagree with their interpretations as their cultural, political, and domestic affairs dictate.

6. The ICJ may recommend punishments, reforms, and collective actions taken to ameliorate the perceived injustice.

7. Member States may, of their own accord and through individual voluntary political, diplomatic, military, economic, legal, or law enforcement measures:
Coordinate to adopt, implement, enforce, and abide by the rulings and recommendations of the ICJ.

8. The General Assembly as a whole reserves the right to be able to further legislate on certain elements not mentioned in the proposal.[/list]


3) Addressed Rovhania and Kophee concerns.

The World Assembly,

Understanding that cases of extreme injustice, malicious action, and heinous crimes occasionally may require the coordinated action of member states;

Acknowledging that while national sovereignty must be respected, widespread perceived failings of the native judicial system, internal policies, or incidents occurring in but not limited to a given nation's border may affect persons beyond their place of occurrence and require a transnational, third-party arbitration;

Reflecting that throughout the course of history, grave and irregular instances recognized by numerous nations and peoples of the world, where morals were breached, injustices of the greatest magnitude occurred, and the highest of crimes were committed;

Believing that the establishment of an international body based on collective action, shared sentiments of justice, and common morals can ameliorate or prevent the repetition of such actions;

Upholding that the rulings of such a forum will respect the rights, governments, liberties, and domestic policy choices of all members not explicitly ceded to this body; therefore;

This august body establishes that:

1. An International Court of Justice (hereafter ICJ), an august body comprised of 9 individuals, serving for 6 years, who:
May be impeached, tried, and removed by a vote from the wider GA for high crimes and misdemeanours as deemed by the General Assembly.
Shall be elected by a Committee on Justice & International Law (hereafter CJIL) from consenting member nations
May pass judgements and opinions by majority vote.
Define its procedures of conduct and case management systems

2. Member states may send or rescind members to the CJIL, as determined by their own internal procedures.

3. The Committee on Justice & International Law shall have one member per member state, alongside their legal officials, aides, judges, private citizens, and governmental personnel. The Committee moreover shall:
Determine the standards and procedures for drafting articles of impeachment and removal against a Justice.
Reccomend cases to the ICJ, by their own internally defined procedures.
Determine the benefits, immunities, and ethics of the ICJ

4. Members of the CJIL, private entities, or non-participating states may reccomend cases to the ICJ, or the ICJ itself may choose to take up cases by direct petition. Such cases must fall under the instances described in Five (5) or Six (6).

5. The ICJ is empowered to take up and rule upon cases involving instances it deems as High Crimes, the standard of which charges must meet at the court's discretion to be taken up. The court may deem one or more of the following true, and thereby deem a case an instance of a possible High Crime:
A person or collective of persons that are deemed conscious and sentient persons inflict systematic, undue, and irregular loss of life, trauma, violations against another person or group of persons based on their skin color, physical characteristics, mental characteristics, religious belief, national identity, ethnic identity, or place of origin. These shall be defined and determined as accepted by World Assembly resolution when applicable or, in the absence thereof, the ICJ's judgement itself.
Undertook actions of serious unjust or immoral conduct during armed conflict or war crimes, as defined and determined as accepted by World Assembly resolution when applicable or, in the absence thereof, the ICJ's judgement itself.
An action or actions by a person or group of persons that result in grave violations of morality, justice, and the collective benefit of all the nations, individuals, persons, or species of the world.

5. In instances where there is "Impossible Amelioration of Justice", the ICJ may be empowered to pass judgment. The standard such charges must meet at the court's discretion to be taken up. The court may deem one or more of the following true, and thereby deem a case an instance of Impossible Amelioration of Justice:
There credibly lacks resources, infrastructure, or due process to deliver swift and immediate justice to persons subjected to events that negatively affect an individual or individuals.
The polity(s) or geographic location(s) in which a grave and serious breach of morals, justice, or World Assembly law occurs are unwilling or unable to carry out justice, as determined by their national laws and procedures.

6. The definition of the enumerated standards and definiaitons are subject to interpretation by future GA resolutions and ICJ Justices. Members may choose to freely disagree with their interpretations as their cultural, political, and domestic affairs dictate.

7. The ICJ may recommend punishments, reforms, and collective actions taken to ameliorate the perceived injustice.

8. Member States may, of their own accord and through individual voluntary political, diplomatic, military, economic, legal, or law enforcement measures:
Coordinate to adopt, implement, enforce, and abide by the rulings and recommendations of the ICJ.

4) Addressed Rovhania concerns again

The World Assembly,

Understanding that cases of extreme injustice, malicious action, and heinous crimes occasionally may require the coordinated action of member states;

Acknowledging that while national sovereignty must be respected, widespread perceived failings of the native judicial system, internal policies, or incidents occurring in but not limited to a given nation's border may affect persons beyond their place of occurrence and require a transnational, third-party arbitration;

Reflecting that throughout the course of history, grave and irregular instances recognized by numerous nations and peoples of the world, where morals were breached, injustices of the greatest magnitude occurred, and the highest of crimes were committed;

Believing that the establishment of an international body based on collective action, shared sentiments of justice, and common morals can ameliorate or prevent the repetition of such actions;

Upholding that the rulings of such a forum will respect the rights, governments, liberties, and domestic policy choices of all members not explicitly ceded to this body; therefore;

This august body establishes that:

I. Definitions

1. A "Person", for the purposes of jurisdiction under this resolution is a living, sentient, conscious, self-aware being as recognized by itself and other individuals or collective individuals.

2. A "Plaintiff" for the purposes of jurisdiction under this resolution,is any Member State, private entity, non-participating state, or member of the Committee on Justice & International Law (hereafter CJIL) that brings a case, complaint, or petition before the body established under Section II of this resolution.

3. A "Victim" for the purposes of jurisdiction under this resolution, is any Person, collective of Persons, or polity that has suffered loss of life, trauma, or violation of rights as a result of conduct falling under the definition of a Crime in this resolution.

4. A "Crime" for the purposes of jurisdiction under this resolution is conduct meeting the standard of a High Crime, as defined below, or conduct occurring under conditions of Impossible Amelioration of Justice, as defined below.

5. A "High Crime" is conduct meeting one or more of the following standards, the determination of which shall be made at the discretion of the body established under Section II:
A Person or collective of Persons inflict systematic, undue, and irregular loss of life, trauma, or violations against another Person or group of Persons based on their skin color, physical characteristics, mental characteristics, religious belief, national identity, ethnic identity, or place of origin. These shall be defined and determined as accepted by World Assembly resolution when applicable or, in the absence thereof, the judgement of the body established under Section II.
Undertook actions of serious unjust or immoral conduct during armed conflict or war crimes, as defined and determined as accepted by World Assembly resolution when applicable or, in the absence thereof, the judgement of the body established under Section II.
An action or actions by a Person or group of Persons that result in grave violations of morality, justice, and the collective benefit of all the nations, individuals, Persons, or species of the world.

