[DEFEATED] Rights for Crime Victims Act

[Chipoli]

I am inebriated right now, but my solution for restitution would be to block any WA action on it; to remove it entirely from your draft and delegate it to member nations. A one-size-fits-all will be bad, and the detail you have to get into is so deep that there is not enough space to write a restitution law taken from any RL nation, let alone one spanning the breadth and depth of the WA.

(OOC) What if some WA Member nations don't provide the crime victim with any restitution at all? That could potentially motivate the victim to seek revenge and/or start committing crimes. I say we can start by simply stating that crime victims have the right to restitution.

I'd like to hear more ambassadors share their opinions on this situation.

[West Barack and East Obama]

Dr Justin Obama, Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs: Your right to full restitution is a recipe for disaster. If the defendant can't pay up, who's paying?

[Chipoli]

Dr Justin Obama, Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs: Your right to full restitution is a recipe for disaster. If the defendant can't pay up, who's paying?

"Should the right for restitution be included? I somewhat feel that omitting can weaken the rights for the victim."

[Chipoli]

Bump.

[Chipoli]

Another Bump. The proposal title has been changed. I have added the definition of "the convicted" and revamped clause 4.

[Chipoli]

Updated clause 4a.

[Chipoli]

Bump.

[Goobergunchia]

Due to the continued presence of clauses 2b and 4, we must respectfully urge a vote against.

Should the resolution pass, the Moderately Liberal Unitary Republic will institute a procedure that formally transfers any fiscal compensation in excess of that which would be otherwise ordered from appropriate government funds to the convicted immediately prior to the order for compensatory payment becoming final.

[Lord] Michael Evif
Goobergunchian WA Ambassador

[Magecastle Embassy Building A5]

Due to the continued presence of clauses 2b and 4, we must respectfully urge a vote against.

Should the resolution pass, the Moderately Liberal Unitary Republic will institute a procedure that formally transfers any fiscal compensation in excess of that which would be otherwise ordered from appropriate government funds to the convicted immediately prior to the order for compensatory payment becoming final.

[Lord] Michael Evif
Goobergunchian WA Ambassador

"We concur. Against."

First, it doesn't say how much is to be provided -- if at all. Second, seek is not the same as receive. It is obvious that someone can decide whether they want something or not. What you want is it to be provided, not just victims to be allowed to seek it and fail to receive anything.

"A disembodied voice originating from The Ice States had raised up the issue with Section 3 before, but it seems to not have been done. On further consideration, we also agree that 2b is an overreach, as the 'release or escape of the convicted' could be relating to a completely different charge/prosecution/incident."

[Philippine Maharlika]

The people together with Legal Experts in Criminal Law and International Law voted against the proposal on the grounds of
1) VIOLATION OF THE LEGAL DOCTRINE of PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE until proven Guilty.
Here, It is ironic that the "ACCUSED" is giving special rights without yet proving that the accusations were true. Giving special priviledges to them means we are already prejudice against the one he/she accused without giving him due process. Remember not all so called accusers/victims are real victims here
2)Alllowing thus proposal destroys independence of the court hence violates right of FAIR TRIAL.
Therefore, with all the premises considers, The Ministry of Justice, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Office of the Solicitor General and the Chief Justice of the Maharlikan Supreme Court found this unconstitutional to our country's constitution.
FURTHERMORE, If we allow this proposal into place then we eventually weakening our Justice System because there is now a bias hence destroy our rights in fair trial.

[Chipoli]

Due to the continued presence of clauses 2b and 4, we must respectfully urge a vote against.

Should the resolution pass, the Moderately Liberal Unitary Republic will institute a procedure that formally transfers any fiscal compensation in excess of that which would be otherwise ordered from appropriate government funds to the convicted immediately prior to the order for compensatory payment becoming final.

[Lord] Michael Evif
Goobergunchian WA Ambassador

"We have noted your feedback, and will use it should another draft be required."

[Daarwyrth]

"We have noted your feedback, and will use it should another draft be required."

