[IC] [TWI-Only] The League of TWI (Assembly)

[The League of TWI]

"A period of voting shall now commence in regards to the proposed amendments by the delegate from the Union of Thromsa. Three separate votes are to be made by each delegate, one for each definition by the delegate from Thromsa. Take note that this is NOT a vote for Resolution No. 22. This voting period shall last for 2-3 days."

[Ainslie]

“The Unified Electorates vote FOR the passage of this amendment.”

[Hyukai]

Hyukai votes For the passage of revision

[Havalland]

“Havalland votes in favor of this resolution”

[San Montagna]

"The Republic of San Montagna votes in favour of the passage of this amendment."

[Serpens Land]

The Realm of Serpens Land votes in favour of the passage of this amendment.

[Roendavar]

"The Utopian Kingdom of the Union of Roendavarian States votes in FAVOUR of this amendment."

[Corindia]

"Corindia votes in favor of the amendment"

[Solaryia]

“The United Republic of Solaryia votes in favour of the amendment.”

[Biaten]

"The Republic of Biaten votes in favour of this amendment."

[Ioudaia]

"Ioudaia votes for the first two definitions, but must abstain from endorsing the third, despite its aims."

[Westmoor Isles]

"The Westmoor Isles vote for this amended definition."

[Albeuve]

Christian Baeriswyl did the obligatory thing that someone who both had been in the room as an active participant in debates within these hallowed halls for years and had just begun existence at the same time, then smiled.

"Albeuve votes in favour of all three amendments"

[The League of TWI]

"The voting period for the amendments proposed by the delegate from the Union of Thromsa has elapsed. For the first amendment, 12 votes are in FAVOR and none are AGAINST. For the second amendment, 12 votes are in FAVOR and none are AGAINST. For the third amendment, 11 votes are in FAVOR, none are AGAINST, and 1 has abstained. With this, all three amendments pass.

A short period for deliberation for Resolution No. 22 shall now commence. This period shall last for one to two days."

[Westmoor Isles]

Delegate Weiss took to his podium, cleared his throat, and began to address the assembly.

"The Westmoor Isles does not approve of any forms of exploitative and cruel practices such as slavery or indentured servitude. This much goes without saying. We also believe that for any nation to exist in the modern world it needs to abandon such practices and recognize that we live in a day and age where unpaid or severely underpaid labour is unsustainable and unnecessary. With these amendments to the definition the League has taken important steps in defining what exactly we are hoping to accomplish in this honorable assembly. On that front, I am glad."

"There is a more concerning and pressing matter at hand here. This proposal is attempting to adjudicate on moral issues that are best discussed within the halls of independent nations' legislatures. Sure, today we are debating a bill that is attempting to rid the Western Isles of an immoral and unjust institution that we almost unanimously agree the world is better without. But what happens when the League attempts to enforce a proposal that will demand that a nation abandon a controversial law that their parliament is still debating? Or when the League decides that it is time that all nations in the Western Isles rid themselves of cars that run on petrol?"

Weiss takes a dramatic pause, casually leans against the podium, and lets out an exasperated sigh before finishing his statement.

"We do not need the League meddling in the legislatures of independent, sovereign, democratic nations. Until one of my fellow delegates can convince me otherwise I'm afraid I will have to be voting against this proposal."

Weiss takes a seat as one of the Westmoorish junior representatives loudly says "Hear, hear!"

[Albeuve]

Delegate Baeriswyl sighed slightly as the delegate of the Westmoor Isles spoke, before his expression of boredom and slight irritation turned to a tight grimace as the nation's junior representative whooped like a chimpanzee. Such a display, while popular at "Model League of TWI" conferences and other forms of entertaining pedagogical exercise, was utterly inappropriate within the decorum of the hallowed halls of a genuine international body. When the simian noises had ceased, he stood to speak. An assured, career diplomat, he spoke with the conviction of a rural preacher and the refined tones of an alumni of one of Fayselle's most esteemed tertiary institutions.

"This delegate, before beginning his speech, would like to briefly remind the young Westmoorish representative that he is currently representing his nation at an international forum. This comes with a degree of responsibility to abide by the decorum inherent in these hallowed halls. If the young man cannot contain his excitement at this fact, he is welcome to take a stroll through the grounds of this building, or grab himself a stromboli from the food truck Stromboli Forever, then return when he has regained his composure.

