[PASSED] Prisoner Financial Rights

[Goobergunchia]

Whereas the practice of financially penalising individuals for their incarceration, such as through "pay-to-stay" policies, is unjust; and

Whereas this practice often keeps former prisoners in a cycle of debt, thereby actively impeding the reintegration of prisoners into society while causing many prisoners to return to crime;

The World Assembly enacts as follows.

1. No individual may suffer any financial penalty, or otherwise be required to provide any payment, where that burden would not exist but for their incarceration and is intended to fund their incarceration or otherwise recuperate costs associated therewith.
   
   
2. Creditors must fully relieve all debts owed by an individual as a result of a required financial penalty or payment of the nature proscribed by Section 1. Member nations must terminate bankrupt status, and expunge records thereof not purely for the purpose of administrative record-keeping, where such status is as a result of any debt of the nature proscribed by Section 1.
   
   
3. Should a provision of this resolution contradict a past World Assembly resolution still in force, that previous resolution takes precedence.

Co-author: Sanctaria.

[The Ice States]

Drafts incarcerated in "pay-to-stay" prisons.

[Tinhampton]

Article 3 can be removed. This is a novel area of legislation; no past resolution touching on these issues, even tangentially, exists; even if I'm wrong and such a resolution does exist, it was ruled in Kenmoria v. Convention on Law Enforcement for Heinous Crimes that "[o]nly a small part of a proposal's hypothetical effect may take advantage of a general subordination clause" and I'm not seeing how any one part of this resolution (and there are only three substantiative parts: ban on fines; fine forgiveness; WAGF support with forgiveness) would be of such little effect as to take such advantage.

[Kenmoria]

Ambassador Fortier stands to speak. “On behalf of the Delegation of the People’s Republic of Kenmoria to the General Assembly, I support this proposal. It is illogical to require a prisoner to pay for something which is mandated by the state. The desire to financially punish convicts can be achieved through fines, and the cost of prisons ought to be paid through national redistribution of wealth such as taxes, in nations where full economic equality has not been achieved. Achieving these goals through requiring payment for incarceration only hides member-nations’ true motives, in a manner contrary to just and open governance.”

[The Ice States]

Article 3 can be removed. This is a novel area of legislation; no past resolution touching on these issues, even tangentially, exists; even if I'm wrong and such a resolution does exist, it was ruled in Kenmoria v. Convention on Law Enforcement for Heinous Crimes that "[o]nly a small part of a proposal's hypothetical effect may take advantage of a general subordination clause" and I'm not seeing how any one part of this resolution (and there are only three substantiative parts: ban on fines; fine forgiveness; WAGF support with forgiveness) would be of such little effect as to take such advantage.

That a clause in its entirety is not a "small effect" does not mean that a part of it (eg, hypothetically, WAGF relief for some particular debt) cannot be.

[Elyreia]

"Perhaps it is due to the brevity of the resolution that I may be overthinking the problem, but how would this legislation affect those incarcerated persons for whom a financial punishment - such as in the form of compensatory or punitive damages or awards - has been levied as part of the same sentencing as their incarceration? For example, one who has committed a crime by involuntary unlawful injury whilst controlling a motorized vehicular transport and has been punished with not only a prison sentence, but also legal and medical fees for the victim, as well as compensatory damages and awards in the case of incomes lost due to said injury

Edit: "To elaborate further, in regards to Clause 2, which causes all creditors to forgive and invalidate debts owed, as this would seem to require the World Assembly to be on the hook for any such rewards and penalties."

[Imperium Anglorum]

You should cover the fair market value of the debt and not the debt par.

[Comfed]

Creditors must fully relieve all debts owed by an individual as a result of a required financial penalty or payment of the nature proscribed by Section 1. The WA General Fund shall cover such debt in full should it be requested in good faith by the relevant creditor.

Are you saying that people who have suffered a financial penalty for being imprisoned are required to be repaid? Because that is not in s 1.

Edit: never mind.

[Imperium Anglorum]

Also, I have a broader draft on this topic which covers a few other related areas. If you want to use portions of it, DM me for the (Google Doc) link and credit me as co-author.

[Kreigsreich of Iron]

If this passes I’m walking out.