Princess Madelyne Zylkoven, WA Representative of Daarwyrth: "Another draft will be necessary, my dear Ambassador, and had been necessary prior to the submission of this proposal. It seems other delegations have pointed out the flaws in your text, yet you seemed to have not engaged with those. As such, the current version is something our delegation absolutely cannot support.

Your proposal is creating a vicious cycle where a convict will only be able to resort to crime in order to pay the restitutions in question. I don't know what hellhole of a judiciary system your delegation took inspiration from, but the focus on punishment instead of rehabilitation that you took within this proposal is simply cruel."

[Philippine Maharlika]

The whole proposal is problematic in a sense that it weakens the core rights of fair trial on the part of the person being accused by the unproven victim.
If this proposal wins. It will give chilling effect that weakens the fundamental rights of every member states hence, failure of this Assembly to protect the best interest of the law and democracy

[Blaenavon]

If the crime victim is incompetent, incapacitated, or deceased, the legal guardians of the crime victim or anyone else appointed as suitable by the court may assume the crime victim's rights.

I assume 'assume' in this context means 'begins to have the crime victims rights'. If that is the intended meaning, why would these suitable people now have the right to be tested for an illness the victim was exposed to? And this doesn't safeguard against a biased court which appoints someone favouring the accused?

[Trattativa]

I believe that section 4 should be placed in it's own proposal, such as a 'Victim Compensation Act'. The section currently modifies the sentencing of all crimes in WA states (or allows lawsuits 'seeking' compensation); this section along with it's subsection mandating probation and forced employment for those unable to pay deserve their own debate.

My government would approve of this Act if section 4 was removed and considered separately.

[Galicia-Podolia]

OOC: So I'm giving this a go again. The last proposal I wrote had a number of serious flaws and was also marked illegal. I believe this concept has a lot of potential and a resolution can probably be passed. I will appreciate any feedback provided below.

Category: Civil Rights Strength: Significant


The World Assembly,

Determined to give crime victims the justice they deserve, along with the respect, civility, and fair treatment that they merit;

Noting that the accused are innocent until proven guilty;

Assured that crime victims can play a vital role in the criminal justice system due to their potential ability as a witness and their ability to provide an understanding of the seriousness of the crime in question;

Acknowledging that legislation (GA#247) regarding the rights of crime victims was previously passed but is no longer in effect;

Urging that the correct proceedings should be conducted in court to satisfy the rights of the crime victim without infringing the rights of the accused or any other parties;

Defines the following terms necessary for this proposal:

A “crime victim” is a person who has been verified by a competent authority as defined in the local jurisdiction to have prima facie evidence of having demonstrably suffered physical, emotional, financial, or sexual harm due to an alleged criminal offense by another individual(s).

“The accused” is a person who is charged with or being prosecuted for a crime against the victim.

“The convicted” is a person who has been convicted of a crime after being accused of it.

A “court proceeding” is any method of invoking the action of a court.

“Incompetent” is a term for a person who cannot testify or stand trial for reasons including but not limited to mental incapacity or physical disability.

Instructs all member nations to provide their crime victims with the following rights:

1. Rights to be protected from the accused, including but not limited to:

a. The right to be tested for serious illnesses the victim may have been exposed to by the accused during the crime.

b. Neither the accused nor any associates may harass, stalk, harm, or threaten the victim.

c. The accused may not contact the victim in any way without the presence of law enforcement unless the victim freely consents to the contact.

d. The crime victim may request the court to give protective orders to limit the disclosure of the victim's personal information unless some of the victim's information is necessary to determine the case's outcome, in which case only the essential information would be revealed.

2. Crime victims have the right to be informed about the following:

a. The victim has the right to be informed of their rights.

b. Crime victims have the right to be notified of any court proceeding involving the crime or any release or escape of the convicted unless the victim decides otherwise.

3. Crime victims can exercise their rights through an attorney or themselves. If the crime victim is incompetent, incapacitated, or deceased, the legal guardians of the crime victim or anyone else appointed as suitable by the court may assume the crime victim's rights.

