(PROPOSAL) The Rights of Illegal Immigrants

[Osthia]

Category: Human Rights
Strength: Significant

ADHERING to the belief that all living persons share fundamental rights, regardless of their race, creed, nationality, or socioeconomic status,

AGREEING that among these rights is the right to not be treated inhumanely by a government,

ACKNOWLEDGING the troublesome fact that there are nations who still employ inhumane practices on certain groups of individuals they view as not deserving dignity,

WISHING to move the world forward, promote fairness, and preserve the dignity of all living persons,

The World Assembly hereby

DEFINES, for the purpose of this resolution, an “unauthorized immigrant” as a person who enters into a nation in which they hold no citizenship, without the authorization or permission from the government of that nation;

PERMITS nations to deport or otherwise return unauthorized immigrants back to the nation from which they originally came;

DECLARES that the following protections must be granted to unauthorized immigrants:
- The same privileges and accommodations that citizens and legal residents are afforded during detention;
- Safe and free passage home, if being deported or otherwise returned to their nation of origin;
- Timely return to their nation of origin, if applicable;
- Freedom from assault, physical or psychological abuse, and all other acts prohibited as torture by international law;

RESOLVES that in the name of dignity and progress, no punishment for the crime of illegal immigration shall consist of permanent detention or of execution;

PROHIBITS the use of lethal force against unauthorized immigrants, unless the immigrant becomes an imminent threat to the life or bodily safety of a nearby individual, through the use of lethal force themselves;

ESTABLISHES the International Immigration Organization (IIO), with the following authorities to:
- Collect and investigate reports and complaints of immigrant abuse or other deviations and violations of international immigration law;
- Refer cases to the International Criminal Court when applicable;
- Establish outreach programs to promote legal and authorized immigration;

IMPLORES nations to create a pathway to citizenship or permanent residence for immigrants, to provide a road for a better life for all people, and increase international peace and prosperity.

Co-Authored by Glen-Rhodes

[Grays Harbor]

The only "right" an ILLEGAL immigrant has is the right to be deported.

[Osthia]

Maybe some POSITIVE input would be nice. You know, like changes, not slamming what I am trying to do.

[Militant Freethinkers]

While your concern for the rights of these people is applauded, the manner in which you present this case is not. We feel that each nation has the right to secure it's borders as it deems necessary, up to and including lethal force. We feel that allowing such concessions to those who would willfully violate the laws of our nation decreases the effectiveness of our authority figures, results in our having to allocate funding to treat and house these persons prior to their deportation, also at our cost, and sends a message to those who would immigrate illegally that even if they are caught entering any WA member nation illegally they will still be treated well, and likely better still than the situation from which they are emigrating.

This not only promotes such immigration by creating consequences less harsh than what many immigrants already face, but guarantee the safety of these immigrants until such time that deportation can occur, which we have found to be a lengthy process. This also creates a tough choice for enforcement officials who often cannot ascertain 100% that a weapon is present, but must act under their own best judgment in many instances without complete information. By providing for such harsh measures against enforcement personnel this measure will strictly limit those 'best judgment' choices and could potentially create an environment where enforcement officials are reluctant to act, often until it is too late.

While we do not condone the use of lethal force as an initial response, and avoid it all costs personally, we feel that this measure intrudes too much upon the governance of WA member nations and will be forced to withhold our support of such a measure.

[Manticore Reborn]

I must agree with the honorable ambassador from Grays Harbour. Illegal immigrants have no eights under Manticorian Law. In fact, our constitution only applies to citizens of Manticore Reborn. We extends rights and privileges to those legally in our nation as a courtesy to our neighboring nations expecting our citizens to be treated likewise when legally in their nation.

[Rutianas]

I'd have to agree with the Honorable Ambassador from Gray's Harbor. Someone who attempts to cross the border illegally already knows full well what they are doing is illegal. If they are caught by border patrols and roughed up in any way, I'm not going to shed a tear for them should they cry foul. No, the rights of illegal immigrants should be limited only to the right to be deported, no matter how they're treated upon being caught.

