[DRAFT] A Ban on Sexual Violence in War

[Unibot]

OCC: I'm probably not doing the subject any sort of justice, because I wrote it in about ten minutes, but let's start from here...

A Ban on Sexual Violence in War
A resolution to improve worldwide human and civil rights.

Category: Human Rights | Strength: Significant

The General Assembly,

Understanding that some national armies have come to accept rape in armed conflict as a perfectly tolerable method of psychological warfare,

Believing that sexual violence in war (as with all forms of rape) is an abuse of power, and generally targets the physically weakest of civilians,

Hereby:

1. Defines “War rape”, as a variation of rape that is committed by soldiers against civilians, prisoners of war, or enemy combatants during armed conflict or war,

2. Outlaws the act of War rape as a severe and atrocious international crime against civilization;

3. Prohibits member-nations from promoting, obligating or facilitating War rape in any means;

4. Declares that all member nations have the right, duty and obligation to diplomatically prevent (via force if necessary) War rape being used in warfare by any nation and to prevent the proliferation of War rape as a tactic to nations that have previously abandoned said abuse;

5. Stipulates that the World Health Authority (WHA) has the duty to determine and locate where War rape cannot or has not been prevented (however distressing and shameful that is) and help to provide emergency contraception, therapy, antibiotics, and/or abortion methods to the potential and present victims of War rape in the international community;

6. Urges the Security Council to condemn any serious advocates and/or participants of this revolting sexual abuse.

[Aranoff]

The Allied States of Aranoff think this is a stupendous idea, and while not fully fleshed out, is a great idea.

We warn the nation of Unibot now, that, while we Aranovians support the clause to help provide abortions in the case of unwanted pregnancy, that they will face firm opposition from those theocratic member-nation goons of the WA. We will help to pursue against their aims and fight for the right of liberty, personal freedom, and the sanctity of the body within the WA.

We offer the following suggestions:

4. Declares that all member nations have the right, duty and obligation to diplomatically prevent (via force if necessary) War rape being used in warfare by any MEMBER nation and to prevent the proliferation of War rape as a tactic to nations that have previously abandoned said abuse;

We believe that, while noteworthy, we cannot force our terms onto a non-Member nation, and those stipulations should probably be noted. However, we Aranovians would willingly stop and provide diplomatic and humanitarian aid to those non-member nations where these atrocious acts occur and may even try to prevent it.

We would also like to point out that the purchasing of such items like contraceptives, antibiotics, and so forth will also provide valuable revenue for our corporations, which will be further injected back into our own national economies.

We full support the bill, the concept, and look forward to other member-nations further to debate this issue.

[Unibot]

We warn the nation of Unibot now, that, while we Aranovians support the clause to help provide abortions in the case of unwanted pregnancy, that they will face firm opposition from those theocratic member-nation goons of the WA. We will help to pursue against their aims and fight for the right of liberty, personal freedom, and the sanctity of the body within the WA.

We offer the following suggestions:

4. Declares that all member nations have the right, duty and obligation to diplomatically prevent (via force if necessary) War rape being used in warfare by any MEMBER nation and to prevent the proliferation of War rape as a tactic to nations that have previously abandoned said abuse;

We believe that, while noteworthy, we cannot force our terms onto a non-Member nation, and those stipulations should probably be noted. However, we Aranovians would willingly stop and provide diplomatic and humanitarian aid to those non-member nations where these atrocious acts occur and may even try to prevent it.

You can force them to comply, if you can force them. It's just that the Compliance Commission isn't going to do it for us. That clause remains as is.

See resolutions like GA#23 as precedent.

As for theocratic nations, bring it on.

Thanks for the advice and the support,
Kuno

[Aranoff]

Thank you for the clarification. As a new member to the World Assembly, we are still reviewing many of the resolutions.

[Grays Harbor]

Our question is this; Why are you focusing solely on an issue which is already considered illegal by a majority of nations, a very narrow issue. Why not instead try to define international war crimes in general, to provide a framework for preventing them?

[Unibot]

Our question is this; Why are you focusing solely on an issue which is already considered illegal by a majority of nations, a very narrow issue. Why not instead try to define international war crimes in general, to provide a framework for preventing them?

I suppose I could, some have already been covered though.. in fact most international war crimes have already been covered... however, almost anything that attacks civilians in the name of a military operation is an international war crime in my book -- would that be a good place to start?

[Grays Harbor]

Our question is this; Why are you focusing solely on an issue which is already considered illegal by a majority of nations, a very narrow issue. Why not instead try to define international war crimes in general, to provide a framework for preventing them?

I suppose I could, some have already been covered though.. in fact most international war crimes have already been covered... however, almost anything that attacks civilians in the name of a military operation is an international war crime in my book -- would that be a good place to start?