6. "Impossible Amelioration of Justice" is a condition meeting one or more of the following standards, the determination of which shall be made at the discretion of the body established under Section II:
There credibly lacks resources, infrastructure, or due process to deliver swift and immediate justice to Persons subjected to events that negatively affect an individual or individuals.
The polity(s) or geographic location(s) in which a grave and serious breach of morals, justice, or World Assembly law occurs are unwilling or unable to carry out justice, as determined by their national laws and procedures.

7. The definitions of the enumerated standards in Five (5) and Six (6) are subject to interpretation by future GA resolutions and by the Justices of the body established under Section II. Members may choose to freely disagree with their interpretations as their cultural, political, and domestic affairs dictate.

II. Constitution of the Court

8. The Committee on Justice & International Law (hereafter CJIL) is hereby established as an august body comprised of one member per member state, alongside their legal officials, aides, judges, private citizens, and governmental personnel.

9. An International Court of Justice (hereafter ICJ), an august body comprised of 9 individuals, serving for 6 years, who:
May be impeached, tried, and removed by a vote from the wider GA for high crimes and misdemeanours as deemed by the General Assembly.
Shall be elected by the CJIL from consenting member nations.
May pass judgements and opinions by majority vote.

III. Jurisdiction

12. The ICJ's jurisdiction shall only be invoked where:
A Member State voluntarily submits itself to the jurisdiction of the Court; or
The Court determines, to the best of its knowledge, that all other means of dispute resolution have been exhausted, and that the relevant Member State(s) are unable or clearly unwilling to prosecute the Crime in question.

13. Members of the CJIL, private entities, non-participating states, or Victims may bring cases before the ICJ as Plaintiffs, or the ICJ itself may choose to take up cases by direct petition. Such cases must fall under the instances described in Five (5) or Six (6).

IV. Procedure

14. Member states may send or rescind members to the CJIL, as determined by their own internal procedures.

15. The CJIL shall:
Determine the standards and procedures for drafting articles of impeachment and removal against a Justice.
Recommend cases to the ICJ, by their own internally defined procedures.
Determine the benefits, immunities, and ethics of the ICJ.

16. The ICJ shall define its own procedures of conduct and case management systems.

17. The General Assembly as a whole reserves the right to further legislate on procedural or other elements not mentioned in this proposal.

18. The ICJ may recommend punishments, reforms, and collective actions taken to ameliorate the perceived injustice.

19. Member States may, of their own accord and through individual voluntary political, diplomatic, military, economic, legal, or law enforcement measures:
Coordinate to adopt, implement, enforce, and abide by the rulings and recommendations of the ICJ.


5) Addressed Croblade Concerns

The World Assembly,

Understanding that cases of extreme injustice, malicious action, and heinous crimes occasionally may require the coordinated action of member states;

Acknowledging that while national sovereignty must be respected, widespread perceived failings of the native judicial system, internal policies, or incidents occurring in but not limited to a given nation's border may affect persons beyond their place of occurrence and require a transnational, third-party arbitration;

Reflecting that throughout the course of history, grave and irregular instances recognized by numerous nations and peoples of the world, where morals were breached, injustices of the greatest magnitude occurred, and the highest of crimes were committed;

Believing that the establishment of an international body based on collective action, shared sentiments of justice, and common morals can ameliorate or prevent the repetition of such actions;

Upholding that the rulings of such a forum will respect the rights, governments, liberties, and domestic policy choices of all members not explicitly ceded to this body; therefore;

This august body establishes that:

I. Definitions

1. A "Person", for the purposes of jurisdiction under this resolution is a living, sentient, conscious, self-aware being as recognized by itself and other individuals or collective individuals.

2. A "Plaintiff" for the purposes of jurisdiction under this resolution,is any Member State, private entity, or non-participating state that brings a case, complaint, or petition before the body established under Section II of this resolution through the process outlined in Sections III & IV.

3. A "Victim" for the purposes of jurisdiction under this resolution, is any Person, collective of Persons, or polity that has perceived to have suffered an event resulting from conduct falling under the definition of a Crime or in this resolution.

4. The "Accused" for the purposes of jurisdiction under this resolution, is any Person, collective of Persons, or polity that has perceived to have commited an event resulting from conduct falling under the definition of a Crime or in this resolution.

5. A "Crime" for the purposes of jurisdiction under this resolution is, but may not be limited to, conduct meeting the standard of a High Crime, as defined below, or conduct occurring under conditions of Impossible Amelioration of Justice, as defined below.

6. A "High Crime" is conduct meeting one or more of the following standards:
A Person or collective of Persons inflict systematic, undue, and irregular loss of life, trauma, or violations against another Person or group of Persons based on their skin color, physical characteristics, mental characteristics, religious belief, national identity, ethnic identity, or place of origin. These shall be defined and determined as accepted by World Assembly resolution when applicable or, in the absence thereof, the judgement of the body established under Section II.
Undertook actions of serious unjust or immoral conduct during armed conflict or war crimes, as defined and determined as accepted by World Assembly resolution when applicable or, in the absence thereof, the judgement of the body established under Section II.
An action or actions by a Person or group of Persons that result in grave violations of morality, justice, and the collective benefit of all the nations, individuals, Persons, or species of the world.

7. "Impossible Amelioration of Justice" is a condition meeting one or more of the following standards:
There credibly lacks resources, infrastructure, or due process to deliver swift and immediate justice to Persons subjected to events that irreparably victimize or egregiously negatively affect an individual or individuals in such a way that legal justice is a necessary recourse.
The polity(s) or geographic location(s) in which a grave and serious breach of morals, justice, or World Assembly law occurs are unwilling or unable to carry out justice, as determined by their national laws and procedures.

8. The definitions of the enumerated standards and definitons above are subject to interpretation by future GA resolutions and by the Justices of the court of law established under Section II. Members may choose to freely disagree with their interpretations as their cultural, political, and domestic affairs dictate.

II. Constitution of the Court

9. The Committee on Justice & International Law (hereafter CJIL) is hereby established as an august body comprised of one member per member state, alongside their legal officials, aides, judges, private citizens, and governmental personnel.

10. An International Court of Justice (hereafter ICJ), an august body comprised of 9 individuals, serving for 6 years, who:
May be impeached, tried, and removed by a resolution from the wider GA for misdemeanours and other poor conduct as deemed by the General Assembly.
Shall be elected by the CJIL from consenting member nations.
May pass judgements and opinions by majority vote.

III. Jurisdiction

11. The ICJ's jurisdiction shall only be invoked where instances described as High Crimes or an Impossible Amelioration of Justice have occurred. The determination of whether such a crime meets these standards shall be made at the discretion of the World Assembly resolution when applicable or, in the absence thereof, the ICJ itself.

12. Members of the CJIL or Victims may bring cases before the ICJ as Plaintiffs, or the ICJ itself may choose to take up cases by direct petition. Such cases must fall under the instances described as High Crimes or an Impossible Amelioration of Justice.

13. The General Assembly as a whole reserves the right to further legislate on procedural or other elements not mentioned in this proposal.
Should such legislation change definitions or policies in a way that contradicts past rulings, Plaintiffs, Victims, or the Accused may appeal the ruling to the ICJ and have it re-litigated.