This delegate is disappointed by the rhetoric of the Westmoorish delegate, which similarly shows a degree of misunderstanding on the purpose of this assembly. The very purpose of international diplomacy is to reach a state of quorum upon the moral issues that were evoqued in their speech. Peace is a moral issue. Human rights are moral issues. The ban on the slave trade was, at its time, a 'moral issue' and the stamping out of the barbaric practice did require, as the Westmoorish delegat ementioned with fear, enforcement. Slaver states were pushed to stop slavery through a range of measures, primarily economic, and as a result we all recognise the right to one's own personal liberty. The same can be said of other human rights, the right to liberty of speech, belief, the press, and many other issues. The international community did not fear treading on the toes of dictatorships, it came together to rightly say that man is endowed with certain inalienable rights and that to deprive one of one's rights is abominable. From the speech of the Westmoorish delegate we can see that he is in favour of such existing quorum, yet clings to the outdated ideals of absolute westphalian sovereignty which have not in practice existed for quite some time. Nations are now no longer able to invade others without consequences, nor commit genocide, nor do any of these acts which one would clearly consider to be abhorrent. But all of these things are, to repeat the delegate's own wording, moral issues. If the delegate agrees that indentured slavery is clearly abhorrent, why does the nation of the Westmoor Isles not seek to recognise this fact within international precedence?

What is also important to take away from the resolution as it stands is that it does not in anyway mandate an action. It gives the few states which still practice indentured servitude a five year moratorium within which they can reform their legal codes to remove this practice, and I know that many states, that of this delegate included, will be willing to aid in economic reforms aimed at eradicating slavery within these countries. After this moratorium, it encourages states to place political and/or economic sanctions upon those who remain unrepentant in their practice of slavery. This would, obviously, be to the discretion of each league member the shape and form that such sanctions could take. Slippery slope arguments are therefore not only a logical fallacy but grossly out of place. The league has in the past called for laws which would breach international law to be withdrawn, as it should, and the already existing body for working towards climate-friendly initiatives is not endowed with the power to force actions upon states. All international diplomacy is, at the end of the day, a participatory affair and the only times in which coercive measures are even considered is in the case of a breakdown of state authority when the state can no longer preserve the right to life of its people, such as in the case of genocide. Scaremongering over irrelevant concerns is simply unfounded.

The delegate ended their speech stating that the league need not meddle within the legislatures of other nations. That is, as this delegate has attempted to show, not what is happening here. The practice of indentured slavery is rare and there are few states who practice it. No democratic states passively or actively allow such abhorrent practices to continue. The role of the international community is to define basic norms and standards to which all states shall be held to account, and this delegate believes that this is a case in which a strong international norm is highly valuable. I would assume, with hope, that the Westmoor Isles do not oppose other human rights treatises or conventions against war crimes. If they do oppose even the most basic and foundational notions of international diplomacy, upon which our entire international system is based, then one would question whether the delegate is fit to represent a democratic nation.

That is without speaking of the major benefits that can come from such a resolution passing. By establishing a baseline for legal employment and contractual standards, we would streamline international economic agreements and further international economic integration by ensuring that all states involved would be participating based on the same foundations. This opens the door to far greater economic prosperity around the Isles, as when we open up the world to trade economics cease to be a zero-sum affair and prosperity is multiplied. This delegate is proud to support the resolution and willing to address any further questions or fears about overreaching legislation from other delegates."

Delegate Baeriswyl sat down and took a deep breath. He hoped he had not seemed to strict on the young man. For sure, his enthousiasm for international discourse was to be lauded, but he had to gain the maturity to learn how such enthousiasm could be channeled. He was also worried by the rhetoric of isolationism present. While such sentiments often came about from dictatorial nations seeking the shield of sovereignty from any criticism of their own oppressive practices, to hear it from a democratic state was bizarre. Surely if the delegate of the Westmoor Isles believed that workers deserved a basic degree of dignity and protection, he would believe that such protections deserved to be universal? Such thoughts were mere conjecture, he reminded himself, and contented himself to sit and listen to the other delegations.

[The Tsunterlands]

Amid the debate a tall, well dressed women, early forties, with a sharp face and dark features strode into the chamber, flocked by a gaggle of aids and juniors. She was Carina Nightingale Chae’La Haunt, former Bande-Captain of the Haunt Clan, very recently appointed Tsunter delegate to the League of the Western Isles. Back in her homeland it was often said that “the Haunts run dark” and Gale, as she was often known, was no exception with a pair of slightly inhuman black eyes and well-groomed mane of dark curls that had were beginning to thin with age. Like many of her colleagues in Libertalia she flaunted her power with the wealth she wore: a De'lucidi royal blue tweed skirt and jacket over an AruWear cream silk blouse, with a crimson silk scarf draped over shoulders. She approached her podium to introduce herself.

