[DRAFT] The Right to Free and Fair Elections

[Czinsurz]

OOC: Hi to all other nations out there, below I've laid out a draft of my planned resolution to propose to the General Assembly. I'd love if some of you more experienced leaders out there would take a look at it and make sure I'm abiding by all the rules, and general traditions when writing proposals? Thanks everybody!

Edit: Based on feedback from lots of friendly people, I've changed:

- I removed Article II Clause 6 as it basically permitted member states to ignore any part of the bill they wanted
- Added an Article IV for clarification that this only applies to already democratic nations
- Added Article I Clauses 7~11 to establish a standard to allow every citizen to vote

Category: Furtherment of Democracy
Strength: Significant

The World Assembly:


Understanding that many nations have a historically ingrained system of autocracy;

Observes that free and regulated elections are a necessary tool to further democratic interests throughout the world;

Recognises that General Assembly Resolution #130 "Elections and Assistance Act" began to develop groundwork for fair and free elections, but failed to require member states to implement this and was subsequently repealed;

Resolved that every member state which desires to implement fair and free elections for heads of states, must comply with legislated expectations of what constitutes a fair and free election;

Hereby:


Article I - Principles of Fair and Free Elections

- Defines 'member state' as any nation member of the World Assembly which has chosen to conduct elections;
- Defines 'public office' as any office of government or civil service that is subject to an election for selection;
- Defines 'citizen' as any person of a member state who abides by common citizenship laws to be eligible to reside;

1. Requires that where each election of public office is held:


a. A secret ballot shall be used to deter voting influence from unlawful and illegitimate factors;
b. An aggregation and analysis of each vote shall be made publicly available;



2. Requires that a proportionate and just vote distribution method procedure is used to assign public office so as not to inequitably advantage or disadvantage a specific demographic of voters or candidates;

3. Requires that universal suffrage is offered by the state and permitted to be utilised regardless of gender, ethnicity, or any other individualising factors;

4. Requires that a comprehensive list of requirements to enlist as a potential candidate, if any, is made available;

5. Requires that a minimum of one polling location is required per one thousand citizens;

6. Requires that each citizen has access to a polling location within five kilometres of their residence;

7. Requires that mail-in voting and absentee voting be permitted and managed on an equal priority as in-person voting; by extension requires that each member state provide adequate facilities for citizens who are absent from their voting district or attempt to mail their vote in, in a way that will not inconvenience any citizens or discourage potential voters;

8. Requires that a minimum of one designated day per five hundred million citizens is given for elections, with an established set minimum of one day;

9. Requires that the period of time wherein elections are taking place be guaranteed as a protected period, and requires employers (whether privatised corporations or the state) provide unchanged pay and time off to all their employees during this period to allow citizens to vote regardless of their employement status;

Article II - Regulation

1. Introduces a universal Election Regulation Body (ERB) which shall be funded and administered by the World Assembly;

2. Requires each member state, to their best of their fiscal and legal ability, create an internal election regulation and governing body in compliance with the ERB;

3. Understands that this regulation body has the potential to be utilised for illicit activities and further vote manipulation, and therefore requires this regulation body to be inspected and evaluated in their compliance of ERB regulations and standards as laid out in Article I by the ERB at a minimum frequency of one time per year;

4. Requires that the ERB be permitted access to a minimum of a randomly chosen ten percent of polling locations and processing facilities without interference for purposes of monitoring fraud, ballot tampering, or other fraudulent activities;

5. Requires that the ERB make the results of these investigations public, archived and available for scrutiny and re-investigation;

Article III - Assistance in Transition

1. Recognises that many member states may have resistance in transitioning from a non-democratic to a democratic form of government (hereinafter 'developing nations';

2. Introduces and establishes a body for assistance in transitioning, the Democratic Transition Authority (DTA):



a. As an advisory rather than regulatory body, the DTA shall not have binding and legal authority in decisions relating to governmental systems, and shall strive to encourage fair and free elections developing nations;

b. The DTA shall co-operate with the ERB in providing fair and free elections in member states which historically have not had democratic systems of government;

c. The DTA shall be permitted under this Article's legislation to co-operate with willing governments of member states in developing democratic public office systems;

d. The DTA shall not be permitted to intervene with political systems orchestrated by uncooperative governments, and the DTA's authority shall not be forced upon states without an electoral system



3. Clarifies that this article will not necessitate DTA intervention for member states who already have an electoral system for selecting members of public office;

Article IV - Clarification for Member States lacking an Electoral System

1. Clarifies unambiguously that Articles I~III apply exclusively to member states who have a pre-established electoral system, or if the member state desires to co-operate with the offered transition described in Article III Clause 2.