It would be a start, yes.

Despite popular opinion about us, we are not "no-lemmings". We merely choose that which we support carefully.

[Eraplevok]

we would mindlessly support this awesome piece of legislation!

[Grays Harbor]

we would mindlessly support this awesome piece of legislation!

You are not even in the WA, why do you feel the need to spam up topics?

[Quadrimmina]

OCC: I'm probably not doing the subject any sort of justice, because I wrote it in about ten minutes, but let's start from here...

A Ban on Sexual Violence in War
A resolution to improve worldwide human and civil rights.

Category: Human Rights | Strength: Significant

The General Assembly,

Understanding that some national armies have come to accept rape in armed conflict as a perfectly tolerable method of psychological warfare,

Believing that sexual violence in war (as with all forms of rape) is an abuse of power, and generally targets the physically weakest of civilians,

Hereby:

1. Defines “War rape”, as a variation of rape that is committed by soldiers against civilians, prisoners of war, or enemy combatants during armed conflict or war,

2. Outlaws the act of War rape as a severe and atrocious international crime against civilization;

3. Prohibits member-nations from promoting, obligating or facilitating War rape in any means;

4. Declares that all member nations have the right, duty and obligation to diplomatically prevent (via force if necessary) War rape being used in warfare by any nation and to prevent the proliferation of War rape as a tactic to nations that have previously abandoned said abuse;

5. Stipulates that the World Health Authority (WHA) has the duty to determine and locate where War rape cannot or has not been prevented (however distressing and shameful that is) and help to provide emergency contraception, therapy, antibiotics, and/or abortion methods to the potential and present victims of War rape in the international community;

6. Urges the Security Council to condemn any serious advocates and/or participants of this revolting sexual abuse.

Is referring to the WHA a HoC violation?

[Flibbleites]

OCC: I'm probably not doing the subject any sort of justice, because I wrote it in about ten minutes, but let's start from here...

A Ban on Sexual Violence in War
A resolution to improve worldwide human and civil rights.

Category: Human Rights | Strength: Significant

The General Assembly,

Understanding that some national armies have come to accept rape in armed conflict as a perfectly tolerable method of psychological warfare,

Believing that sexual violence in war (as with all forms of rape) is an abuse of power, and generally targets the physically weakest of civilians,

Hereby:

1. Defines “War rape”, as a variation of rape that is committed by soldiers against civilians, prisoners of war, or enemy combatants during armed conflict or war,

2. Outlaws the act of War rape as a severe and atrocious international crime against civilization;

3. Prohibits member-nations from promoting, obligating or facilitating War rape in any means;

4. Declares that all member nations have the right, duty and obligation to diplomatically prevent (via force if necessary) War rape being used in warfare by any nation and to prevent the proliferation of War rape as a tactic to nations that have previously abandoned said abuse;

5. Stipulates that the World Health Authority (WHA) has the duty to determine and locate where War rape cannot or has not been prevented (however distressing and shameful that is) and help to provide emergency contraception, therapy, antibiotics, and/or abortion methods to the potential and present victims of War rape in the international community;

6. Urges the Security Council to condemn any serious advocates and/or participants of this revolting sexual abuse.

Is referring to the WHA a HoC violation?

No, it's just giving the committee another job.

[Quadrimmina]

OCC: I'm probably not doing the subject any sort of justice, because I wrote it in about ten minutes, but let's start from here...

A Ban on Sexual Violence in War
A resolution to improve worldwide human and civil rights.

Category: Human Rights | Strength: Significant

The General Assembly,

Understanding that some national armies have come to accept rape in armed conflict as a perfectly tolerable method of psychological warfare,

Believing that sexual violence in war (as with all forms of rape) is an abuse of power, and generally targets the physically weakest of civilians,

Hereby:

1. Defines “War rape”, as a variation of rape that is committed by soldiers against civilians, prisoners of war, or enemy combatants during armed conflict or war,

2. Outlaws the act of War rape as a severe and atrocious international crime against civilization;

3. Prohibits member-nations from promoting, obligating or facilitating War rape in any means;

4. Declares that all member nations have the right, duty and obligation to diplomatically prevent (via force if necessary) War rape being used in warfare by any nation and to prevent the proliferation of War rape as a tactic to nations that have previously abandoned said abuse;

5. Stipulates that the World Health Authority (WHA) has the duty to determine and locate where War rape cannot or has not been prevented (however distressing and shameful that is) and help to provide emergency contraception, therapy, antibiotics, and/or abortion methods to the potential and present victims of War rape in the international community;

6. Urges the Security Council to condemn any serious advocates and/or participants of this revolting sexual abuse.

Is referring to the WHA a HoC violation?