14. The ICJ may recommend punishments, reforms, and collective actions taken to ameliorate the perceived crime. These recommendations must respect the national sovereignty and reserved powers, as prescribed by the General Assembly, of the victims and the accused to the best of the court's ability while still delivering the appropriate justice and ameliorations.

IV. Procedure

15. Member states may send or rescind members to the CJIL, as determined by their own internal procedures.

16. The CJIL shall:
Determine the standards and procedures for electing members of the ICJ, or drafting articles of impeachment and removal against a Justice.
Recommend cases to the ICJ, by its own internally defined procedures.
Determine the benefits, immunities, and ethics of the ICJ.
Oversee and enforce the standards of justice, national sovereignty, and reserved powers regarding ICJ rulings, and take the appropriate actions as they or the General Assembly see fit.

17. The ICJ shall define its own procedures of conduct and case management systems.
of the ICJ.

VI. Enforcement

18. Member States may, of their own accord and through individual voluntary political, diplomatic, military, economic, legal, or law enforcement measures:
Coordinate to adopt, implement, enforce, and abide by the rulings and recommendations


6) Fixed Character Limit/Trimmed it down

The World Assembly,

Reflecting that throughout the course of history, grave and irregular instances recognized by numerous nations and peoples of the world, where morals were breached, injustices of the greatest magnitude occurred, and the highest of crimes were committed;

Believing that the establishment of an international body based on collective action, shared sentiments of justice, and common morals can ameliorate or prevent the repetition of such actions;

Upholding that the rulings of such a forum will respect the rights, governments, liberties, and domestic policy choices of all members not explicitly ceded to this body; therefore;

This august body establishes that:

I. Definitions

1. A "Person" is a living, sentient, conscious, self-aware being as recognized by itself and other individuals or collective individuals.

2. A "Plaintiff" is any Member State, private entity, or non-participating state that brings a case, complaint, or petition before the body established under Section II of this resolution through the process outlined in Sections III & IV.

3. A "Victim" is any Person, collective of Persons, or polity that has perceived to have suffered an event resulting from conduct falling under the definition of a Crime or in this resolution.

4. The "Accused" is any Person, collective of Persons, or polity that has been perceived to have committed an event resulting from conduct falling under the definition of a Crime or in this resolution.

5. A "Crime" is, but may not be limited to, that meeting standards in 6 or 7.

6. A "High Crime" is conduct that may meet one or more of the following standards:
The accused inflicted systematic, undue, and irregular loss of life, trauma, or violations against a victim based on their skin color, physical characteristics, mental characteristics, religious belief, national identity, ethnic identity, or place of origin. These shall be defined and determined as accepted by World Assembly resolution when applicable or, in the absence thereof, the judgement of the body established under Section II.
Undertook actions of serious unjust or immoral conduct during armed conflict or war crimes, as defined and determined as accepted by World Assembly resolution when applicable or, in the absence thereof, the judgement of the body established under Section II.
An action or actions by the accused that result in grave violations of morality, justice, and the collective benefit of all the nations, individuals, Persons, or species of the world.

7. "Impossible Amelioration of Justice" is a condition meeting the following standards:
There credibly lacks infrastructure or due process to deliver swift and immediate justice to plaintiffs subjected to irreparable damage or High Crime.

8. The standards and definitions above are subject to interpretation by future GA resolutions and by the Justices of the court of law established under Section II.

II. Constitution of the Court

9. The Committee on Justice & International Law (hereafter CJIL) is hereby established as an august body comprised of one voting member per member state.

10. An International Court of Justice (hereafter ICJ), an august body comprised of 9 individuals, serving for 6 years, who:
May be impeached, tried, and removed by a vote from the wider GA for high crimes and misdemeanours as deemed by the General Assembly.
Shall be elected by the CJIL from consenting member nations.
May pass judgements and opinions by majority vote.

III. Jurisdiction

11. The ICJ's jurisdiction shall only be invoked where instances described as High Crimes or an Impossible Amelioration of Justice have occurred. The determination of whether such a crime meets these standards shall be made at the discretion of the World Assembly resolution when applicable or, in the absence thereof, the ICJ itself.

12. Members of the CJIL or Victims may bring cases before the ICJ as Plaintiffs, or the ICJ itself may choose to take up cases by direct petition. Such cases must fall under the instances described as High Crimes or an Impossible Amelioration of Justice.

13. The General Assembly as a whole reserves the right to further legislate on procedural or other elements not mentioned in this proposal.
Should legislation change policies in a way that contradicts past rulings, Plaintiffs, Victims, or the Accused may appeal the ruling to the ICJ and have it re-litigated.

14. The ICJ may recommend punishments, reforms, and collective actions taken to ameliorate the perceived crime. These must respect the sovereignty and reserved powers prescribed by the General Assembly, while still delivering appropriate justice.

IV. Procedure

15. Member states may send or rescind members to the CJIL, determined by their internal procedures.

16. The CJIL shall:
Determine the standards and procedures for electing members of the ICJ, or drafting articles of impeachment and removal against a Justice.
Recommend cases to the ICJ, by its own internally defined procedures.
Determine the benefits, immunities, and ethics of the ICJ.
Oversee and enforce the standards of justice, national sovereignty, and reserved powers regarding ICJ rulings, and take the appropriate actions as they or the General Assembly see fit.

17. The ICJ shall define its own procedures of conduct and case management systems.

VI. Enforcement

18. Member States may, of their own accord and through individual voluntary political, diplomatic, military, economic, legal, or law enforcement measures:
Coordinate to adopt, implement, enforce, and abide by the rulings and recommendations


7) Addressed Old Hope and Pircairns concerns (preliminarily, subject to further change)

The World Assembly,

Reflecting that throughout the course of history, grave and irregular instances recognized by numerous nations and peoples of the world, where morals were breached, injustices of the greatest magnitude occurred, and the highest of crimes were committed;

Believing that the establishment of an international body based on collective action, shared sentiments of justice, and common morals can ameliorate or prevent the repetition of such actions;

Upholding that the rulings of such a forum will respect the rights, governments, liberties, and domestic policy choices of all members not explicitly ceded to this body; therefore;

This body establishes that:

I. Definitions

1. A "Person" is a living, sentient, conscious, self-aware being as recognized by itself and other individuals or collective individuals.

2. A "Plaintiff" is any Member State, private entity, or non-participating state that brings a case, complaint, or petition before the body established under Section II of this resolution through the process outlined in Sections III & IV.

3. A "Victim" is any Person, collective of Persons, or polity that has perceived to have suffered an event resulting from conduct falling under the definition of a Crime or in this resolution.

4. The "Accused" is any Person, collective of Persons, or polity that has been perceived to have committed an event resulting from conduct falling under the definition of a Crime or in this resolution.

5. A "Crime" is, but may not be limited to, that meeting standards in 6 or 7.

6. A "High Crime" is conduct that may meet one or more of the following standards:
Genocide, ethnocide, ethnic cleansing, or systematic and massive loss of life or persecution against a victim based on their skin color, physical characteristics, mental characteristics, religious belief, national identity, ethnic identity, or place of origin. These shall be defined and determined as accepted by World Assembly resolution when applicable or, in the absence thereof, the judgement of the body established under Section II.
Undertook actions defined as war crimes, as defined and determined as accepted by World Assembly resolution when applicable or, in the absence thereof, the judgement of the body established under Section II.