4. Crime victims have the right to seek compensation from the convicted for any damages suffered as a result of the crime.

a. If a judge finds that the convicted is unable to pay their compensation, they will be put on probation in order to be able to find a source of income to pay the compensation.

5. Crime victims have the right to be referred to services that support victims and have them tailored to their needs.

\

Rights gained by "Crime Victims" should vary depending on what the crime victims went through.

[Galicia-Podolia]

I believe that section 4 should be placed in it's own proposal, such as a 'Victim Compensation Act'. The section currently modifies the sentencing of all crimes in WA states (or allows lawsuits 'seeking' compensation); this section along with it's subsection mandating probation and forced employment for those unable to pay deserve their own debate.

My government would approve of this Act if section 4 was removed and considered separately.

i agree

[Galicia-Podolia]

Oh, and I also think that this should not be a significant strength, as some nations maybe wouldn't think this is fair for the crime victims. The strength should be somewhere between significant and weak.

[Toonela]

"In addition to criticism of certain provisions already provided by other delegations, much of which we agree with, we would also like to point out that 2a of this resolution creates 'a right to be informed of the right to be informed of one's rights', which we assume was not intended, but is nevertheless problematic. We have advised the Social Liberal Union vote Against this resolution. The full reasoning of that advisement can be found in the appropriate regional notice."

[Goobergunchia]

I believe that section 4 should be placed in it's own proposal, such as a 'Victim Compensation Act'. The section currently modifies the sentencing of all crimes in WA states (or allows lawsuits 'seeking' compensation); this section along with it's subsection mandating probation and forced employment for those unable to pay deserve their own debate.

We agree with the ambassador from Trattativa, with the caveat that we would also suggest that the newly split proposal be subsequently removed the chamber, cut into tiny strips, and said strips be rolled up and used for the construction of, er, drug delivery mechanisms.

[Lord] Michael Evif
Goobergunchian WA Ambassador

[Attempted Socialism]

I am happy that a majority of the voters have seen past the title and recognised this for the deeply flawed proposal that it is. I can only suggest to the author that, if they draft another resolution, they listen when people point out deep flaws in their proposal.

[Chipoli]

"We appreciate the feedback but do not understand why any of these issues were pointed out before submission when we could actually improve on them."

[Attempted Socialism]

"We appreciate the feedback but do not understand why any of these issues were pointed out before submission when we could actually improve on them."

OOC: They were pointed out. We had several posts back and forth where you made it very clear you preferred a resolution that fit your ideals. This is the resolution you wanted, with the flaws you were adamant on including.

[The Pacific Northwest]

Section 4 concerns me. It essentially says that all criminals who don’t have enough money to pay restitution for the damages caused by any crime will be placed on probation and told to get a job. Probation is not parole. Parole means they have already served time. Putting them on probation means they’re not serving any time in prison at all. And what happens after they’ve paid up? Do they go to prison then because that’s not clear from what the proposal says.

So all poor criminals, even people like convicted murderers just get turned loose. Do they search for a job? If they can’t find one due to being a convict what happens then, forced labor?

Having read through your previous posts, many issues were pointed out and not fixed. The law does only what it says. If the law does not specify something then it does not do it. You can’t just explain how you would handle it and then not change the proposal to reflect that. You actually need to clarify in the proposal itself for it to apply.

[Daarwyrth]

"We appreciate the feedback but do not understand why any of these issues were pointed out before submission when we could actually improve on them."

Zylkoven: "Oh, but Ambassador, it wasn't that these flaws weren't pointed out. Because quite frankly they were pointed it. Your delegation simply chose not to listen. Every time a delegation, most notably the one from Attempted Socialism, provided commentary you merely provided replies and explanations as to why you wish to keep things the way they are, instead of working those comments and remarks into your draft proposal. The only one to blame for the failure of this proposal is your delegation, Ambassador, because you refused to listen."