2. Further clarifies that in accordance with Article IV Clause 1, no member state whose government does not conduct elections for public office shall be bound by Articles I~III.

[Fachumonn]

GA proposals cannot force ideologies, or types of government onto other nations. I suggest you check out the GA rules stickied at the top of the forum page.

[Floofybit]

I commend the idea and think that elections would be a vital and essential piece of nations, however, while the present world implements democracy with a positive outlook, not all nations in Nationstates are current-time nations. Similarly, many nations roleplay as oppressive autocracies, royal monarchies, and subverting anarchists. Your form of government is a key factor of Nationstates and it is bittersweet that nations have different styles of governments. However, you can attempt to implement something similar to this towards nations that are already democracies.

[Czinsurz]

I commend the idea and think that elections would be a vital and essential piece of nations, however, while the present world implements democracy with a positive outlook, not all nations in Nationstates are current-time nations. Similarly, many nations roleplay as oppressive autocracies, royal monarchies, and subverting anarchists. Your form of government is a key factor of Nationstates and it is bittersweet that nations have different styles of governments. However, you can attempt to implement something similar to this towards nations that are already democracies.

Sorry, I thought this was clear in the wording, directed towards Floofybit (and Fachumonn too).

This proposal is not forcing democracy and elections, hencing "willing" and "cooperating" states - only enforcing fair and free elections in those that choose to have elections.

[Floofybit]

I commend the idea and think that elections would be a vital and essential piece of nations, however, while the present world implements democracy with a positive outlook, not all nations in Nationstates are current-time nations. Similarly, many nations roleplay as oppressive autocracies, royal monarchies, and subverting anarchists. Your form of government is a key factor of Nationstates and it is bittersweet that nations have different styles of governments. However, you can attempt to implement something similar to this towards nations that are already democracies.

Sorry, I thought this was clear in the wording, directed towards Floofybit (and Fachumonn too).

This proposal is not forcing democracy and elections, hencing "willing" and "cooperating" states - only enforcing fair and free elections in those that choose to have elections.

Oh, I see! Then I'm for this proposal as of now!

[Anne of Cleves in TNP]

“Ambassador, I have two major complaints. First, Article II, Clause 4 is unnecessary since national election officials can just inspect the voting areas themselves and then export the findings to the ERB. Second, Article II, Clause 6 is just shooting the proposal in the foot. What I mean is that this specific clause essentially allows member nations to submit appeals in order to disregard parts of Article 1 when necessary, thus soiling the article’s purpose.”
-Ms. Charlotte Schafer, WA Ambassador for the Clevesian Empire

[The Orwell Society]

Support in concept

[Wallenburg]

I commend the idea and think that elections would be a vital and essential piece of nations, however, while the present world implements democracy with a positive outlook, not all nations in Nationstates are current-time nations. Similarly, many nations roleplay as oppressive autocracies, royal monarchies, and subverting anarchists. Your form of government is a key factor of Nationstates and it is bittersweet that nations have different styles of governments. However, you can attempt to implement something similar to this towards nations that are already democracies.

Sorry, I thought this was clear in the wording, directed towards Floofybit (and Fachumonn too).

This proposal is not forcing democracy and elections, hencing "willing" and "cooperating" states - only enforcing fair and free elections in those that choose to have elections.

That doesn't address the issues with sections 1 and 2. Those still violate the Ideological Ban rule.

[Bears Armed]

OOC Note:
I think that Article 3, Clause 1 is an illegal RL reference, since it mentions “developing nations” (I.e: third-world countries)

OOC: No, because it explains that what it means by "developing countries" in this context is nations that are developing from undemocratic government systems into democracies. A reference explicitly to "third world" countries would be illegal, but this wording is fine.

