DRAFT: A Convention on Emigration

[Charlotte Ryberg]

Reforming the Right to Emigrate (Re: Epidemic Response Act)

Noting the outcome of a recent discussion in respect to the the containment of epidemics or pandemics, the honoured ambassador to Charlotte Ryberg has accepted the repeal of the incumbent Right to Emigration law and therefore drafts a proposed replacement under the same category and strength:

---

A Convention on Emigration
A resolution to improve worldwide human and civil rights.

Category: Human Rights | Strength: Mild | Proposed by: Charlotte Ryberg

Description: The World Assembly,

Description: OBSERVING that in the countries of the World Assembly, people may emigrate from one country to another for many reasons such as:
• Pursuit of ambition, opportunity or refuge;
• Escape from war, persecution or injustice;

SEEKING to promote the right of emigration for such reasons;

DEFINES, for the purpose of this resolution:
• Emigration: an act of leaving one country in order to settle in another;

The World Assembly therefore,

1. MANDATES the following, unless any of the situations in Sections 2 and 3 are true:
a) A civilian of a member state who is above the age of majority, and is mentally sound, has the right to emigrate from their current country of residence regardless of their status (such as disability, gender, sexuality, ethnicity or belief).
b) A mentally capable civilian who is below the age of majority (as defined in their country of residence), and is orphaned, may emigrate if the said person has a genuine aspiration and determination to pursue a better life in another country;
c) Member states must allow legal parent/guardian(s) of a mentally incapable civilian to make such a decision on their behalf. For reasons of safety and well-being, a mentally incapable civilian who is emigrating must be accompanied by parent/guardian(s);

2. ALLOWS for member states to waive Section 1, if any of the following situations are true:
a) The person is under penal servitude, undergoing civil or criminal legal proceedings;
b) To prevent the spread of radiation/contagious diseases or to contain an ongoing disease epidemic/pandemic;

3. PROVIDES for member states to waive Section 1, as a result of a legitimate judicial ruling, that is delivered in good faith compliance with the clauses and intents of this resolution;

4. URGES the member state in which the emigrant left, upon successful emigration, to inform the new country of residence of its criminal history, if that emigrant has any.

5. URGES member states to enact appropriate legislation to prevent citizens from becoming stateless.

6. EMPHASIZES that this resolution shall have no effect on legislation of member states concerning on immigration.

---

The following bits were made redundant by GA #57 and subsequent new legislation and will no longer be part of the draft, but kept here for the record:


3. PROVIDES for member states to waive Section 1:
a) For persons suspected of espionage or intention to carry out terrorist acts abroad, for up to the maximum of 90 days (or lower if specified by national legislation), after which the person must be charged in criminal justice or be allowed to emigrate; (Habeas Corpus now covers this)

4. Further allows member states to waive Section 1 in peacetime only, if the country has experienced a net population decline of 5% or more of its population in each of the last five calendar years, provided that the clauses and intents of this resolution are respected. For the purpose of this resolution the net population decline is determined by the following traits: a low birth rate, a high death rate and a low net rate of immigration.

5. Encourages member states to:
a) Help refugees who are fleeing from hostile situations such as: natural disasters, war, persecution or oppressive/unethical governments with respect being given to the provisions of this resolution.
b) Help such refugees under these situations to travel safely and swiftly to countries that are more tolerant to them;
c) Take action or enact appropriate legislation to prevent refugees from becoming stateless.

See also:

• Recent repeal by Sionis Prioratus
• The incumbent version

[Aidsboat]

Suspected of Espionage by whom? The nation they are emigrating to, or that which they are emigrating from?

[Aidsboat]

Suspected of Espionage by whom? The nation they are emigrating to, or that which they are emigrating from?

[Aidsboat]

Apologies for double post, my computer's freaking out.

[Charlotte Ryberg]

Suspected of Espionage by whom? The nation they are emigrating to, or that which they are emigrating from?

Clarified: Member states should be able to continue to detain those who sneak out their national secrets to the enemy. This along with terrorism abroad comes under a international security situation so therefore it has been split.

[Aidsboat]

So in the event that either nation suspects the person of espoinage, they will be detained by the nation that suspects them?

[Glen-Rhodes]

I don't have much of a problem with this replacement. However, I would caution you to add the incumbent's clause on judicial rulings. Judicial rulings are essential to allowing flexibility for a state to waive the right of emigration for reasons not espoused from the resolution text, but legitimate nonetheless.