No, it's just giving the committee another job.

But what if the resolution creating the WHA gets repealed? Then that measure would be useless.

[Gratislavia]

what a great idea

[Zhorsasa]

Though clearly not finished, its a great idea!
Zhorsasa will certainly vote for it.

[Nulono]

Why not just ban all rape?

[Flibbleites]

OCC: I'm probably not doing the subject any sort of justice, because I wrote it in about ten minutes, but let's start from here...

A Ban on Sexual Violence in War
A resolution to improve worldwide human and civil rights.

Category: Human Rights | Strength: Significant

The General Assembly,

Understanding that some national armies have come to accept rape in armed conflict as a perfectly tolerable method of psychological warfare,

Believing that sexual violence in war (as with all forms of rape) is an abuse of power, and generally targets the physically weakest of civilians,

Hereby:

1. Defines “War rape”, as a variation of rape that is committed by soldiers against civilians, prisoners of war, or enemy combatants during armed conflict or war,

2. Outlaws the act of War rape as a severe and atrocious international crime against civilization;

3. Prohibits member-nations from promoting, obligating or facilitating War rape in any means;

4. Declares that all member nations have the right, duty and obligation to diplomatically prevent (via force if necessary) War rape being used in warfare by any nation and to prevent the proliferation of War rape as a tactic to nations that have previously abandoned said abuse;

5. Stipulates that the World Health Authority (WHA) has the duty to determine and locate where War rape cannot or has not been prevented (however distressing and shameful that is) and help to provide emergency contraception, therapy, antibiotics, and/or abortion methods to the potential and present victims of War rape in the international community;

6. Urges the Security Council to condemn any serious advocates and/or participants of this revolting sexual abuse.

Is referring to the WHA a HoC violation?

No, it's just giving the committee another job.

But what if the resolution creating the WHA gets repealed? Then that measure would be useless.

The committee would still exist.

A Proposal must be able to stand on its own even if all referenced Resolutions were struck from existance; however, you may assign duties to an existing committee. Should the Resolution that creates the committe be Repealed, the committee will continue to exist, but in a reduced capacity.

[Quadrimmina]

OCC: I'm probably not doing the subject any sort of justice, because I wrote it in about ten minutes, but let's start from here...

A Ban on Sexual Violence in War
A resolution to improve worldwide human and civil rights.

Category: Human Rights | Strength: Significant

The General Assembly,

Understanding that some national armies have come to accept rape in armed conflict as a perfectly tolerable method of psychological warfare,

Believing that sexual violence in war (as with all forms of rape) is an abuse of power, and generally targets the physically weakest of civilians,

Hereby:

1. Defines “War rape”, as a variation of rape that is committed by soldiers against civilians, prisoners of war, or enemy combatants during armed conflict or war,

2. Outlaws the act of War rape as a severe and atrocious international crime against civilization;

3. Prohibits member-nations from promoting, obligating or facilitating War rape in any means;

4. Declares that all member nations have the right, duty and obligation to diplomatically prevent (via force if necessary) War rape being used in warfare by any nation and to prevent the proliferation of War rape as a tactic to nations that have previously abandoned said abuse;

5. Stipulates that the World Health Authority (WHA) has the duty to determine and locate where War rape cannot or has not been prevented (however distressing and shameful that is) and help to provide emergency contraception, therapy, antibiotics, and/or abortion methods to the potential and present victims of War rape in the international community;

6. Urges the Security Council to condemn any serious advocates and/or participants of this revolting sexual abuse.

Is referring to the WHA a HoC violation?

No, it's just giving the committee another job.

But what if the resolution creating the WHA gets repealed? Then that measure would be useless.

The committee would still exist.

A Proposal must be able to stand on its own even if all referenced Resolutions were struck from existance; however, you may assign duties to an existing committee. Should the Resolution that creates the committe be Repealed, the committee will continue to exist, but in a reduced capacity.

Ok, thank you honored Ambassador.

[JoshBanks]

Defines “War rape”, as a variation of rape that is committed by soldiers against civilians, prisoners of war, or enemy combatants during armed conflict or war,

I think this is a sick act upon citizens- The Empire of JoshBanks

[Krioval]

"Prevention of Torture" and "The Prisoners of War Accord" do this without resorting to ridiculously narrow legislation, and they do it better. Opposed.

Aleksei-kan Volkov
Imperial Chiefdom of Krioval

[Quadrimmina]

"Prevention of Torture" and "The Prisoners of War Accord" do this without resorting to ridiculously narrow legislation, and they do it better. Opposed.

Aleksei-kan Volkov
Imperial Chiefdom of Krioval

PoW Accord may not necessarily apply since it could just be on the spot and not a capture.