[Anne of Cleves in TNP]

OOC Note:
I think that Article 3, Clause 1 is an illegal RL reference, since it mentions “developing nations” (I.e: third-world countries)

OOC: No, because it explains that what it means by "developing countries" in this context is nations that are developing from undemocratic government systems into democracies. A reference explicitly to "third world" countries would be illegal, but this wording is fine.

OOC: Ah, developing in a different context. Thanks for clearing things up for me.

[Chipoli]

OOC: Hi to all other nations out there, below I've laid out a draft of my planned resolution to propose to the General Assembly. I'd love if some of you more experienced leaders out there would take a look at it and make sure I'm abiding by all the rules, and general traditions when writing proposals? Thanks everybody!

Category: Furtherment of Democracy
Strength: Significant

The World Assembly:


Understanding that while many nations may have a historically ingrained system of autocracy;

Observes that free and regulated elections are a necessary tool to further democratic interests throughout the world;

Recognises that General Assembly Resolution #130 "Elections and Assistance Act" began to develop groundwork for fair and free elections, but failed to require member states to implement this and was subsequently repealed;

Resolved that every member state which desires to implement fair and free elections for heads of states, and must comply with legislated expectations of what constitutes a fair and free election;

Hereby enacts the following:


Article I - Principles of Fair and Free Elections

- Defines 'member state' as any nation member of the World Assembly;
- Defines 'public office' as any office of government or civil service that is subject to an election for selection;

1. Requires that where each election of public office is held:


a. A secret ballot shall be used to deter voting influence from unlawful and illegitimate factors;
b. An aggregation and analysis of each vote shall be made publicly available;



2. Requires that a proportionate and just vote distribution method procedure is used to assign public office so as not to inequitably advantage or disadvantage a specific demographic of voters or candidates;

3. Requires that universal suffrage is offered by the state and permitted to be utilised regardless of gender, ethnicity, or any other individualising factors;

4. Requires that a comprehensive list of requirements to enlist as a potential candidate, if any, is made available;

5. Demands that no candidate who is not in violation of sanctioned international law may be forbidden from running for public office;

6. Demands that no member state or government may utilise dishonest campaigning techniques or condemn opposing political parties without just reasoning

Article II - Regulation

1. Introduces a universal Election Regulation Body (ERB) which shall be funded and administered by the World Assembly;

2. Requires each member state, to their best of their fiscal and legal ability, create an internal election regulation and governing body in compliance with the ERB;

3. Understands that this regulation body has the potential to be utilised for illicit activities and further vote manipulation, and therefore requires this regulation body to be regularly inspected and evaluated by the ERB;

4. Requires that the ERB have access to voting locations and processing facilities without interference for purposes of monitoring fraud, ballot tampering, or other fraudulent activities.

5. Requires that the ERB make the results of these investigations public, archived and available for scrutiny and re-investigation;

5. Permits member states to submit appeals concerning individual sections of Article I they believe are in violation of their self-determination or right of independence;

Article III - Assistance in Transition

1. Recognises that many nation states may have resistance in transitioning from a non-democratic to a democratic form of government (hereinafter 'developing nations';

2. Introduces and establishes a body for assistance in transitioning, the Democratic Transition Authority (DTA):



a. As an advisory rather than regulatory body, the DTA shall not have binding and legal authority in decisions relating to governmental systems, and shall strive to encourage fair and free elections developing nations;

b. The DTA shall co-operate with the ERB in providing fair and free elections in member states which historically have not had democratic systems of government;

c. The DTA shall be permitted under this Article's legislation to co-operate with willing governments of member states in developing democratic public office systems;

d. The DTA shall not be permitted to intervene with political systems orchestrated by uncooperative governments, and the DTA's authority shall not be forced upon states without an electoral system



3. Clarifies that this article will not necessitate DTA intervention for member states who already have an electoral system for selecting members of public office;

4. Further clarifies that the DTA and ERB will only be required or permitted, to monitor and regulate elections if the member state in question has a pre-established electoral system, or if the member state is willing to co-operate with the transition described in III§2.

Support, Looks fine to me.