[Simone Republic]

Why don't you add a clarifying line that also includes things like fees, phone call charges, food and beverage and other charges? You only talk about "as a result of incarceration" but not indirect billings.

Also about prisoners bankrupted as a result. And whether those can be reversed.

Also as mentioned on Discord, whether the anti-conflicts clause is genuinely necessary, but that's your call.

[The Ice States]

Ooc: All of these comments should be addressed. Per commentary from Second Sovereignty on the Discord, I axed the provision for WAGF coverage of debt. Re IA, would you still prefer that a provision for fair market value be included in the general debt relief mandate?

Ic:

"Perhaps it is due to the brevity of the resolution that I may be overthinking the problem, but how would this legislation affect those incarcerated persons for whom a financial punishment - such as in the form of compensatory or punitive damages or awards - has been levied as part of the same sentencing as their incarceration? For example, one who has committed a crime by involuntary unlawful injury whilst controlling a motorized vehicular transport and has been punished with not only a prison sentence, but also legal and medical fees for the victim, as well as compensatory damages and awards in the case of incomes lost due to said injury

Edit: "To elaborate further, in regards to Clause 2, which causes all creditors to forgive and invalidate debts owed, as this would seem to require the World Assembly to be on the hook for any such rewards and penalties."

"Thank you for the commentary, Ambassador. However, I and my mission do not believe that our draft includes general fines or other mandatory payments administered as part of a sentence in addition to incarceration. Being financially penalised in general for an offence is not being fined 'a result of that individual having been incarcerated'; the individual could very well have been fined without having been incarcerated. The person is being fined as a result of them having committed the act they were sentenced for, not as a result of them being incarcerated per se."

~Robert Desak,
World Assembly Ambassador,
The Eternal Union of Devonia and the Ice States.

[Normastan]

"What about other penalties which banks and creditors could set as a result of incarceration, but indirectly? For example, if one is incarcerated, they can't earn a good salary, and so can't pay off their previous debts, even though, were it not for the fact that they were in prison, their previous salary would have allowed them to pay off their debts. Would a person simply be able to be imprisoned for their debts to be wiped out on these grounds?"

[Kenmoria]

Ambassador Fortier stands to speak. “Though this is something of a moot point for the People’s Republic of Kenmoria, on a conceptual level, I disagree with the mandate of clause 2 about the expungement of records. The keeping of accurate records sometimes demands that a de facto bankruptcy, even if later retroactively declared to not be a de iure bankruptcy, is noted in official documentation. The fact that this bankruptcy is affected by this proposal can be made clear through methods other than full expungement.”

[Simone Republic]

Ambassador Fortier stands to speak. “Though this is something of a moot point for the People’s Republic of Kenmoria, on a conceptual level, I disagree with the mandate of clause 2 about the expungement of records. The keeping of accurate records sometimes demands that a de facto bankruptcy, even if later retroactively declared to not be a de iure bankruptcy, is noted in official documentation. The fact that this bankruptcy is affected by this proposal can be made clear through methods other than full expungement.”

My comment to Mage was that basically, there are certain roles IRL where someone who was previously incarcerated can undertake (if the incarceration was not related to fraud or dishonesty). This is more related to financial services where bankruptcy is usually a bar to further involvement in the industry.

For example insurance sales (in some states) can be done if the former prisoner was say incarcerated for driving under the influence. But they cannot usually undertake such roles if they were previously bankrupt.

[The Ice States]

"All comments so far should be addressed. Section 1 in particular has been rewritten so as to hopefully address the concerns of the Normastanian mission, as the penalty must be for their incarceration, or otherwise to maintain it. Simply inability to find a job due to being incarcerated is not that."

"I maintain our disagreement with Ambassador Fortier; as stated by the Simonian representative, often individuals who have been bankrupted are discriminated against for that reason in eg employment or receiving financial products such as a loan. That the situations which led to this bankruptcy are unjust make such discrimination also unjust; removing these records is thus necessary to prevent this discrimination completely."

"Further commentary remains welcome."

~Robert Desak,
World Assembly Ambassador,
The Eternal Union of Devonia and The Ice States.

[Simone Republic]

"All comments so far should be addressed. Section 1 in particular has been rewritten so as to hopefully address the concerns of the Normastanian mission, as the penalty must be for their incarceration, or otherwise to maintain it. Simply inability to find a job due to being incarcerated is not that."