I've made some aesthetic corrections, but I suppose you aren't bound to employ them:

The World Assembly,

OBSERVING that in the countries of the World Assembly, people choose to emigrate from one country to another for many reasons such as the pursuit of ambition, opportunity or refuge, and to escape from war, persecution or injustice;

WHEREAS Emigration is DEFINED, for this resolution only, as an act of leaving one country in order to settle in another, and WILLING to promote the right of emigration for such reasons;

Therefore:

1. MANDATES that any civilian of a member state has the right to emigrate from their current country of residence regardless of their status of disability, gender, sexuality, ethnicity or belief, unless any of the situations in Section 2 are true.

2. PERMITS member states to waive Section 1 if any of the following situations are true:
a) The person is under penal servitude, undergoing civil or criminal legal proceedings, convicted of sexual offenses with proof;
b) The person is suspected of espionage or intention to carry out terrorist acts abroad;
c) To prevent the spread of radiation/contagious diseases, to contain an ongoing disease epidemic/pandemic, or where the person is mentally incapable of making such a decision;
d) Unless orphaned and safe to do so, the person is below the age of maturity (as defined in their country of residence) and lacks the consent of their legal parents or guardians;
e) A legitimate judicial ruling, that is delivered in good faith compliance with the clauses and intents of this resolution, has waived the person's right to emigration.

3. ENCOURAGES member states to:
a) Help refugees who are fleeing from hostile situations such as: natural disasters, war, persecution or oppressive/unethical governments with respect being given to Section 1 of this resolution.
b) Help such refugees under these situations to travel safely and swiftly to countries that are more tolerant to them;
c) Take action or enact appropriate legislation to prevent refugees from becoming stateless.

[float=left]Dr. Bradford Castro
Chief Ambassador, FAA
the Commonwealth of Glen-Rhodes[/float][float=right][/float]

[Charlotte Ryberg]

So in the event that either nation suspects the person of espoinage, they will be detained by the nation that suspects them?

It's up to the member state itself to decide on that: the argument for this clause is that some member states don't want enemy spies to make off with their plans for a super-duper all-destructive weapon and then the enemy build it to attack them.

[Aidsboat]

Sounds good and I agree with the amendment for judicial action. With that,this is a proposition I (and most likely my fellow members of the Free Society) can get behind. Is co-sponsorship necessary, Because I'd be willing.

[Charlotte Ryberg]

Not a problem Dr. Castro: that has been added as a separate section for other reasons. Both sections are however, binding.

[New Rockport]

"Sexual offences" in section 2 (a) could be read overbroadly, to include minor offenses such as prostitution or indecent exposure. I suggest replacing these words with the words "offences involving non-consensual sexual conduct."

Under Section 2 (b), a government could hold an innocent person within its borders indefinitely under the pretext of mere suspicion. I suggest replacing this section with the following language:

A person suspected of espionage or intention to carry out terrorist acts abroad may be prevented from emigrating for a period not to exceed twenty eight (28) days, after which the person must either be charged in criminal court or allowed to emigrate.

Respectfully submitted,
David Corrigan, Esq.
Deputy Counsel to the Ambassador
Republic of New Rockport

[Aidsboat]

That's a good point about the detainment of suspects, and something I had thought about myself, which is kind of why I had been asking those questions, though I assumed more specific guidelines for suspect detainment had been spelled out in another resolution.

This sounds good though.

[Charlotte Ryberg]

"Sexual offences" in section 2 (a) could be read overbroadly, to include minor offenses such as prostitution or indecent exposure. I suggest replacing these words with the words "offences involving non-consensual sexual conduct."

Under Section 2 (b), a government could hold an innocent person within its borders indefinitely under the pretext of mere suspicion. I suggest replacing this section with the following language:

A person suspected of espionage or intention to carry out terrorist acts abroad may be prevented from emigrating for a period not to exceed twenty eight (28) days, after which the person must either be charged in criminal court or allowed to emigrate.

I approve of this and therefore incorporates it into the appropriate sections. Here is how I have done it:

2. PERMITS member states to waive Section 1 if any of the following situations are true:
a) The person is under penal servitude, undergoing (civil or criminal) legal proceedings or proven to be convicted of offences involving non-consensual sexual conduct;
b) To prevent the spread of radiation/contagious diseases, to contain an ongoing disease epidemic/pandemic or where the person is mentally incapable of making such a decision;
c) Unless orphaned or safe to do so, the person is below the age of maturity (as defined in their country of residence) and lacks the consent of their legal parents or guardians.