[The Pacific Northwest]

I don’t see anything wrong with what’s already written and would vote for it if it were at vote, however I would like to suggest adding a few things on how ballots are to be collected.

From reading the proposal it appears voting is to be conducted in person only. I didn’t see anything regarding mail in votes. With this in mind, I also didn’t read anything regarding how many polling locations are required per capita, which leaves the door open for a member state to try to influence an election by only having a single polling location in a voting district with 100,000 people (maybe not that egregious but they could still disadvantage voters).

And whether or not elections are carried out over multiple days or if there’s one designated Election Day, people should be guaranteed time off work to have the chance to vote, otherwise elections can be scheduled during days or times most people have to work, and workers would need to request time off to vote and risk losing their jobs/missing out on pay, or not get the chance to vote at all, putting the working class at a disadvantage in elections.

And finally, what about people who will be absent from their voting districts during an election? Is any form of absentee/proxy voting allowed?

I’m sorry if this comes off as rude or like I’m trying to micromanage your proposal, these are just a few things I thought of while reading it. Knowing how people are, if there’s a loophole, someone will exploit it. Even with the ERB someone could point to this proposal and say “well the WA never said we had to provide more than one voting location for the entire country, who cares if we have 100 million citizens”.

[Czinsurz]

I don’t see anything wrong with what’s already written and would vote for it if it were at vote, however I would like to suggest adding a few things on how ballots are to be collected.

From reading the proposal it appears voting is to be conducted in person only. I didn’t see anything regarding mail in votes. With this in mind, I also didn’t read anything regarding how many polling locations are required per capita, which leaves the door open for a member state to try to influence an election by only having a single polling location in a voting district with 100,000 people (maybe not that egregious but they could still disadvantage voters).

And whether or not elections are carried out over multiple days or if there’s one designated Election Day, people should be guaranteed time off work to have the chance to vote, otherwise elections can be scheduled during days or times most people have to work, and workers would need to request time off to vote and risk losing their jobs/missing out on pay, or not get the chance to vote at all, putting the working class at a disadvantage in elections.

And finally, what about people who will be absent from their voting districts during an election? Is any form of absentee/proxy voting allowed?

I’m sorry if this comes off as rude or like I’m trying to micromanage your proposal, these are just a few things I thought of while reading it. Knowing how people are, if there’s a loophole, someone will exploit it. Even with the ERB someone could point to this proposal and say “well the WA never said we had to provide more than one voting location for the entire country, who cares if we have 100 million citizens”.

OOC: Absolutely doesn't come off as rude, thanks so much! All of this is great stuff that I didn't really thunk about, but now I realise people will definitely use to try and repeal it late Ron the basis of loopholes. I'll add some sections into Article I detailing the location of polling booths and mail votes.

[Tinhampton]

You say "Hereby enacts the following:" but the tenses of your operative clauses would work much better with a simple "Hereby:".

Articles I.2 (micromanagement), I.5 (macromanagement), I.6 (would destroy most modern political campaigns), II.3 (unclear how monitoring is to occur), and II.4 (allows the ERB access to all polling stations, however innocuous) lead me to withhold my support at this time.

[Czinsurz]

You say "Hereby enacts the following:" but the tenses of your operative clauses would work much better with a simple "Hereby:".

Articles I.2 (micromanagement), I.5 (macromanagement), I.6 (would destroy most modern political campaigns), II.3 (unclear how monitoring is to occur), and II.4 (allows the ERB access to all polling stations, however innocuous) lead me to withhold my support at this time.

Tinhampton
Based off your feedback I've adjusted the wording of or removed:

- Article I Clause 5 (perhaps overreaching the authority of the ERB)
- Article I Clause 6 (as you said, this behaviour is now common so outlawing it would be troublesome)
- Article 2 Clause 3 (clarified a little of how monitoring is to occur)
- Article 2 Clause 4 (reworded so as to simulate say a school inspection, so it is random and fair)

Could I ask for elaboration on your protest to Article 1.2? I think it is important to do this otherwise gerrymandering or techniques like that could render the entire rest of the bill useless, provided the state is allowed to do that.

[Tinhampton]

Could I ask for elaboration on your protest to Article 1.2?