"I maintain our disagreement with Ambassador Fortier; as stated by the Simonian representative, often individuals who have been bankrupted are discriminated against for that reason in eg employment or receiving financial products such as a loan. That the situations which led to this bankruptcy are unjust make such discrimination also unjust; removing these records is thus necessary to prevent this discrimination completely."

"Further commentary remains welcome."

~Robert Desak,
World Assembly Ambassador,
The Eternal Union of Devonia and The Ice States.

(OOC)

I don't really like replying IC so it's an OOC reply.

One potential compromise between Kenmoria and Magecastle is to "deem the bankruptcy records expunged for all purposes in all WA states" rather than expunging it directly. But that's kind of a dodge.

[The Ice States]

I've added an exception for "administrative record-keeping" in Section 1.

[The Overmind]

Remind me: is there legislation already in place to prevent disproportionate fines from being levied against a convicted criminal? Because, if not, I feel like this legislation must take it on. In the absence of such a provision, a member nation need only pair all crimes that carry a prison sentence with fines that are of equal size to whatever the anticipated prison debts are, with respect to the length of the sentence, in order to circumvent this proposal.

[Kenmoria]

Remind me: is there legislation already in place to prevent disproportionate fines from being levied against a convicted criminal? Because, if not, I feel like this legislation must take it on. In the absence of such a provision, a member nation need only pair all crimes that carry a prison sentence with fines that are of equal size to whatever the anticipated prison debts are, with respect to the length of the sentence, in order to circumvent this proposal.

(OOC: Such legislation does not exist, to the best of my knowledge. However, I feel as though it would be close to impossible, if not actually impossible, to write good legislation on how costly fines can be. Considering different currencies, economic systems, wealths of perpetrators, and types of crime, any attempt to standardise seems doomed to failure.)

[The Overmind]

Remind me: is there legislation already in place to prevent disproportionate fines from being levied against a convicted criminal? Because, if not, I feel like this legislation must take it on. In the absence of such a provision, a member nation need only pair all crimes that carry a prison sentence with fines that are of equal size to whatever the anticipated prison debts are, with respect to the length of the sentence, in order to circumvent this proposal.

(OOC: Such legislation does not exist, to the best of my knowledge. However, I feel as though it would be close to impossible, if not actually impossible, to write good legislation on how costly fines can be. Considering different currencies, economic systems, wealths of perpetrators, and types of crime, any attempt to standardise seems doomed to failure.)

We can still enact broad standards of fairness in justice that require good faith compliance. With respect to this legislation, it may suffice to say that fines may not be used to circumvent the mandates of the proposal, and then leave it to the WACC.

[The Ice States]

The new wording of Section 1 should address this.

[B1G JIM SLADE]

"What about voluntary pay-to-stay? Lets say a wealthy brotha get locked up, and he wanna pay a little extra to be placed in a better cell, or even a different, safer prison? Maybe he willin' to pay for a private bathroom, or better food?"

[The Ice States]

"What about voluntary pay-to-stay? Lets say a wealthy brotha get locked up, and he wanna pay a little extra to be placed in a better cell, or even a different, safer prison? Maybe he willin' to pay for a private bathroom, or better food?"

"In that case, Ambassador, it would not be a 'penalty' and they would not be 'required' to provide it; therefore it would not fall under the Section 1 proscription. Does this address your concern?"

~Robert Desak,
World Assembly Ambassador,
The Eternal Union of Devonia and the Ice States.

[B1G JIM SLADE]

"What about voluntary pay-to-stay? Lets say a wealthy brotha get locked up, and he wanna pay a little extra to be placed in a better cell, or even a different, safer prison? Maybe he willin' to pay for a private bathroom, or better food?"

"In that case, Ambassador, it would not be a 'penalty' and they would not be 'required' to provide it; therefore it would not fall under the Section 1 proscription. Does this address your concern?"

~Robert Desak,
World Assembly Ambassador,
The Eternal Union of Devonia and the Ice States.

"I believe it does!

I'm inclined to support this. Makin' a convict pay his debt to society one thing. But lockin' a man up for years then sendin' him out into the world with insupportable debt, insurin' he never overcome that or properly integrate back into society just wrong."