PoT would imply that the WA considered rape torture. While it may be a terrible thing to do, it cannot be considered on par with torture. Even if it was, not all nations would interpret it as such.

Therefore, there is a need for this resolution.

[Krioval]

PoW Accord may not necessarily apply since it could just be on the spot and not a capture.

PoT would imply that the WA considered rape torture. While it may be a terrible thing to do, it cannot be considered on par with torture. Even if it was, not all nations would interpret it as such.

Therefore, there is a need for this resolution.

Read first, comment later. Then you won't look entirely idiotic.

From "Prevention of Torture":

1. ‘Torture’ is defined as an act of intentionally inflicting pain, severe discomfort or suffering on a person for the purposes of [/b]intimidation, coercion, personal punishment[/b] or interrogation, or to extract information, confession or concession to demands from them or any other person, where committed with the approval or assistance of a government official or person acting in such capacity.

2. Such acts include, but are not limited to:
-Physical, sexual, or psychological abuse,

Yes, it does. As for The Prisoners of War Accord, it extends any POW protection to civilian internees specifically, effectively making that class of people particularly well-defended. Thus, no need for this proposal.

Aleksei-kan Volkov
Imperial Chiefdom of Krioval

[Glen-Rhodes]

1. ‘Torture’ is defined as an act of intentionally inflicting pain, severe discomfort or suffering on a person for the purposes of intimidation, coercion, personal punishment or interrogation, or to extract information, confession or concession to demands from them or any other person, where committed with the approval or assistance of a government official or person acting in such capacity.

What about the last part -- "where committed with the approval or assistance of a government official or person acting in such capacity"? Should 'war rape' be considered 'legal' by the World Assembly, so long as a commanding officer isn't approving of or assisting in the rape?

Yes, it does. As for The Prisoners of War Accord, it extends any POW protection to civilian internees specifically, effectively making that class of people particularly well-defended. Thus, no need for this proposal.

It only protects a narrow group of individuals. 'Civilian internee' is not a catch-all: it refers specifically to civilians your nation has rounded up within your own borders. The Prisoners of War Accord offers no protection whatsoever to fly-by-night rape of regular old villagers.

- Dr. B. Castro

[Sweden III]

Although my glorious nation did once support War rape, and almost every other kind of rape, we are now convinced that it is a bad thing through your very heart-felt arguements and will no longer intentionally rape anyone during a war.

[Charlotte Ryberg]

"Prevention of Torture" and "The Prisoners of War Accord" do this without resorting to ridiculously narrow legislation, and they do it better. Opposed.

Aleksei-kan Volkov
Imperial Chiefdom of Krioval

I think these two legislation may have already covered this hand in hand. In my opinion I think they should suffice for now.

[Quadrimmina]

PoW Accord may not necessarily apply since it could just be on the spot and not a capture.

PoT would imply that the WA considered rape torture. While it may be a terrible thing to do, it cannot be considered on par with torture. Even if it was, not all nations would interpret it as such.

Therefore, there is a need for this resolution.

Read first, comment later. Then you won't look entirely idiotic.

From "Prevention of Torture":

1. ‘Torture’ is defined as an act of intentionally inflicting pain, severe discomfort or suffering on a person for the purposes of [/b]intimidation, coercion, personal punishment[/b] or interrogation, or to extract information, confession or concession to demands from them or any other person, where committed with the approval or assistance of a government official or person acting in such capacity.

2. Such acts include, but are not limited to:
-Physical, sexual, or psychological abuse,

Yes, it does. As for The Prisoners of War Accord, it extends any POW protection to civilian internees specifically, effectively making that class of people particularly well-defended. Thus, no need for this proposal.

Aleksei-kan Volkov
Imperial Chiefdom of Krioval

Maybe you should read.

Your quote from PoT is correct, but it's only for "intimidation, coercion, personal punishment or interrogation". As in, not for personal gratification.

PoW accords may do that, but that typically refers to a group being detained in a camp (internment camp). This is as opposed to, say, the My Lai incident IRL. Or, if you want me to elaborate, say Quadrimmina invades a neighboring village. While gathering the citizens, a soldier takes one and rapes her. What is stopping this from happnening? Not PoT...this isnt done for "intimidation, coercion, personal punishment or interrogation", and not PoW. Think before you call someone an idiot, and maybe you too, sir, will look more like a delegate and less like an acerbic jerk.

"Prevention of Torture" and "The Prisoners of War Accord" do this without resorting to ridiculously narrow legislation, and they do it better. Opposed.

Aleksei-kan Volkov
Imperial Chiefdom of Krioval

I think these two legislation may have already covered this hand in hand. In my opinion I think they should suffice for now.

We ask the honorable Ms. Harper if our analysis above does not take into account something from one of these two resolutions.