“Greetings to the honourable delegates of this esteemed body.” Her Alteran was tainted with the hint of a French accent, a legacy of being fostered with the Appâtmann clan in her youth. “It is with my utmost pleasure that I can inform you that the Grand Conclave has appointed myself to represent the Cooperatist Tsunter Republic within the League. I must ask for you forgiveness in the delay between our former delegate’s resignation and my appointment, as one of our former First Councillors was known to say, ‘bureaucracy is the ugliest mistress we must ever bed.’” There was slight chuckle at the crude joke. Not that First Councillor Eyre would be so polite to use the word mistress when referring to a women Gale thought as she shuffled her papers.

“On to the topic of discussion. Firstly, we would like to commend both the intention of the Resolution 22, and the amendments proposed by the honourable delegates of Ainslie and Thromsa. However, we also recognise and echo the concerns raised by several delegates that such a resolution goes beyond the political remit of the league and into affairs that should be dealt with on a national level. Furthermore, we would like to raise the point that this resolution has the potential to undermine the League’s role as a chamber of public and open diplomacy, which we see as its primary duty. More foundational to international organisation and diplomacy than any treaty is a notion of cooperation and the adoption certain ideological positions, moral as they may seem, effectively risks alienating states and cultures that do not share that ideology. How then is the League to function as an effective chamber for diplomacy and peacekeeping among all nations if it cannot engage with those that do not share the norms expressed within this resolution?”

She took a quick sip of water before concluding. “Therefore, it is our opinion that while there is a need for the establishment of an international framework for the management and protection of labour rights the League is the not the body to implement such measures and Resolution 22 would be better retooled as multilateral treaty to be signed by those nations that share in its norms.”

[Westmoor Isles]

"We would like to echo the points made by the honorable delegate from the Tsunterlands. Like they said, the League exists to encourage these dialogues between nations without forcing them out based on their beliefs or customs. We also wish to apologize for the behavior of our junior representative," Weiss began, shooting a glare at the young man who had cried out earlier. The last thing the Westmoor Isles needed was to be the laughing stock of the League while trying to argue these points.

"Like my fellow delegate said, this is something best left for a multilateral treaty that, should fellow nations desire to go through with it, the Westmoor Isles would gladly sign. Its worth establishing that the following is not an argument in favor of unpaid labour. As mentioned earlier, the crux of this debate is the League's role in this issue and I truly believe that by simply discussing this a point is being made to nations that allow for indentured servitude. The threat of sanctions and being cut off from international diplomacy is going to pressure them to make changes to their nations whether or not this proposal is passed. By voting against it we do not stop this progress. Voting in its favor will just expedite changes which would already be in progress, albeit while corrupting the League's purpose. We hope it is clear that the Westmoor Isles stands against these violations of human rights, but at the same time stands against the corruption of international dialogues."

Weiss concluded his speech, careful not to raise his voice or seem to be frustrated.

[Albeuve]

Baeriswyl was disappointed that his reproaches had, as of so far, been ignored by the delegate for the Westmoor Isles. The Tsunter delegate's unwelcome chimings in were unsurprising, given the state was a socialist one and likely employed similarly slave-like labour, but annoying nonetheless.

"If one so much as reads the charter of this esteemed institution, they would see that the arguments of the league existing for nothing more than open dipomacy is at best based of personal opinion, and at worst upon deliberate misinformation. The League exists In order to promote international cooperation, peace, and security; open, just, and honourable relations between states; and the maintenance of law and respect for all obligations hereafter put into action by this organisation; the undersigned member states hereby agree to this Charter of the League of The Western Isles and pledge to uphold its articles and resolutions., wherein one can plainly see mentions of respecting obligations the League puts in place and working to promote a just international order. It is not merely a forum for diplomacy. Ironically enough, diplomacy itself is the subject of bi or multilateral talks. This assembly is where nations come together to establish an international order which is fair and equitable.

One can also look into the previous resolutions of the league. Resolution 3 clearly defined international boundaries, something which would, under the westphalian model advocated by the Westmoor Isles and the Tsunterlands, be a matter of discussion between states. Resolution 8 established a supreme court under the auspices of the League to enforce the legal writs of the league, which cannot be interpreted in any way other than as an endorsement of the League's jurisdiction to set legal parameters upon its member states. Resolution 10 made clear stances upon drug smuggling and other issues, again a legal debate. Resolutions 11, 12 and 15 condemned in clear terms the internal and external behaviours of states, when they were deemed to be in breach of the collective obligations set out by the League. Even the last resolution passed, resolution 21, clearly dictated offences which constrain legislative activities of member states. To argue that establishing a better global order is not the mandate of the league is therefore both ignorant and factually incorrect.