The requirement that "a proportionate and just vote distribution method procedure" be used could be interpreted as mandating that all election-holding member states use proportional representation in their elections. I'm as much a PR fan as anybody but I do not want to see it forced upon EVERY member state (for the same reason I opposed Drug Decriminalisation Act).

[Anne of Cleves in TNP]

“Considering that Clause 6 of Article 2 has been removed, and that Clause 4 of that same article has been reworded so that the ERB will not inspect every voting station, all of my original complaints have been resolved and so the Clevesian people will support this.”
-Ms. Charlotte Schafer, WA Ambassador for the Clevesian Empire

[Princess Rainbow Sparkles]

This is a great effort. I like how it does not pretend to be the final answer on voting rights for all time, or otherwise try to shut down future debate on the topic (unlike some other efforts floating around out there). I would offer the following critiques:

1. Requires that where each election of public office is held:

a. A secret ballot shall be used to deter voting influence from unlawful and illegitimate factors;
b. An aggregation and analysis of each vote shall be made publicly available;

"B" is unobjectionable, but I believe "A" is needless micromanagement. Encourage, if you must, that secret ballots be used where doing so would deter improper voting influence (whatever that means...) or other illegitimate factors (whatever those are....). But a requirement for secret ballots is needless micromanagement and is unfair to systems that may demand certain elections be made publicly. For instance, the election of a school superintendent (clearly, a public office) by the local board of education. There are many other means to deter unlawful influence. Secret ballots may be preferable to some societies but requiring them for all societies is not right.

Requires that a proportionate and just vote distribution method procedure is used to assign public office so as not to inequitably advantage or disadvantage a specific demographic of voters or candidates;

I don't know what this means or what the full scope of what you're trying to accomplish here is. Can you elaborate on what it does with an example?

Requires that universal suffrage is offered by the state and permitted to be utilised regardless of gender, ethnicity, or any other individualising factors;

What about individualsing factors including an individual's citizenship, or whether an individual is a child, or whether they have committed acts of treason, rebellion, or sedition? Some part of this principle may be sound enough and your heart is in the right place, but your aim is off and your sweep is too large.

5. Requires that a minimum of one polling location is required per one thousand citizens;

6. Requires that each citizen has access to a polling location within five kilometres of their residence;

7. Requires that mail-in voting and absentee voting be permitted and managed on an equal priority as in-person voting; by extension requires that each member state provide adequate facilities for citizens who are absent from their voting district or attempt to mail their vote in, in a way that will not inconvenience any citizens or discourage potential voters;

8. Requires that a minimum of one designated day per five hundred million citizens is given for elections, with an established set minimum of one day;

You are losing me again with the micromanagement. There is no reason to demand these specific, nitpicky requirements. There is no reason to enshrine in-person voting for all time when other more efficient and cost effective models may develop with time. The internet is still in its infancy, after all. There is no reason to affix an arbitrary standard like "one day of voting per 500m voters" on all member nations. A general command that member nations ensure convenient access to voting by means calculated to minimize the burden and inconvenience on voters would be more effective and enduring.

9. Requires that the period of time wherein elections are taking place be guaranteed as a protected period, and requires employers (whether privatised corporations or the state) provide unchanged pay and time off to all their employees during this period to allow citizens to vote regardless of their employement status;

I can agree with everything prior to the comma but I object to imposing this burden on small businesses. Also, it creates inequities with sole proprietorships, contractors, and those who otherwise do not work for wages. A requirement that employers must allow employees sufficient time off for voting, along with a requirement that member nations provide financial support and assistance to individuals who can show that they incurred any financial hardship in order to exercise their voting rights, would be more agreeable to me.

