[DRAFT] Repeal: Freedom Of Association

[New Bradfordsburg]

Submitting a draft repeal of GA 550 for review and comment. After review, I do firmly believe that GA 550 actually gives authoritarians an extra tool in their toolbox - it's a clear vehicle that can be used to justify oppression of harmless groups under the guise of protecting national security.

This could have been easily avoided with a clear definition of what an organization that "actively undermines national security" actually is. Instead, it was left undefined, leading members to have no other choice but to subjectively interpret this text. Obviously, this can be wildly abused with bad faith interpretations.

Therefore, we propose that GA 550 is repealed.

The World Assembly,

Identifying undefined mandates as legislative directives that fail to provide clear definitions,

Aware that legislating undefined mandates into law can cause legal chaos, proving costly and inefficient to members,

Realizing that undefined mandates can lead to a checkerboarding of legal interpretations across differing national jurisdictions,

Concerned about the wording of GA 550 "Freedom of Association", which states that governments, with exceptions, must allow citizens to associate with any organization of their choosing,

Further concerned that one such exception in GA 550, as listed in clause (1.b), permits the pursuit of criminal penalties for association with an organization on the basis that said organization "actively undermine national security,"

Alarmed that the term national security is left undefined,

Cognizant of the fact that asking members to themselves define groups considered to be actively undermining national security, without a guiding framework, is a request that will lead to highly subjective conclusions,

Further aware that many authoritarians will likely employ a bad-faith interpretation with their definition of groups considered to be actively undermining national security, thus leading to the opposite effect of GA 550's original legislative intent,

Knowing that such language, as the undefined mandate in GA 550 clause (1.b), is likely to be severely abused by authoritarians,

Hereby repeals GA 550.

[Pathonia]

^{I was going to mention that a link to the target should be included, it seems that it has been edited in :p}
The way I see it- and probably how it's intended to be seen -this repeal is entirely based on the following phrase:

"An organisation may have criminal penalties attached for association with it on the basis that it actively undermines national security"

I don't think any of the other sections for a basis on criminalising an organisation- such as using or endorsing violations of criminal law or hate speech -are part of your argument, so it's unfortunate that those would be axed alongside that problematic portion.

If you were to repeal the target for that minor section, which I can see through your arguments as being dangerously ambiguous, I'd quite appreciate a replacement- ideally with some more clarity over the shortcomings of the target.

-

Concisely put; I'd support the draft conditional upon a replacement of the target.

[Comfed]

Not to mention that the resolution allowing countries to suppress groups which direct their members to violate "national criminal law" arguably allows countries to use their criminal codes to make this resolution totally useless.

I lean towards supporting this, but I would probably want to see the replacement.

[The Ice States]

"The Eternal Union is broadly supportive of this repeal as written, without the need for a replacement. However, we do not consider the 'Further aware' clause to be persuasive as written, as The Civil Charter of the World Assembly already requires all member nations to interpret standing resolutions, including the target of this repeal, in good faith."

~Claudia Lindner,
Deputy World Assembly Ambassador,
The Eternal Union of Devonia and the Ice States.

Ooc: I do think that this repeal is otherwise fine, however note that the comment regarding a replacement is purely IC since the Eternal Union is an authoritarian nation

[The Overmind]

Noting that it's open to interpretation and that where to draw the line is not clear is fair, but member nations run aground of noncompliance and face sanctions when clearly acting on bad faith interpretations of WA law.

[Bananaistan]

OOC: This whole thing amounts to no more than an "it's not defined" argument IMO and is a swing and a miss. Firstly, each element of "actively undermine national security" are easily understood and do not require definitions. Then, just what the bad faith interpretation would be and how it leads to bad things is merely asserted but not demonstrated.

[New Bradfordsburg]

In response to the prior comments:

IC: "Alright, what we'll do is draft a replacement before moving forward. Look for that in the coming days. In our opinion, it's definitely valid that some key clauses in here shouldn't be entirely thrown out because of some poor wording. That said, New Bradfordsburg looks forward to this language being eventually fixed."

OOC: Roughly the same as IC. Agree with the sentiment that this needs a replacement. And in response to the last comment, I don't see this as a swing and a miss at all. It's a chance to tie up a loose end. And that's what we're going to do.