7. "Impossible Amelioration of Justice" is a condition meeting the following standards:
There credibly lacks infrastructure or due process to deliver swift and immediate justice to plaintiffs subjected to irreparable damage or High Crime.

8. The standards and definitions above are subject to interpretation by future GA resolutions and by the Justices of the court of law established under Section II.

II. Constitution of the Court

9. The Committee on Justice & International Law (hereafter CJIL) is hereby established as an august body comprised of one voting member per member state.

10. An International Court of Justice (hereafter ICJ), an august body comprised of 9 individuals, serving for 6 years, who:
May be impeached, tried, and removed by a vote from the wider GA for high crimes and misdemeanours as deemed by the General Assembly.
Shall be elected by the CJIL from consenting member nations.
May pass judgements and opinions by majority vote.

III. Jurisdiction

11. The ICJ's jurisdiction shall only be invoked where instances described as High Crimes or an Impossible Amelioration of Justice have occurred. The determination of whether such a crime meets these standards shall be made at the discretion of the World Assembly resolution when applicable or, in the absence thereof, the ICJ itself.

12. Members of the CJIL or Victims may bring cases before the ICJ as Plaintiffs, or the ICJ itself may choose to take up cases by direct petition. Such cases must fall under the instances described as High Crimes or an Impossible Amelioration of Justice.

13. The General Assembly as a whole reserves the right to further legislate on procedural or other elements not mentioned in this proposal.
Should legislation change policies in a way that contradicts past rulings, Plaintiffs, Victims, or the Accused may appeal the ruling to the ICJ and have it re-litigated.

14. The ICJ may recommend punishments, reforms, and collective actions taken to ameliorate the perceived crime. These must respect the sovereignty and reserved powers prescribed by the General Assembly, while still delivering appropriate justice.

IV. Procedure

15. Member states may send or rescind members to the CJIL, determined by their internal procedures.

16. The CJIL shall:
Determine the standards and procedures for electing members of the ICJ, or drafting articles of impeachment and removal against a Justice.
Recommend cases to the ICJ, by its own internally defined procedures.
Determine the benefits, immunities, and ethics of the ICJ.
Oversee and enforce the standards of justice, national sovereignty, and reserved powers regarding ICJ rulings, and take the appropriate actions as they or the General Assembly see fit.

17. The ICJ shall define its own procedures of conduct and case management systems.
of the ICJ.

VI. Enforcement

18. Member States may, of their own accord and through individual voluntary political, diplomatic, military, economic, legal, or law enforcement measures:
Coordinate to adopt, implement, enforce, and abide by the rulings and recommendations


8 ) Changed based on Cretox and Heaven's Reach's suggestions

The World Assembly,

Reflecting that throughout the course of history, grave and irregular instances recognized by numerous nations and peoples of the world, where morals were breached, injustices of the greatest magnitude occurred, and the highest of crimes were committed;

Believing that the establishment of an international body based on collective action, shared sentiments of justice, and common morals can ameliorate or prevent the repetition of such actions;

Upholding that the rulings of such a forum will respect the rights, governments, liberties, and domestic policy choices of all members not explicitly ceded to this body; therefore;

This body establishes that:

Definitions
A "Person" is a living, sentient, conscious, self-aware being as recognized by itself and other individuals or collective individuals.
A "Plaintiff" is any Member State, private entity, or non-participating state that brings a case, complaint, or petition before the body established under Section II of this resolution through the process outlined in Sections III & IV.
A "Victim" is any Person, collective of Persons, or polity that has been perceived to have suffered an event resulting from conduct falling under the definition of a Crime or in this resolution.
The "Accused" is any Person, collective of Persons, or polity that has been perceived to have committed an event resulting from conduct falling under the definition of a Crime or in this resolution.
A "High Crime" is conduct that may meet one or more of the following standards:
Genocide, ethnocide, ethnic cleansing, or systematic and massive loss of life or persecution of a victim based on their skin color, physical characteristics, mental characteristics, religious belief, national identity, ethnic identity, or place of origin. These shall be defined and determined as accepted by World Assembly resolution when applicable or, in the absence thereof, the judgement of the body established under Section II.
Undertook actions defined as war crimes, as defined and determined as accepted by World Assembly resolution when applicable or, in the absence thereof, the judgement of the body established under Section II.
"Impossible Amelioration of Justice" is a condition meeting the following standards:
There credibly lacks infrastructure or due process to deliver swift and immediate justice to plaintiffs subjected to irreparable damage or High Crime.
The standards and definitions above are subject to interpretation by future GA resolutions and by the Justices of the court of law established under Section II.
The Court
An International Court of Justice (hereafter ICJ) shall be established to hold trials and make judgements on matters within it's Jurisdiction.
Jurisdiction
The ICJ's jurisdiction shall only be invoked where instances described as High Crimes or an Impossible Amelioration of Justice have occurred. The determination of whether such a crime meets these standards shall be made at the discretion of the World Assembly resolution when applicable or, in the absence thereof, the ICJ itself.
Members of the WA or Victims may bring cases before the ICJ as Plaintiffs, or the ICJ itself may choose to take up cases by direct petition. Such cases must fall under the instances described as High Crimes or an Impossible Amelioration of Justice.
The General Assembly as a whole reserves the right to further legislate on procedural or other elements not mentioned in this proposal.
Should legislation change policies in a way that contradicts past rulings, Plaintiffs, Victims, or the Accused may appeal the ruling to the ICJ and have it re-litigated.
The ICJ may recommend punishments, reforms, and collective actions taken to ameliorate the perceived injustice. These must respect the sovereignty and reserved powers prescribed by the General Assembly, while still delivering appropriate justice.
Procedure
Member states may participate in, send, or rescind members to the ICJ, as determined by their internal procedures.
The ICJ shall:
Define its own procedures of conduct and case management systems.
Ensure the standards of justice, national sovereignty, and reserved powers regarding rulings, and reccomend the appropriate actions as they or the General Assembly see fit.
Enforcement
Member States may, of their own accord and through individual voluntary political, diplomatic, military, economic, legal, or law enforcement measures:
Coordinate to adopt, implement, enforce, and abide by the rulings and recommendations.