That is not to speak of the sheer fallacy within the arguments presented against the argument. The Westmoorian delegate has openly admitted that this resolution would expediate the elimination of indentured servitude across the Isles, something they have also said is a desirable outcome. However, they are unwilling to step down from the ivory tower of westphalian principles they have created for themselves and make this change. They are happy for people to sit in indentured servitude for a longer time, for more people to live miserable lives, just to preserve their own invented principles which, as I have comprehensively demonstrated with the League's own charter and past actions, do not exist. It is clear that the delegate has never been affected by forced labour, to them the issue is a foreign one and it doesn't matter if some foreigners suffer as long as their imaginary concept of the league is preserved. Such selfish attitudes are the anathema to the League's true purpose. Would slavery have been outlawed in many countries if the banning of slavery had been merely confined to a multilateral agreement between abolitionist states? Of course not. Criminals will not stop their crimes if they are never made illegal.

These remarks are equally valid when applied to the arguments postulated by the Tsunter delegate. They say that legislating human rights may alienate states which do not share the same concept of human rights. This delegate would argue that that is the entire point of human rights. They are a pressure. They are an obligation that a state has to its people and if the state is unable to meet its most base obligations and ensure its citizens are not held in slavery then the state deserves to be alienated from the international system until they can grant them. This is not enforcing an ideology, it is protecting the basic dignity of workers across the world and it is bizarre that a self-declared co-operativist state would be opposed to furthering the standards of worker protection. Other abominable actions, such as honour killings, rape, killing people for being born as albinos, literal slavery, can be considered to be cultural. But culture is not a defence for barbarism. The international community rightfully condemns such actions and this resolution is a logical continuation of such measures. The league exists to protect law, just relations between states, and not just to provide an open forum for states to commit the most vile of crimes against their citizens. The Charbagnian regime's norms included using chemical weapons against civilian populations, and instead of tiptoeing around this so as to not hurt their feelings, the international community ensured that the League's norms were upheld.

To summarise, the League has an established precedent in legislating on the same sort of issues, a role which is clearly set out within the league's own charter. To argue that this issue is not within the scope of the league is folly. The resolution is, as its detractors have admitted, an effective measure to end a practice that both delegates view as odious and worthy of eradication. To stand against this resolution is to place a set of imagined principles above a score of very real and tangible benefits to the lives of many thousands across the Isles. How one can from their privileged position seek to detract from this stinks of a disregard for the lives and rights of others and is an embarassment of the League's founding principles. This resolution should stand, and Albeuve is proud to stand on the right side of history in advocating for an end to something this chamber has unanimously equated with slavery."

He sat down again, gauging the room for a reaction.

[The Tsunterlands]

"You’re not going there to win debates, Gale” the First Councillor had told her before she left from the I.D. You’re there to cheerlead Tsunter and convince the world that whatever the actions our government takes tastes better than it smells. And yet… she couldn’t let it go. Gale never fancied herself particularly patriotic but jibe about the Tsunterlands opposing worker rights stuck in her mind, along with a much smaller voice teller her she was about to make fool of herself. But she’d be dammed not to have the last word in on the matter.

“I’m not going to defend the Chargbagnian state but perhaps their internal affairs became a symptom of its international isolation. And without that isolation a diplomatic solution might have been found to the security crisis the state eventually presented and lives needn’t be lost.” She took a moment to ensure her composure remained well-maintained. “But I’ll admit that’s conjecture - history is history. The delegate from Albeuve declares themselves to be on the right side of it but I’ll reserve that judgement to future generations.”

“The delegate has helpfully reminded us of the preamble to the League’s charter. ‘In order to promote international cooperation, peace, and security”. The first words of the charter, no less. And you cannot have peace and security among states without cooperation from those states. ‘Open, just, and honourable relations between states’ although if certain nations were to have their way for those of-” she almost said, ‘those of us’. Almost. “Excuse me. If certain nations were to have their way those states found morally wanting would be cast out of our international system and back to age of secret diplomacy and insecurity despite the fact that these states that often present the greatest security threats.”

“The delegate argues we are mandated to build a better world order. He is correct, specifically under Article Six of the charter we have such obligations ‘to end suffering’ which appears to be the intent of this resolution. But this resolution as it stands does not fulfil those obligations. The resolution’s only instrument for enforcement is that of sanctioning and I have spoken for some length about the security issues surrounding the incautious application of sanctions. This is not to mention their limited effectiveness or the fact that history shows us those most adversely affected by economic sanctions them tend to be the most vulnerable members of the targeted state, a demographic with a degree of crossover which those very individuals this resolution seeks to protect.”