Paula Jenner, Rutianas and Swarming Cute Kittens Ambassador

[Kari-Kazzir]

What a crock of text-book bleeding heart liberalism.
Expect one hell of a no from the single vote that i can provide.
But good luck, honestly.

[Militant Freethinkers]

Maybe some POSITIVE input would be nice. You know, like changes, not slamming what I am trying to do.

Perhaps this is not occurring because the honorable representatives of this assembly are so vehemently opposed to your measure, and any measure of it's ilk, which would limit their rights to secure their borders and hold them responsible for the well-being of those who have already shown a clear disregard for the laws of the land which they intend to enter.

[Thee Cheshire Cat]

The only "right" an ILLEGAL immigrant has is the right to be deported.

Agreed,

They can be protected on the deportation, and dealt with nicely however that is their only right.

[Glen-Rhodes]

The only "right" an ILLEGAL immigrant has is the right to be deported.

Yes, illegal immigrants ought to be offered zero protection from murder, rape, assault, and general human rights abuses! Isn't the World Assembly just so progressive, nowadays?

- Dr. B. Castro

[Denecaep]

Being a liberally oriented nation (at least until the next election) we respect your efforts for this, and recognize the hard work you have put in to create this.

Sadly enough, you may want to direct your efforts somewhere else, or they may be fruitless, due to the political boundaries that weave the WA. Perhaps you could work with the idea, yet be much milder with action.

I too have written a good resolution, and been frustrated with choosing a topic that simply wouldn't have a way to pass, so let me say what I wish had been said to me; your work here is recognized, we appreciate your efforts to take an active part in the WA, and we hope you will continue your efforts, however maybe in other topics.

[Mesogiria]

The only "right" an ILLEGAL immigrant has is the right to be deported.

Yes, illegal immigrants ought to be offered zero protection from murder, rape, assault, and general human rights abuses! Isn't the World Assembly just so progressive, nowadays?

- Dr. B. Castro

"While illegal immigrants certainly deserve the universal human and sapient rights accorded to all," says Ambassador Rodrigues, looking at the good doctor over the top of her glasses, "It is certainly not the place of a WA resolution to be dictating operational policy to police and military units. I must contend that the diversity of situations possible within the realm of border security is so large that no specific language about the use or non-use of force should be included in this proposed measure. A clause urgin restrain upon the part of police and military units would accomplish much the same purpose, and spare us the possilbility of a policeman having to consult with WA regulations before deciding if lethal force is appropriate."

An aide, a small round-faced man with a silly-looking mustache, leans forward and whipers a few word in the Ambassador's ear. She nodds, and speaks again.

"Additionally, this proposal contains another clause most troubling to my government. It reads:

THEREFORE classifies an illegal immigrant/illegal alien as a foreigner who has entered or resides in a country unlawfully or without the country's authorization.

"

"This definition seems sufficiently broad so as to include spies, foreign agents, terrorists, and even foreign soliders, all of might enter the Imperial Commonwealth without the authorization of the government. It is certainly permissibile to engage and kill enemy forces in time of war in uniform, even if they do not present an immediate threat to anyone. However, as it stand, this proposal would permit the use of force only upon enemy soldiers and agents actively engaged in killing Mesogiria citizen, and not merely those that have participated in the invasion and perhaps killed Mesogirian citizens in the past. This is absolutely intolerable."

[Glen-Rhodes]

-snip-

I am not saying that this proposal is perfect and ready to become a resolution. You make good points about foreign agents, terrorists, and the like. What I am appalled at is how nearly all the delegations here are saying that 'illegal immigrants' deserve no protection whatsoever, that governments ought to be able to shoot them on sight, beat them to an inch within life, and all other atrocities that no government supportive of basic human rights would ever want to do or want the world as a whole to be doing.

Frankly, I'm quite disgusted. The World Assembly has a long track record of supporting human rights. That there are actually delegations here opposing the very idea of protecting non-documented immigrants from assault and murder, that there are actually delegations saying that these people have absolutely no rights whatsoever, has made me reevaluate where the World Assembly stands on human rights. Are we heading towards a dark path of making exceptions simply because somebody isn't a bona fide citizen? Or are we going to stand by our long-held, long-established principles?

