[DRAFT] Repeal: Protections During Territorial Transitions

[Toonela]

It certainly looks like a resolution I have little love for is on track to pass, so I’m beginning work on this.

This is a first draft, my first for the GA ever to be posted publicly now that I think about it, and there’s at least a couple of places I already know I’ll need to clean up the phrasing and tighten some screws, but I’m too tired to be fussing with it from mobile tonight. I’m also in no rush with it, being rather busy, so it may sit here a while. All the better to gather feedback from my peers, improve it, and add some roleplaying flavor to this post in the future though!

The General Assembly,

Bearing in mind the laudable intentions of GAR#620, "“Protections During Territorial Transitions”, with regards to protecting those left vulnerable by some forms of territorial transference between member states and,

Aware that this body should not refrain from future commitments to addressing many of the pertinent issues therein,

Nonetheless identifies a number of flaws with the aforementioned resolution which render it ineffectual and burdensome upon member states, such as:

• The broad exception in the resolution’s second clause, which plausibly allows for inhabitants taking on representative or otherwise privileged roles within a community to obstruct others access to information on jurisdictional changes.
  
• A lack of a rigorous, impartial compliance mechanism in the resolution’s fifth clause, via which any member state may feasibly claim for themselves to be overwhelmed under certain conditions, allowing for the shirking of the resolution’s third and fourth clauses without providing “other suitable, temporary measures” of any meaningful definition.
  
• The malignant phrasing of the seventh clause of the resolution, which mandates that member states must either transfer any and all “rights, privileges, and duties” held by an affected inhabitant in the ceding state to the newly formed territoriality of the receiving state or, in the event the receiving state does not have such roles within their society, provide a “close equivalent”, even if a close equivalent to a role beholden to the rights, privileges, and duties of the ceding state’s inhabitants would be utterly alien to the receiving state; this goes so far as to undermine the resolution’s own ninth clause’s goal of fair acclimatization.
  
• An inability on the part of the resolution’s twelfth clause to become operable upon non-member states, as among the provisions of the resolution which must be provided for are the definitions of the resolution’s first clause, which categorically exclude non-member states.

Hereby repeals General Assembly Resolution #620, "Protections During Territorial Transitions".

Any and all feedback is appreciated and welcome. Cheers!

[Honeydewistania]

The broad exception in the resolution’s second clause, which plausibly allows for inhabitants taking on representative or otherwise privileged roles within a community to obstruct others access to information on jurisdictional changes.

How?

[Magecastle Embassy Building A5]

The broad exception in the resolution’s second clause, which plausibly allows for inhabitants taking on representative or otherwise privileged roles within a community to obstruct others access to information on jurisdictional changes.

"How does it do this, ambassador?"

A lack of a rigorous, impartial compliance mechanism in the resolution’s fifth clause, via which any member state may feasibly claim for themselves to be overwhelmed under certain conditions, allowing for the shirking of the resolution’s third and fourth clauses without providing “other suitable, temporary measures” of any meaningful definition.

"Agreed here."

The malignant phrasing of the seventh clause of the resolution, which mandates that member states must either transfer any and all “rights, privileges, and duties” held by an affected inhabitant in the ceding state to the newly formed territoriality of the receiving state or, in the event the receiving state does not have such roles within their society, provide a “close equivalent”, even if a close equivalent to a role beholden to the rights, privileges, and duties of the ceding state’s inhabitants would be utterly alien to the receiving state; this goes so far as to undermine the resolution’s own ninth clause’s goal of fair acclimatization.

"Why is this a problem?"

An inability on the part of the resolution’s twelfth clause to become operable upon non-member states, as among the provisions of the resolution which must be provided for are the definitions of the resolution’s first clause, which categorically exclude non-member states.

"I concur here, but it may be helpful to clarify why not affecting non-member nations is a problem -- it may not be immediately obvious."

[Imperium Anglorum]

The broad exception in the resolution’s second clause, which plausibly allows for inhabitants taking on representative or otherwise privileged roles within a community to obstruct others access to information on jurisdictional changes.

I don't think this claim is true. It shouldn't be a large problem, just omit it.

---

Formatting. 1. In the second paragraph, you have an extraneous quotation mark. Also, don't use smart quotes in formatting; the dumb quotes format better sometimes because of NS's bad character encoding. 2. Use alphabetical lists instead of bullets. 3. Abbreviate your "seventh clause" stuff just to "section 7". Or, if you are still not clear, "target section 7".

As to claim (b), we have the WACC and the Administrative Compliance Act. You could get away with saying that the target resolution creates no such compliance mechanism, but it is probably more strategic simply to point out that "other suitable, temporary measures" is undefined and that there are no standards for judging when a member state is actually "overwhelmed". Mere difficulty is not "overwhelmed". Yet, sometimes mere difficulty can make something impossible.

[Daarwyrth]

Princess Madelyne Zylkoven, WA Representative of Daarwyrth: "Our delegation would like to inform you that a replacement proposal is currently in its drafting stage, should you wish to mention it or include it as an addendum to your repeal endeavour."

The malignant phrasing of the seventh clause of the resolution

Madelyne raises an eyebrow, while a gentle and polite smile rests on her lips. "Malignant, Ambassador? Just to ensure we're on the same page, you are aware that 'malignant' means 'having a strong wish to do harm'? I can assure you that there was neither a conscious or unconscious wish to do harm when out delegation wrote that clause. What we intended was to ensure that affected inhabitants wouldn't lose rights or privileges as a result of a transition. An automatic conversion of rights for rights was even suggested to us by a senior and well-respected delegation of this assembly."

The princess lowers her eyebrow and continues to look at Toonela's ambassador politely. "Could our delegation have developed a better phrasing of the clause? Yes, and we hope that is now reflected in the replacement proposal should your repeal come to pass. Thus, may I suggest 'unfortunate' instead of 'malignant', my dear Ambassador? Because as the authoring delegation I can plainly state there was no strong wish to do harm with this clause."