Article II - Regulation

1. Introduces a universal Election Regulation Body (ERB) which shall be funded and administered by the World Assembly;

2. Requires each member state, to their best of their fiscal and legal ability, create an internal election regulation and governing body in compliance with the ERB;

3. Understands that this regulation body has the potential to be utilised for illicit activities and further vote manipulation, and therefore requires this regulation body to be inspected and evaluated in their compliance of ERB regulations and standards as laid out in Article I by the ERB at a minimum frequency of one time per year;

4. Requires that the ERB be permitted access to a minimum of a randomly chosen ten percent of polling locations and processing facilities without interference for purposes of monitoring fraud, ballot tampering, or other fraudulent activities;

5. Requires that the ERB make the results of these investigations public, archived and available for scrutiny and re-investigation;

I'm worried these provisions effectively require member nations to give up ultimate regulatory control of their elections to the WA. What does it mean to have an internal regulation and governing body "in compliance with the ERB." The fact that the proposal warns about how voting regulatory bodies have "the potential to be utilised for illicit activities and further vote manipulation" sounds biased and prejudiced against local control. Anyway, requiring national regulators to be subject to WA regulators sort of just stacks the same problem on top of the first: couldn't the WA regulatory body also illicitly manipulate a member nation's voting system, to achieve the ends of certain members of the international community at the expense of local control?

I would support if ERB were just an advisory body to assist member nations with evaluating their practices and identifying areas for reform, with the power to shame member nations by publicly identifying when they have employed harmful or inefficient systems.

I think the bit about access to a minimum of ten percent of polling locations and processing facilities presumes a lot about how member nations will conduct their elections. I think it would be clearer to just mandate that ERB has the right to inspect a member nation's election process for evidence of fraud (etc.), and the power to issue public warnings when inspection access has been willfully or unreasonably restricted.

I have no issues whatever with the last provision here.

I'll wait to see how this develops in response to these criticisms before commenting further.

[Hannasea]

"The only way to have fair elections is to require every WA nation to hold elections. Article IV of this proposal is laughably absurd."

Daniella Russel, MA PhD
Representing the office of:
Ambassador Brittany Hepburn
Semi-Permanent Representative to the World Assembly

[Floofybit]

"The only way to have fair elections is to require every WA nation to hold elections. Article IV of this proposal is laughably absurd."

Daniella Russel, MA PhD
Representing the office of:
Ambassador Brittany Hepburn
Semi-Permanent Representative to the World Assembly

"Proposals cannot wholly outlaw, whether through direct or indirect language, religious, political or economic ideologies. However, proposals can target specific practices, such as slavery."
If you don't understand the rules, maybe you shouldn't be on the WA forum...

[Princess Rainbow Sparkles]

The GA cannot “wholly outlaw” a political ideology. Member states have the right to determine their form of government for themselves.

But the GA can direct actions. For instance, we cannot outlaw the ideology of slavery as a viable economic model, but we may prohibit certain acts that constitute slavery (as the international community may define the concept), without directly or indirectly banning the whole of the ideology. We still struggle with the concept, as modern debates over wage slavery, human trafficking, and the limits of indebtedness continue to rage.

Anyway, I agree Article IV serves no legitimate furtherment of democracy purpose and should go. Also, to what end do we advertise that autocracies may do as they please?

With respect to the call to mandate elections. Which ones? The election of representatives? The election of laws or ballot measures? The election of what to have for dinner? If we can answer the question of “what matters should be decided by election”, then we may find the path to say: “member nations must allow elections for these things!”

[The New Nordic Union]

"The only way to have fair elections is to require every WA nation to hold elections. Article IV of this proposal is laughably absurd."

Daniella Russel, MA PhD
Representing the office of:
Ambassador Brittany Hepburn
Semi-Permanent Representative to the World Assembly

"Proposals cannot wholly outlaw, whether through direct or indirect language, religious, political or economic ideologies. However, proposals can target specific practices, such as slavery."
If you don't understand the rules, maybe you shouldn't be on the WA forum...

Rules are OOC, though. The ambassador can still advocate for more extensive provisions IC. (Although the concerns of course cannot be addressed in a legal proposal).

[Hannasea]

"Proposals cannot wholly outlaw, whether through direct or indirect language, religious, political or economic ideologies. However, proposals can target specific practices, such as slavery."
If you don't understand the rules, maybe you shouldn't be on the WA forum...

OOC: Replying out of character makes it impossible to respond, much as I'd love to learn more from the TOP. MINDS. on the proposal rules about how the WA can ban slavery.

[Uan aa Boa]

Once again we have a "furtherance of democracy" proposal that finds fault with some democratic nations while dictatorships are automatically compliant.