[DEFEATED] Recreational Drugs Compact

[Tinhampton]

This resolution was at vote between the 19th and 23rd of September, 2021.
It was defeated by a margin of 13,004 votes (about 87%) to 1,936 (about 13%).

---

This proposal has been submitted to the General Assembly Social Justice Board.
NOTE: at 1809 BST on the 15th of September 2021, this proposal reached quorum with South Boston Irishmen's approval, the 54th all told.

---

Character count: 547
Word count: 80

IC: Please take up your quibbles with Assistant Bianca Venkman Lydia Anderson.
OOC: This is a blocker... kind of. I think. Probably. say hi to morover and vhaovamer ... qvait ... greater cesnica and honeydewistania to me

Recreational Drugs Compact
A resolution to reduce income inequality and increase basic welfare.

Category: Social Justice

Strength: Mild

Proposed by: Tinhampton

---

The General Assembly hereby:

1. reserves to its member states whether to legalise, decriminalise, or forbid the possession, distribution, growing, use, sale and purchase of drugs for recreational purposes within their jurisdiction,
2. suggests that members treat paraphernalia used with a certain recreational drug as having the same legal status as that drug, and
3. urges members to fund or provide addiction recovery services for intensive drug users who sincerely desire them, without fear of punishment for using such services.

[Astrobolt]

Recognising that prior attempts to decriminalise all recreational drugs have failed at vote, the General Assembly hereby:

1. reserves to its member states the matter of whether to legalise, decriminalise, or forbid the possession, distribution, growing, use, sale and purchase of drugs for recreational purposes within their jurisdiction, and
2. urges members to treat paraphernalia used with a certain recreational drug as having the same legal status as that drug.

"Opposed. This is a health matter, not a criminal matter, and this proposal would allow member nations to criminalize drug usage."

[Kenmoria]

“I don’t think there is a need for a blocker on this issue. Decriminalisation is a goal that should be pursued by the GA.”

[PotatoFarmers]

"While we do not agree with a decriminalisation of drugs, we feel that a blocker is unnecessary."

[Morover]

urges members to treat paraphernalia used with a certain recreational drug as having the same legal status as that drug.

"What? Why?"

"Fundamentally opposed."

[Tinhampton]

urges members to treat paraphernalia used with a certain recreational drug as having the same legal status as that drug.

"What? Why?"

Venkman: Ambassador... Somedoddle*, I'm trying to encourage nations to avoid a scenario where - for instance - marijuana is legal but marijuana-related paraphernalia is not, or vice versa. Such a clause is included to prevent this proposal from being deemed to be an illegal Pure Blocker.

*Please forgive Bianca her trespasses, she hasn't quite worked out who Morover's Ambassador is yet

[The Palentine]

I like it. You have my support.

See you in the funny papers,
Sen. Horatio Sulla

[Imperium Anglorum]

No support; a blocker of this sort has the exact same effect as passing no legislation of any kind. Member nations already have the ability to determine the legality of recreational drugs.

[Agarntrop 2]

Opposed

[Sierra Lyricalia]

OOC: I note that paragraph (a) has no effect within the category (being a blocker); and paragraph (b) has a mild effect that more nations will now treat possession of (say) a glass pipe as being just as bad as actually possessing some illegal drug.

As written, I don't think this can be legally submitted under Civil Rights.

- 1/6 GenSec

[Araraukar]

IC: "Insofar as the WA should be legislating anything on recreational drug use, leaving it at the hands of the nations themselves is the best choice of action. Support."

OOC: As per category problems, you could add clauses that require/encourage member states to provide help with getting rid of a drug habit to people who willingly ask for such treatment, rather than punish them for being addicts in the first place - this could be written as Social Justice: Mild fairly easily.

[WayNeacTia]

"Unnecessary and quite frankly, useless."

Wayne

[Tinhampton]

OOC: As per category problems, you could add clauses that require/encourage member states to provide help with getting rid of a drug habit to people who willingly ask for such treatment, rather than punish them for being addicts in the first place - this could be written as Social Justice: Mild fairly easily.

Article c has been added - extremely belated thanks, Ara.

[Bananaistan]

"In light of the competing proposal with an opposite policy effect, the Politburo has convened in support of this proposal."

[Tinhampton]

Anderson: Ta very much. Any more thoughts?