- Dr. B. Castro

[Mallorea and Riva]

-snip-

I am not saying that this proposal is perfect and ready to become a resolution. You make good points about foreign agents, terrorists, and the like. What I am appalled at is how nearly all the delegations here are saying that 'illegal immigrants' deserve no protection whatsoever, that governments ought to be able to shoot them on sight, beat them to an inch within life, and all other atrocities that no government supportive of basic human rights would ever want to do or want the world as a whole to be doing.

Frankly, I'm quite disgusted. The World Assembly has a long track record of supporting human rights. That there are actually delegations here opposing the very idea of protecting non-documented immigrants from assault and murder, that there are actually delegations saying that these people have absolutely no rights whatsoever, has made me reevaluate where the World Assembly stands on human rights. Are we heading towards a dark path of making exceptions simply because somebody isn't a bona fide citizen? Or are we going to stand by our long-held, long-established principles?

- Dr. B. Castro

Absolute agreement. Very well said.

[Unibot]

This resolution needs a lot of reform to prevent a strawman debate -- we do not support any treatment of immigrants which neglects the human dignity of immigrants. They're typically immigrating to look a better life, a principle that we can all sympathize with and although we all are not always able to support everyone's wish for equal access to opportunity .. we can at-least treat these people with respect -- treat these immigrants like human beings, not dead meat.

I'd support a problem that essentially,

• Prohibited unlawful treatment of immigrants.
• Mandated opportunities for legal immigrants.
• Provided access to far-away and opportune nations to immigrants by providing funding for transportation if both parties are willing.
  

[Grays Harbor]

The only "right" an ILLEGAL immigrant has is the right to be deported.

Yes, illegal immigrants ought to be offered zero protection from murder, rape, assault, and general human rights abuses! Isn't the World Assembly just so progressive, nowadays?

- Dr. B. Castro

rape, murder, etc, etc, etc are already crimes under existing law. Why do you, or anybody else for that matter, feel the need to make it something that should be covered by the WA? How is this pertinent? How does that even make sense? Your well demonstrated love of international interference is taking you a bit far this time.

[Charlotte Ryberg]

Ms. Harper isn't convinced that the rights of illegal immigrants is going to please the WA... some may argue that after all they were not allowed to enter their country. However, we have been taking on people who had been failed by their own country.

[Bears Armed]

MANDATES that all illegal immigrants received by any other WA member nations shall be transferred to Osthia and immediately granted full citizenship there.

"Hokay, 'Illegal for Branding', I know; But if only we could add such a clause..."

[Glen-Rhodes]

Rape, murder, etc, etc, etc are already crimes under existing law. Why do you, or anybody else for that matter, feel the need to make it something that should be covered by the WA? How is this pertinent? How does that even make sense? Your well demonstrated love of international interference is taking you a bit far this time.

Because it's obvious that some nations in the World Assembly don't extend some of the most basic rights to non-documented immigrants. Sorry if I don't feel compelled to reign back interference on human rights issues; though, I would suspect Grays Harbor to object to even the most universally acceptable proclamation of human dignity, if it were to come in the form of a World Assembly resolution.

- Dr. B. Castro

[Meekinos]

Anyone who enters illegally is committing an act of aggression, especially when there are legal channels through which the individuals may enter. Instead of denying sovereign members the right to defend themselves -- after all, anyone entering is a potential threat until we know otherwise -- this act should reflect the right to deport illegals while providing them with the right to be treated with dignity. Better yet, instead of focusing on illegal immigration, since it is bound to break the law in many member nations, it would be wiser to design a proposal that would grant asylum rights to persecuted individuals; actual refugees and not just queue-jumpers.

In providing rights for refugees and asylum seekers (from both WA and non-WA members), the WA would be better able to protect the vulnerable. If a person is neither of these and simply an immigrant, they can go through the proper legal channels, otherwise if they are in a member nation illegally, they can face deportation at the discretion of said nation.

[Glen-Rhodes]

... this act should reflect the right to deport illegals while providing them with the right to be treated with dignity.