9) Addressed Rovhania concerns offsite

The World Assembly,

Reflecting that throughout the course of history, grave and irregular instances recognized by numerous nations and peoples of the world, where morals were breached, injustices of the greatest magnitude occurred, and the highest of crimes were committed;

Believing that the establishment of an international body based on collective action, shared sentiments of justice, and common morals can ameliorate or prevent the repetition of such actions;

Upholding that the rulings of such a forum will respect the rights, governments, liberties, and domestic policy choices of all members not explicitly ceded to this body; therefore;

This body establishes that:

Definitions
A "Person" is a living, sentient, conscious, self-aware being as recognized by itself and other individuals or collective individuals.
A "Plaintiff" is any Member State, private entity, or non-participating state that brings a case, complaint, or petition before the body established under Section II of this resolution through the process outlined in Sections III & IV.
A "Victim" is any Person, collective of Persons, or polity that has been perceived to have suffered an event resulting from conduct falling under the definition of a Crime or in this resolution.
The "Accused" is any Person, collective of Persons, or polity that has been perceived to have committed an event resulting from conduct falling under the definition of a Crime or in this resolution.
A "High Crime" is conduct that may meet one or more of the following standards:
Genocide, ethnocide, ethnic cleansing, or systematic and massive loss of life or persecution against a victim based on their skin color, physical characteristics, mental characteristics, religious belief, national identity, ethnic identity, or place of origin.
Undertook actions defined as war crimes.
Engagement of mass and systemic slavery, forced labor, or trafficking.
"Impossible Amelioration of Justice" is a condition meeting the following standards:
There credibly lacks infrastructure, will, or due process to deliver proper justice to plaintiffs subjected to irreparable damage or High Crime.
The Court
An International Court of Justice (hereafter ICJ) shall be established to hold trials and make judgements on matters within it's Jurisdiction.
Jurisdiction
The ICJ's jurisdiction shall only be invoked where instances described as High Crimes or an Impossible Amelioration of Justice have occurred. The determination of whether such a crime meets these standards shall be made at the discretion of the World Assembly resolution when applicable or, in the absence thereof, the ICJ itself.
Members of the WA or Victims may bring cases before the ICJ as Plaintiffs, or the ICJ itself may choose to take up cases by direct petition. Such cases must fall under the instances described as High Crimes or an Impossible Amelioration of Justice.
The General Assembly as a whole reserves the right to further legislate on procedural or other elements not mentioned in this proposal.
Should legislation change policies in a way that contradicts past rulings, Plaintiffs, Victims, or the Accused may appeal the ruling to the ICJ and have it re-litigated.
The ICJ may recommend punishments, reforms, and collective actions taken to ameliorate the perceived injustice. These must respect the sovereignty and reserved powers prescribed by the General Assembly, while still delivering appropriate justice.
Procedure
Member states may participate in, send, or rescind members to the ICJ, as determined by their internal procedures.
The ICJ shall:
Define its own procedures of conduct and case management systems.
Ensure the standards of justice, national sovereignty, and reserved powers regarding rulings, and reccomend the appropriate actions as they or the General Assembly see fit.
Enforcement
Member States may, of their own accord and through individual voluntary political, diplomatic, military, economic, legal, or law enforcement measures:
Coordinate to adopt, implement, enforce, and abide by the rulings and recommendations.


10) Change in language of I.5.a & I.6.a.

The World Assembly,

Reflecting that throughout the course of history, grave and irregular instances recognized by numerous nations and peoples of the world, where rights were breached, injustices of the greatest magnitude occurred, and the highest of crimes were committed;

Believing that the establishment of an international body based on collective action and shared sentiments of justice can ameliorate or prevent the repetition of such actions;

Upholding that the rulings of such a forum will respect the rights, governments, liberties, and domestic policy choices of all members not explicitly ceded to this body; therefore;

This body establishes that:

Definitions
A "Person" is a living, sentient, conscious, self-aware being as recognized by itself and other individuals or collective individuals.
A "Plaintiff" is any Member State, private entity, or non-participating state that brings a case, complaint, or petition before the body established under Section II of this resolution through the process outlined in Sections III & IV.
A "Victim" is any Person, collective of Persons, or polity that has been perceived to have suffered an event resulting from conduct falling under the definition of a Crime or in this resolution.
The "Accused" is any Person, collective of Persons, or polity that has been perceived to have committed an event resulting from conduct falling under the definition of a Crime or in this resolution.
A "High Crime" is conduct that may meet one or more of the following standards:
Genocide, ethnocide, ethnic cleansing, or systematic persecution and/or mass murder of a victim(s) based on their skin color, physical characteristics, mental characteristics, religious belief, sexual orientation, national identity, ethnic identity, or place of origin.
Undertook actions defined as war crimes.
Engagement of mass and systemic slavery, forced labor, or trafficking.
"Impossible Amelioration of Justice" is a condition meeting the following standards:
There credibly lacks infrastructure, will, or due process to deliver swift and commensurate justice to plaintiffs subjected to perceived extraordinary and/or irreparable damage or High Crime.
The Court
An International Court of Justice (hereafter ICJ) shall be established to hold trials and make judgements on matters within it's Jurisdiction.
Jurisdiction
The ICJ's jurisdiction shall only be invoked where instances described as High Crimes or an Impossible Amelioration of Justice have occurred. The determination of whether such a crime meets these standards shall be made based on the appropriate World Assembly resolution(s) when applicable or, in the absence thereof, the ICJ itself.
Members of the WA or Victims may bring cases before the ICJ as Plaintiffs, or the ICJ itself may choose to take up cases by direct petition. Such cases must fall under the instances described as High Crimes or an Impossible Amelioration of Justice.
The General Assembly as a whole reserves the right to further legislate on procedural or other elements not mentioned in this proposal.
Should legislation change policies in a way that contradicts past rulings, Plaintiffs, Victims, or the Accused may appeal the ruling to the ICJ and have it re-litigated.
The ICJ may recommend punishments, reforms, and collective actions taken to ameliorate the perceived injustice. These must respect the sovereignty and reserved powers prescribed by the General Assembly, while still delivering appropriate justice.
Procedure
Member states may participate in, send, or rescind members to the ICJ, as determined by their internal procedures.
The ICJ shall:
Define its own procedures of conduct and case management systems.
Ensure the standards of justice, national sovereignty, and reserved powers regarding rulings, and reccomend the appropriate actions as they or the General Assembly see fit.
Enforcement
Member States may, of their own accord and through individual voluntary political, diplomatic, military, economic, legal, or law enforcement measures:
Coordinate to adopt, implement, enforce, and abide by the rulings and recommendations.


11) Changed structure from a "court" to a commission.

Commission on Universal Rights and Treatment
Proposed by: Ubertas
Co Authors: MLGDogeland & Gudetama


The World Assembly,

Reflecting that throughout the course of history, grave and irregular instances recognized by numerous nations and peoples of the world, where rights were breached, injustices of the greatest magnitude occurred, and the highest of crimes were committed;

Believing that the establishment of an international body based on collective action and shared sentiments of justice can ameliorate or prevent the repetition of such actions;

Upholding that the rulings of such a forum will respect the rights, governments, liberties, and domestic policy choices of all members not explicitly ceded to this body; therefore;

This body establishes that:

Definitions

A "Breach of International Conduct" is behavior that may meet one or more of the following standards:
Genocide, ethnocide, ethnic cleansing, or systematic persecution and/or mass murder of a victim(s) based on their skin color, physical characteristics, mental characteristics, religious belief, sexual orientation, national identity, ethnic identity, or place of origin.
Undertook actions defined as war crimes.
Engagement in mass and systemic slavery, torture, forced labor, or trafficking of sentient beings.
Actions where nation(s) or people(s) egregiously infringes on the sovereignty and basic rights of other nation(s) or people(s).
"Impossible Amelioration of Justice" is a condition meeting the following standards:
There credibly lacks infrastructure, will, or due process to deliver swift and commensurate justice to plaintiffs subjected to perceived extraordinary and/or irreparable damage or Breach of International Conduct.
The Commission
A Commission on Universal Rights and Treatment (hereafter CoURT) shall be established as a forum to listen and attempt to bring reconciliation regarding events meeting the Standard of Purview.
Procedure
Member states may participate in, send, or rescind members to the CoURT, as determined by their internal procedures.
The CoURT shall:
Define its own procedures of conduct and case management systems.
Standard of Purview
The CoURT shall only be appealed to when instances described as Breach of International Conduct or Impossible Amelioration of Justice arise. The determination of whether such an event meets these standards shall be made based on the appropriate World Assembly resolution(s) when applicable or, in the absence thereof, the CoURT itself.
Members of the WA or Victims may bring cases before the CoURT as Plaintiffs, or the CoURT itself may choose to take up cases by direct petition. Such cases must fall under the instances described as Breach of International Conduct or an Impossible Amelioration of Justice.
Should General Assembly legislation change policies in a way that contradicts past rulings, Plaintiffs, Victims, or those accused by the latter may appeal the ruling to the CoURT and have it re-litigated.
Reccomendations & Enactment
The ICJ may recommend, based on the facts of the events, reconciliation, reforms, and collective actions to the international community. These must respect the sovereignty and reserved powers prescribed by the General Assembly, while still delivering appropriate justice. Member States may, of their own accord and through individual voluntary political, diplomatic, military, economic, legal, or law enforcement measures:
Coordinate to adopt, implement, enforce, and abide by the recommendations.

12) Addressed First round of Idie's concerns

The World Assembly,

Reflecting that throughout the course of history, numerous grave instances have transpired where rights have been breached, injustices have occurred, and serious crimes have been committed;

Believing that the establishment of an international body based on collective action and shared sentiments of justice can ameliorate or prevent the repetition of such actions;

Upholding that the rulings of such a forum will respect the rights, governments, liberties, and domestic policy choices of all members not explicitly ceded to this body; therefore;

This body establishes that:

1. Definitions
   
   
   
   1. A "Breach of International Conduct" is behavior meeting one or more of the following standards:
      
      1. Systematic Persecution of an individual or group due to their possession of characteristics defined as protected, such as skin color, physical characteristics, mental characteristics, religious beliefs, sexual orientation, national identity, ethnic identity, or place of origin.
      2. Undertook actions defined as war crimes.
      3. Engagement in mass and systemic slavery, torture, forced labor, or trafficking of sentient beings.
      4. Actions where nation(s) or people(s) egregiously infringes on the sovereignty and basic rights of other nation(s) or people(s).
   2. "Impossible Amelioration of Justice" is a condition meeting the following standards:
      
      1. There credibly lacks infrastructure, will, or due process to deliver swift and commensurate justice to plaintiffs subjected to perceived extraordinary and/or irreparable damage or Breach of International Conduct.
2. The Commission
   
   1. A Commission for Organizing Universal Rights & Treatment (hereafter COURT) shall be established as a forum to listen and attempt to bring reconciliation regarding events meeting the Standard of Purview.
3. Procedure
   
   1. Member states may participate in, send, or rescind members to the COURT, as determined by their internal procedures.
      
   2. The COURT shall:
      
      1. Define its own procedures of conduct and case management systems.
4. Standard of Purview
   
   1. The COURT shall only be appealed to when instances described as Breach of International Conduct or Impossible Amelioration of Justice arise. The determination of whether such an event meets these standards shall be made based on the appropriate World Assembly resolution(s) when applicable or, in the absence thereof, the COURT itself.
      
   2. Members of the WA or Victims may bring cases before the COURT as Plaintiffs, or the COURT itself may choose to take up cases by direct petition. Such cases must fall under the instances described as Breach of International Conduct or an Impossible Amelioration of Justice.
      
   3. Should General Assembly legislation change policies in a way that contradicts past recommendations, Plaintiffs, Victims, or those accused by the latter may ask the COURT for reassessment of recommendations and/or have the case re-heard.
5. Reccomendations & Enactment
   
   1. The COURT may recommend, based on the facts of the events, reconciliation, reforms, and collective actions to the international community. These must respect the sovereignty and reserved powers prescribed by the General Assembly, while still delivering appropriate justice. Member States may, of their own accord and through individual voluntary political, diplomatic, military, economic, legal, or law enforcement measures:
      
      1. Coordinate to adopt, implement, enforce, and abide by the recommendations.

13) Addressed Meraud Concerns

The World Assembly,

Reflecting that throughout the course of history, numerous grave instances have transpired where rights have been breached, injustices have occurred, and serious crimes have been committed;

Believing that the establishment of an international body based on collective action and shared sentiments of justice can ameliorate or prevent the repetition of such actions;

Upholding that the rulings of such a forum will respect the rights, governments, liberties, and domestic policy choices of all members not explicitly ceded to this body; therefore;

This body establishes that:

1. Definitions
   
   
   
   1. A "Breach of International Conduct" is behavior meeting one or more of the following standards:
      
      1. Systematic Persecution of an individual or group due to their possession of characteristics defined as protected, such as:
         
         1. skin color, physical characteristics, mental characteristics, religious beliefs, sexual orientation, cultural heritage, or ethnic identity.
      2. Undertook actions defined as war crimes.
      3. Actions where nation(s) or people(s) egregiously infringes on the sovereignty and basic rights of other nation(s) or people(s).
   2. "Impossible Amelioration of Justice" is a condition meeting the following standards:
      
      1. There credibly lacks infrastructure, will, or due process to deliver swift and commensurate justice to plaintiffs subjected to perceived extraordinary and/or irreparable damage or Breach of International Conduct.
2. The Commission
   
   1. A Commission for Organizing Universal Rights & Treatment (hereafter COURT) shall be established as a forum to listen and attempt to bring reconciliation regarding events meeting the Standard of Purview.
3. Procedure
   
   1. Member states may participate in, send, or rescind members to the COURT, as determined by their internal procedures.
      
   2. The COURT shall:
      
      1. Define its own procedures of conduct and case management systems.
4. Standard of Purview
   
   1. The COURT shall only be appealed to when instances described as Breach of International Conduct or Impossible Amelioration of Justice arise. The determination of whether such an event meets these standards shall be made based on the appropriate World Assembly resolution(s) when applicable or, in the absence thereof, the COURT itself.
      
   2. Members of the WA or Victims may bring cases before the COURT as Plaintiffs, or the COURT itself may choose to take up cases by direct petition. Such cases must fall under the instances described as Breach of International Conduct or an Impossible Amelioration of Justice.
      