[Tinhampton]

Anderson: No? Jolly good, then.

[Minskiev]

What the hell is this

Edit: Ambassador Wallace Russell states "Arf arf arf," roughly translating to "What the hell is this"

[Desmosthenes and Burke]

We find this preferable to the competing draft on the topic. How the bar came to be that low we dare not speculate for fear of offending almighty Jove.

[Goobergunchia]

This quorate proposal does absolutely nothing except force two votes to be held on any future resolution regarding recreational drugs, or require said resolution to find that the use of a given drug is not recreational. (It occurs to us that such a finding could be made for criminalization but would be extremely difficult to make for legalization.) There is no benefit in throwing up additional procedural obstacles to General Assembly authors.

We respectfully urge a vote against.

[Lord] Michael Evif
Goobergunchian WA Ambassador

[Abacathea]

suggests that members treat paraphernalia used with a certain recreational drug as having the same legal status as that drug, and

As long as that clause exists or any similar clause exists, I will campaign actively against this proposal. A burnt bit of tinfoil, an empty baggie or as has been previously stated a glass pipe should never unaccompanied be put on the same footing as any significant classification of drugs, controlled or otherwise. Open to abuse, even if it is just a "suggestion".

[Greater Cesnica]

suggests that members treat paraphernalia used with a certain recreational drug as having the same legal status as that drug, and

As long as that clause exists or any similar clause exists, I will campaign actively against this proposal. A burnt bit of tinfoil, an empty baggie or as has been previously stated a glass pipe should never unaccompanied be put on the same footing as any significant classification of drugs, controlled or otherwise. Open to abuse, even if it is just a "suggestion".

Well put.

[Separatist Peoples]

As long as that clause exists or any similar clause exists, I will campaign actively against this proposal. A burnt bit of tinfoil, an empty baggie or as has been previously stated a glass pipe should never unaccompanied be put on the same footing as any significant classification of drugs, controlled or otherwise. Open to abuse, even if it is just a "suggestion".

Well put.

"Likewise. This proposal condemns victims of overpolicing to more of the same, and actively discourages domestic reform of drug arrests. It gives overt approval from this august body to apply the most draconian possible law enforcement methods. It is hard to see such an egregious issue as accidental."

[Brezzia]

suggests that members treat paraphernalia used with a certain recreational drug as having the same legal status as that drug,

Somedoddle*, I'm trying to encourage nations to avoid a scenario where - for instance - marijuana is legal but marijuana-related paraphernalia is not, or vice versa. Such a clause is included to prevent this proposal from being deemed to be an illegal Pure Blocker.

So, should owning a lighter be equated with owning marijuana or crack? Should a pharmacy apply for a license to sell heroin if a customer asks for syringes? Because this is what this proposal "suggests".

[Greater Cesnica]

---

The Europeian Ministry of World Assembly Affairs recommends a vote AGAINST the General Assembly Resolution, "Recreational Drugs Compact".
Its reasoning may be found here.

---

[Tinhampton]

The Europeian Ministry of World Assembly Affairs recommends a vote AGAINST the General Assembly Resolution, "Recreational Drugs Compact".
Its reasoning may be found here.

Firstly:

This proposal is a blocker; or a resolution that effectively prevents the World Assembly from legislating on a topic. Blockers only contribute to National Sovereignty, which is what one gives up when joining the World Assembly, and prevent progress by stopping the Assembly from being able to legislate.

Keshiland was the author of the last repeal of GA#2 to reach vote in June 2017. His proposed replacement would at least have given member states authority over "Property laws and Emergency services" - not nothing - and even then, I believe it was lambasted for giving his proposed WA replacement too much power. Blockers, although less commonplace today, are still appropriate for certain highly divisive (or internationally irrelevant) issues. If "progress" is that important a consideration for the government of Sincluda or any member state, they can decriminalise or legalise drugs themselves... or write a resolution requiring all stop signs in the WA to be octogonal.


Secondly:

In addition, it is plausible that this blocker was created in response to a proposal in drafting that the author disagrees with regarding the decriminalization of drugs as an attempt to stop it.

Outlaw Pedophilia - Goobergunchia's iconic Historical Resolution - was submitted on similar grounds. Was his resolution submitted on a pretext any worse (or better) than mine was?