3. FURTHER PERMITS member states to waive Section 1:
a) For persons suspected of espionage or intention to carry out terrorist acts abroad, for up to 28 days, after which the person must charged in criminal justice or be released and thereby allowed to emigrate;
b) As a result of a legitimate judicial ruling, that is delivered in good faith compliance with the clauses and intents of this resolution.

I am hopeful that section 2a is also covering our sex offenders register, which bans registrants from travel to WA member states without the permission and supervision of the Home and Colonial Offices.

[New Rockport]

Thank you very much, your Excellency, for incorporating my proposed amendments. I would suggest adding the word "be" between the words "must" and "charged" in Section 3a, so that it reads as follows:

a) For persons suspected of espionage or intention to carry out terrorist acts abroad, for up to 28 days, after which the person must be charged in criminal justice or be released and thereby allowed to emigrate;

Other than that it looks good.

Respectfully submitted,
David Corrigan, Esq.
Deputy Counsel to the Ambassador
Republic of New Rockport

[Charlotte Ryberg]

Thank you very much, your Excellency, for incorporating my proposed amendments. I would suggest adding the word "be" between the words "must" and "charged" in Section 3a, so that it reads as follows:

a) For persons suspected of espionage or intention to carry out terrorist acts abroad, for up to 28 days, after which the person must be charged in criminal justice or be released and thereby allowed to emigrate;

Other than that it looks good.

Respectfully submitted,
David Corrigan, Esq.
Deputy Counsel to the Ambassador
Republic of New Rockport

Got that, honoured ambassador.

[Laysley]

It must be stated that this really is an area the World Assembly should have no control, authority or influence in.

Recognizing the need for certain civil rights is one thing, but really! Emigration?!

Any normal (not even oppressive) theocracy or monarchy around the world will have tonnes of 'open minded' extremists against them, so allowing random and spontaneous emigration for these people is absurd; A country cannot function if everyone has the right to move out as they please. Valuable workforces will be lost, and neighboring countries will be overrun with immigrants.

That's not to say that emigration should be illegal everywhere, for some reason democracy gives people hope for the future of their nation and so very few will move from those nations which would be a balanced situation- so I'm not against emigration completely. It's just having compulsory freedom of emigration everywhere that's the problem.

Viceroy Stancliffe
Hampshireian Colony of Laysley

[Aidsboat]

That sounds like an ideal system to me.

That would increase everyone's standards of living, and if a nations is losing alot of people to emigration, they will have to make their minimum wages and standards of living better, until we reach a world in which everyone lives in a country of their choosing where they are treated fairly.

[Laysley]

It's not necessarily about wages or standards of living and all that bureaucratic what not though!

Imagine a nice little Islamic Theocracy, with good standards of living. A third of the population are, say, Zionists. The Zionists, seeing the new resolution to make emigration easier would almost instantly get out of there. Not because of poverty, but because of religious views.

Then we have a situation where a state has nothing wrong, and yet it loses much of it's workforce. And that's not to mention the fact that hundreds and thousands of immigrants arriving in a nearby nation, and all the problems with unemployment, crime and loss of culture that would cause!

[Aidsboat]

In every migration, there are push and pull factors, and the same factors will effect every surrounding country. Muslims in and around the Zionist state would flock to the Islamic Theocracy for community and acceptance of THEIR religious ideas too.

The situation you've described sounds like a great occurance: There would be no more tension within the country between the Zionist minority and the Islamic Government and (assumably)majority population.

[Laysley]

That's all very well, but that doesn't out way the problem of the Islamic nation falling apart and nearby nation being overrun with foreigners, wanted or not!

[Glen-Rhodes]

If your government is that worried about an exodus to your nation, then your government can easily change their immigration laws.

Dr. Bradford Castro
Chief Ambassador, FAA
the Commonwealth of Glen-Rhodes

[Laysley]

And so we'll have thousands of emigrates sitting around in boats in international waters then?

[Glen-Rhodes]

And so we'll have thousands of emigrates sitting around in boats in international waters then?

That's hyperbolic, but yes. A reasonable person would assume that they wouldn't try to emigrate without a place to go.

Dr. Bradford Castro
Chief Ambassador, FAA
the Commonwealth of Glen-Rhodes

[Laysley]

Indeed, but if everyone did tighten their immigration laws and so they couldn't leave the country: What would be the point of this law?

[Charlotte Ryberg]

That is where the convention on refugees is needed, since there isn't any in force yet: this is specifically about emigration only, not immigration, honoured ambassador.

Kelssek appears to be drafting up one.