   3. Should General Assembly legislation change policies in a way that contradicts past reccomendations, Plaintiffs, Victims, or those accused by the latter may ask the COURT for reassessment of recommendations and/or have the case re-heard.
5. Reccomendations & Enactment
   
   1. The COURT may recommend, based on the facts of the events, reconciliation, reforms, and collective actions to the international community and coordinate with them to ensure their enactment. These must respect the sovereignty and reserved powers prescribed by the General Assembly, while still delivering appropriate justice. Member States may, of their own accord and through individual voluntary political, diplomatic, military, economic, legal, or law enforcement measures:
      
      1. Coordinate to adopt, implement, enforce, and abide by the recommendations.

[Rovhania]

As it stands, this draft doesn't define the jurisdictional limits, the kind of cases the Agency is meant to handle, or any clear guidance on how nations as member states are meant to implement this. The proposal could be structured like so:

I. Preamble: Identifying the issues that are of an international character or concerns that need to be addressed through international cooperation.
II. Definitions: For the kind of disputes or crimes that the Court will be competent to hear.
III. Jurisdiction: It would serve the world community best if the ICJ's jurisdiction only came in where a member state is either unable or clearly unwilling to prosecute — a determination that can either be made through voluntary submission to the jurisdiction of the Court by the relevant Member State(s) or brought before the Court by the affected parties where all other means of dispute resolution have been exhausted to the best knowledge of the Court.
IV. Constitution of the Court: Describing its makeup, term, salaries (if needed) and immunities and powers.
V. Procedure: Probably the most important aspect. I'd leave it to the Court to manage its own procedures of conduct and case management systems, but leave it open for the GA as a whole to be able to further legislate on certain elements not mentioned in the proposal or something of that sort.

The important bits are there, somewhat, but the resolution itself would be largely ineffective if passed in its current form.

[Ubertas]

As it stands, this draft doesn't define the jurisdictional limits, the kind of cases the Agency is meant to handle, or any clear guidance on how nations as member states are meant to implement this. The proposal could be structured like so:

I. Preamble: Identifying the issues that are of an international character or concerns that need to be addressed through international cooperation.
II. Definitions: For the kind of disputes or crimes that the Court will be competent to hear.
III. Jurisdiction: It would serve the world community best if the ICJ's jurisdiction only came in where a member state is either unable or clearly unwilling to prosecute — a determination that can either be made through voluntary submission to the jurisdiction of the Court by the relevant Member State(s) or brought before the Court by the affected parties where all other means of dispute resolution have been exhausted to the best knowledge of the Court.
IV. Constitution of the Court: Describing its makeup, term, salaries (if needed) and immunities and powers.
V. Procedure: Probably the most important aspect. I'd leave it to the Court to manage its own procedures of conduct and case management systems, but leave it open for the GA as a whole to be able to further legislate on certain elements not mentioned in the proposal or something of that sort.

The important bits are there, somewhat, but the resolution itself would be largely ineffective if passed in its current form.

Edit: Done my best to work on this. LMK what you think.

[Kophee23]

You should be giving at least some definition to the categories in 4. Alternatively, replace those specific categories with a standard for the future designation and definition of crimes that could be addressed. The latter seems a better route to go

[Ubertas]

You should be giving at least some definition to the categories in 4. Alternatively, replace those specific categories with a standard for the future designation and definition of crimes that could be addressed. The latter seems a better route to go

I attempted to implement this suggestion. What do you think of the current form?

[Ubertas]

The ambassador sits at his desk, tidying things up with a hand wave...

"Alright then, any other comments we need to address?"

[Zetaopalatopia]

Would nations that do not adopt this proposal should it pass be immune to prosecution from the created court? Are the decisions made only a suggestion on action rather than an explicit call for them?

[Ubertas]

Would nations that do not adopt this proposal should it pass be immune to prosecution from the created court? Are the decisions made only a suggestion on action rather than an explicit call for them?

No, they wouldn't be immune per se. They don't have to follow the rulings either.

The court's definitions and outlook on morals, justice, etc. are determined by the collective will of the member states that choose to send delegates to the CJIL. Through the diplomacy and politicking of individual nations, you could, in theory, push for a view of justice that you'd like to see implemented or lobby the CJIL and member states in it for a specific crime to be prosecuted or a certain set of punishments. These would inevitably be put into practice by the ICJ, as the CJIL elects them.

The idea here is that any nation who chose to adopt or not adopt does not have to follow the rulings of the court. The court can prescribe punishments or make a pronouncement on what they think is a crime and how to deliver justice for it, but only the members of the international community can band together to make these rulings enforceable. So, if the ICJ rules that your nation committed a crime, nothing happens, but your neighboring country is entitled to impose sanctions on you for the ruling or to rally other nations through economic and diplomatic means to put sanctions, diplomatically isolate you, or use their own foreign policy to ensure you're bound to the ruling. They can also write an SC resolution too. Likewise, you can do the same and also write a GA resolution that defines terms in WA policy that suspend or render the ruling on you moot (as the ICJ must defer to terms set out in GA resolutions above their own judgment).

If you and other like-minded nations choose not to adopt, that is fine. You can band together to oppose and resist the rulings or just gain enough of a following that rulings don't matter at all.

Conversely, if you and everyone else do choose to adopt, then the international community as a whole can work together to find common ground on what they consider justice and see that this operation works.

I will also note that given past GA resolutions like national sovereignty, I imagine the court won't step in unless there's an extraordinary breach of morals, justice, or conduct of some kind that seriously outrages a large chunk of the WA members. So you could make the case that if a nation is simply dissatisfied with some internal affair in your state but beyond that it doesn't affect them or you, by existing GA resolution, the ICJ probably won't rule on it.

[Ubertas]

Thank you all for the continued feedback. Happy to keep accepting more.

[Croblade]

"There credibility" in #7.

Overall this is really good work in covering a topic definitely needed in the WA, my only question is what are the punishments exactly in regards to procedure? Does the ICJ have the authority to issue the death penalty? Or is there an international prison of sorts that houses highly known political figures from the general population (or are they just sent to any prison for that matter)?

[Ubertas]

"There credibility" in #7.

Overall this is really good work in covering a topic definitely needed in the WA, my only question is what are the punishments exactly in regards to procedure? Does the ICJ have the authority to issue the death penalty? Or is there an international prison of sorts that houses highly known political figures from the general population (or are they just sent to any prison for that matter)?

Thank you for the response!

To answer your question, the proposal was designed with the intent of maximizing both the goals of justice and national sovereignty. It also explicitly does not seek to contradict or tread upon things like GA#2 or the current GA resolution at vote (likely to pass). Punishments will be recommended by the court, but the court also must respect sovereignty and the policies of the nations involved. Thus, I would say that if the ICJ asked for the death penalty, then this would contradict GA#2 and other resolutions, and therefore the GA or the CJIL can call for their removal.

The ICJ may rule upon things and reccomend that some action such as imprisonment or sanctions may be undertaken, but it's up to the member states to coordinate and enforce the terms of the court should they choose to. Thus, if someone needs to be detained, they will be detained in a member state through some extradition agreement and international agreement that this is ok. There aren't any international prisons, unless the GA decides to establish one.

I will add in a clause that specifies a little more how punishments ought to be undertaken/some standard of what can and cannot be recommended. See the draft for details

[Ubertas]

Trimmed to meet character count

[Old Hope]

This International Court of Justice sounds like a kangaroo court. The definition for "high crime" is way too flexible! It is a massive violation of the principle of justice to subject people to a law that can outlaw basically anything, as long as enough member states agree. This mocks the principle of "no punishment without law" by letting the justices determine what the law is on the spot.