That is exactly what the proposal is currently doing. I'm currently mulling over some edits at the moment. When I'm finished, I'll post them here for the author's consideration.

Better yet, instead of focusing on illegal immigration, since it is bound to break the law in many member nations, it would be wiser to design a proposal that would grant asylum rights to persecuted individuals; actual refugees and not just queue-jumpers.

That issue is completely separate from providing protection against murder, assault, etc. for undocumented immigrants, I would say.

- Dr. B. Castro

[Grays Harbor]

We have no "undocumented" immigrants in our nation. You are either a legal immigrant or an illegal immigrant, with the latter being deported immediately upon discovery or arrival, whichever comes first. We are as yet of the opinion that special consideration is not required to protect illegal immigrants from otherwise illegal activities. To believe that because someone is in a nation illegally, and subject to deportation, makes them fair game and unprotected from other crimes is just so much nonsense.

Therefore, our position remains that this entire proceeding is just so much nonsense as well.

[Meekinos]

... this act should reflect the right to deport illegals while providing them with the right to be treated with dignity.

That is exactly what the proposal is currently doing. I'm currently mulling over some edits at the moment. When I'm finished, I'll post them here for the author's consideration.

The only rights they should have is not to be mistreated. This proposal goes too far in preventing authorities from exercising their rights to protect the nation. As far as this proposal is concern, anyone who illegally enters a nation doesn't have malicious intent. We do not know if they do or not, hence, nations should and must have the right to exercise reasonable force.

This proposal makes detainment harder since some may consider the detainment to be forcible and thus, "harmed".

Better yet, instead of focusing on illegal immigration, since it is bound to break the law in many member nations, it would be wiser to design a proposal that would grant asylum rights to persecuted individuals; actual refugees and not just queue-jumpers.

That issue is completely separate from providing protection against murder, assault, etc. for undocumented immigrants, I would say.

- Dr. B. Castro

Why should protection be extended to illegal aliens who willingly violate our sovereign rights by illegally entering our nation? They are no better than any other foreigner, be they terrorists, soldiers or spies. Oh how easy it would be for foreign influences to slip past if they could simply blend in with "undocumented immigrants".

These people are committing illegal acts and only should be afforded the right for immediate deportation.

Torture is already banned in the World Assembly.

How do you plan to address murder? After all, if someone is running from the authorities who have legally stopped them, they are a criminal and if they resist -- which is clearly criminal behaviour -- they may very well be shot at. That would under this proposal count as assault even though they are breaking the law and have already attempted to evade authorities.

This proposal doesn't address treatment in custody or detention. If they are out freely in the nation, they are breaking the law; they are criminals and should be treated as any other wanted criminal should. If they enter with a valid passport and visa, then there isn't an issue, is there? They have briefly satisfied the requirements for entry and enable authorities to ensure that they leave at the end of their visa. Why else should they have to be undocumented? If they can't even satisfy this one requirement, what reason is there to offer them protection?

[Bears Armed]

To believe that because someone is in a nation illegally, and subject to deportation, makes them fair game and unprotected from other crimes is just so much nonsense

... and in contradiction of the CoCR...

[Glen-Rhodes]

To believe that because someone is in a nation illegally, and subject to deportation, makes them fair game and unprotected from other crimes is just so much nonsense. ...Therefore, our position remains that this entire proceeding is just so much nonsense as well.

Your position is wrong. Clearly, there are nations who do believe they are 'fair game.' They have commented in this very debate. I see no valid reason why the World Assembly shouldn't be voicing an opinion on this matter.

To believe that because someone is in a nation illegally, and subject to deportation, makes them fair game and unprotected from other crimes is just so much nonsense

... and in contradiction of the CoCR...

I doubt it. The World Assembly itself discriminated against undocumented immigrants when it granted the right to education only to citizens. If CoCR didn't prevent that, I don't see how it prevents inhumane treatment of those same undocumented immigrants, either while they're detained before deportation or in the process of being deported.

-snip-

All of this is a response to something I did not say. You failed to notice that I've already mentioned there are problems with this proposal.

- Dr. B. Castro