“Now we are not denying that it is sometimes necessary for the League to punish certain states that violate the laws and the norms of our international system. We also recognise the League’s power to codify certain norms and the potential for good that can cause. But the exercising of that power comes at the risk of undermining its position as our Island’s premier organisation for the maintenance of peace. With regards to the matter of this resolution, it is our view that risk is not worth taking, especially when there exist alternative and more effective avenues for achieving similar results.”

“To put the security issue to one side and to address this recurring issue of sovereignty, we should look at the previous resolutions passed by the League. The delegate from Albeuve argues resolution 22 has its precedents. We'd argue its entirely unprecedented. The League resolutions that seek to establish legislation do so on spheres of international concern: borders, drug trafficking, displaced persons. If this resolution were to be passed it’d be something of an anomaly in its efforts to manage a state’s domestic labour practices. The League has of course attempted to assert its certain norms through specific condemnations, but the League does not issue policy directives on domestic matters. In fact, we could argue, considering how often we hear the same arguments criticising the league for interfering in domestic matters, that something of an unwritten norm on the matter has emerged, entirely unique to the Isles. I’ll leave that discussion to the professors. We reiterate our original opinion, the League is not the body for the introduction of this legislation.”

[The League of TWI]

"As there are no further discussions on the chamber, we now move to the voting period for Resolution No. 22. The resolution is as follows, as submitted by the delegate of Reathwood..."

RESOLUTION 22
A resolution to combat indentured servitude

Recognising that some nations within The Western Isles continue to allow the practice of indentured servitude,
Acknowledging that some governments have already taken the important step of phasing out or outlawing the practice,
In supporting and aiding these governments and the organisations and individuals who made abolition possible, whilst
Committing to a fair and just transition for workers in the industry, and
Pursuing an internationally uniform stance against the inhumane practice;

The League of The Western Isles hereby;

1. Formally condemns the practice of indentured servitude.
2. Strongly encourages nations to abolish the practice.
3. Institutes a moratorium on the legalisation of any form of unpaid labor based on contracts or other forms of legally binding documents until the 1^st of January, 2023.
4. Mandates that nations in which such practices remain legal begin demonstrable efforts toward the criminalization of such practices before the moratorium’s end.
5. Stipulates that indentured servitude be phased out of legality in all member states by the 1^st of January, 2025.
6. Encourages member states to enforce the end of indentured servitude through the use of economic and political sanctions against those nations which permit, legally or extralegally, the practice.

Introduced to the League by the Republic of Reathwood on the 10^th of March, 2021.

"The amendements on the definition of indentured servitude by the delegate from Thromsa, submitted on April 11, 2021 and approved by the chamber by a vote on April 22, 2021, is as follows..."

AMENDMENTS ON THE DEFINITION OF INDENTURED SERVITUDE BY THE DELEGATE FROM THROMSA

'Indentured servitude is a circumstance through which an individual or group of individuals can find themselves subordinate to another in a system of unpaid labour, or to maintain someone in paid labour whose payment is substantially lower compared to what would be expected to be the value of labour for that geographical area, abnormally practiced throughout The Western Isles. It finds its origin from a contract or some other form of document, whether it be implied or expressed. It is a system of coercion and control to any extent that is identifiable, whether that be expressed or implied. It causes one to become subservient to another through means that are morally wrong and do not reasonably uphold international norms surrounding fair working conditions.'.


'For the matters of this Resolution, socially and legally accepted forms of labour, paid or unpaid, where the worker may unilaterally exclude themselves from the relationship, without any significant consequence, are presumed to not be considered to be under the scope of this Resolution.'.


'On the interpretation of this Resolution, "international norms surrounding fair working conditions" shall be done following the social and legal status provided by internal labour law, but always interpreted in accordance with the principle of human dignity and protection of workers, and the rights to life, personal health, and liberty. Whenever the internal labour law is not possible to be interpreted in accordance with those principles and rights, the entities mentioned shall promote an interpretation in line with the general aims of labour law, in accordance with those principles and rights, practiced in other nations of The Western Isles.'.

"All member nations are to vote whether they are in FAVOUR, AGAINST, or shall ABSTAIN. All member nations of the League are encouraged to vote on the matter. This voting period will last indefinitely."

[Biaten]

"The Republic of Biaten votes in favour of Resolution 22.

[Wellsia]

The Kingdom of Wellsia votes against this or any other resolution that tries to dictate one country’s social norms over other countries.

[Solaryia]

"The United Republic of Solaryia votes in favour of this resolution."

[Havalland]

“The kingdom of Havalland votes in favor of resolution 22.”