[Ubertas]

This International Court of Justice sounds like a kangaroo court. The definition for "high crime" is way too flexible! It is a massive violation of the principle of justice to subject people to a law that can outlaw basically anything, as long as enough member states agree. This mocks the principle of "no punishment without law" by letting the justices determine what the law is on the spot.

Couldn't you just levy the same criticism on the WA? If enough people want to outlaw cakes, for instance, it could be done. If people disagree with the ICJ, they can contest it on the international stage as some already do with the WA resolutions.

The definition of High Crime is general because I want to leave it to the WA, the institution I believe, based on our mutual adoption history, we both trust. This must serve as a the vehicle where the actual work of past and future GA resolutions can be upheld and implemented to address breaches of justice or morals.

The justices determine the law because, as of now, there is frightfully little international law. However, the last three recent GAs have already provided much basis for the ICJ to rule upon (such as the War Crimes resolution) and much to restrain it (see the Reserved powers resolution up now).

Additionally, there are explicit provisions to ensure they don't run awry from the bench: The GA can further define instances of high crimes and make this specific as time goes on. They can also pull the justices and recall them altogether. Member states can recall the justices, and lastly, any trial can be appealed should the GA legislate for it to be done.

[Zoamunda]

I do have a question about the part of the ICJiL and the ICJL. So, for the ICJIl, does each member state of the WA just automatically become a member or it, or does it apply to become part of it or something, if so, how does that work? And for the ICJL, how exactly are they gonna be elected, is there qualifications? I just want more indication one just two parts.

[Ubertas]

I do have a question about the part of the ICJiL and the ICJL. So, for the ICJIl, does each member state of the WA just automatically become a member or it, or does it apply to become part of it or something, if so, how does that work? And for the ICJL, how exactly are they gonna be elected, is there qualifications? I just want more indication one just two parts.

I will direct you to:

IV. Procedure

15. Member states may send or rescind members to the CJIL, determined by their internal procedures.

16. The CJIL shall:
Determine the standards and procedures for electing members of the ICJ, or drafting articles of impeachment and removal against a Justice.
Recommend cases to the ICJ, by its own internally defined procedures.
Determine the benefits, immunities, and ethics of the ICJ.
Oversee and enforce the standards of justice, national sovereignty, and reserved powers regarding ICJ rulings, and take the appropriate actions as they or the General Assembly see fit.

I believe this is quite clear. You may send or rescind members to the CJIL, as defined by internal procedures (meaning the nations decide internally). This means you can choose to not particpate or send anyone. No member state automatically becomes part of it as this violates national sovereignty. Moreover, the "determined by internal procedures" means if a nation chooses to opt out, they can opt out.

Every WA member state is eligible to send a member, as (15) states.

Elections to the CJIL and the qualifications are determined by the member states, as it is outside the authority of the WA to decide who member nations send. The ICJ is appointed by the CJIL, and the CJIL determines on its own what qualifications are needed for the ICJ. The member states who opt in by their own violition can then set the policies and qualifications.

I won't specify all this out because:
1) it's already covered
2) WA resolutions have a 5000 character limit and I have reached it

If you have issues, feel free to write up a follow-up resolution to further clarify or spell out the ambiguities you are concerned with (as was my intention with this resolution). The current resolution is the staging ground for future efforts to, if the GA wants, elaborate on the policies, procedures, qualifications, etc. of international law.

[Old Hope]

An action or actions by the accused that result in grave violations of morality, justice, and the collective benefit of all the nations, individuals, Persons, or species of the world.

As you do not understand our argument yet, let's try again: This definition is too flexible. No reasonable person, and indeed, no reasonable lawyer, can be certain which acts do or do not fall under this definition. Similar to the principle that criminal punishment for a law that was not in force is unacceptable, it is likewise unacceptable to pass laws that cannot be reliably interpreted in a way that allows at least reasonable lawyers to correctly interpret it.

We are sure that the nations of the World Assembly that subscribe to the principle of national sovereignty will not endorse this draft either, so you got to change that...
An international court should not be given discretion in this manner.

[Ubertas]

An action or actions by the accused that result in grave violations of morality, justice, and the collective benefit of all the nations, individuals, Persons, or species of the world.

As you do not understand our argument yet, let's try again: This definition is too flexible. No reasonable person, and indeed, no reasonable lawyer, can be certain which acts do or do not fall under this definition. Similar to the principle that criminal punishment for a law that was not in force is unacceptable, it is likewise unacceptable to pass laws that cannot be reliably interpreted in a way that allows at least reasonable lawyers to correctly interpret it.

We are sure that the nations of the World Assembly that subscribe to the principle of national sovereignty will not endorse this draft either, so you got to change that...
An international court should not be given discretion in this manner.

As I do understand your argument and dislike your tone, let's try again: If you feel so strongly, you are free to draft your own resolution to define the basis for High Crimes further. This is not intended to be the end of international law, the court's scope is meant to be further legislated upon and defined by the community.

[Old Hope]

As you do not understand our argument yet, let's try again: This definition is too flexible. No reasonable person, and indeed, no reasonable lawyer, can be certain which acts do or do not fall under this definition. Similar to the principle that criminal punishment for a law that was not in force is unacceptable, it is likewise unacceptable to pass laws that cannot be reliably interpreted in a way that allows at least reasonable lawyers to correctly interpret it.

We are sure that the nations of the World Assembly that subscribe to the principle of national sovereignty will not endorse this draft either, so you got to change that...
An international court should not be given discretion in this manner.

As I do understand your argument and dislike your tone, let's try again: If you feel so strongly, you are free to draft your own resolution to define the basis for High Crimes further. This is not intended to be the end of international law, the court's scope is meant to be further legislated upon and defined by the community.

Us assuming that you misunderstood our argument was reasonable, and not discourteous.
Now that you have shown your true colors, ambassador - as someone willing to enshrine massive basic civil rights violations into World Assembly law, into a law that seems to be intended to punish evil crimes - we have to say the following: This is disgusting. No one should intentionally try to draft a law they know to be this flawed at passage.

[Picairn]

Policing "morality", to be defined by member-nations, is hilariously bad. Against.

[Ubertas]

Policing "morality", to be defined by member-nations, is hilariously bad. Against.

So then what is the WA? What of all the recent resolutions, such as the war crimes resolution, do? Is that not morality defined by member states?

If you have a suggestion that you'd like to see added, I'm open to seeing if we can accommodate your concerns.

[Ubertas]

appended updates based on changes reccomended by our S7 friends Cretox, Heavens Reach, and Rovhania

[Old Hope]

"Impossible Amelioration of Justice" is a condition meeting the following standards:

There credibly lacks infrastructure, will, or due process to deliver swift and immediate justice to plaintiffs subjected to perceived extraordinary and/or irreparable damage or High Crime.

A lot of justice systems do not deliver immediate justice. They hold trials, hearings, and actual investigations instead of quickly finding a scapegoat to subject to unjust punishment. This would encourage the latter, which we cannot support.