Jump to content

[DRAFT] Ban


States of Glory

Recommended Posts

Quote

Ban
Category: Human Rights | Strength: Significant

The World Assembly,

APPLAUDING previous efforts by this august organisation to reduce statelessness,

SHOCKED nonetheless that while nationality is protected, citizenship is not,

NOTING that member states have seen it fit to regulate capital punishment on an international level,

BELIEVING that exile, due to the potential of it exacerbating the international statelessness problem, is more worthy of World Assembly regulation than the death penalty is,

CONCERNED that certain member states wish to enact exile for the most minor of offences, such as the possession of tobacco farms, seeds or cigarettes,

HEREBY:

  1. DEFINES exile, for the purposes of this resolution, as the removal of an individual's citizenship and the enforced prohibition of said individual's return, either temporarily or permanently,


  2. DEFINES an exiled person, for the purposes of this resolution, as an individual who is serving exile,


  3. RESTRICTS the use of exile as a valid punishment by member states to situations where:

    • the only legal alternative punishments are life imprisonment or execution, and
    • the individual to be exiled is given adequate opportunity to obtain citizenship of another state if they do not already possess such citizenship,


  4. ESTABLISHES the Court of International Jurisdiction (CIJ), which shall:

    1. hear cases for torts from exiled persons against the exiling state, 
    2. have the authority to dismiss cases that are patently frivolous, and
    3. provide access to applications of immigration, citizenship, and/or passports to exiled persons seeking relocation,


  5. CLARIFIES that nothing in this resolution empowers the CIJ to claim civil jurisdiction on non-member states or criminal jurisdiction on any state,


  6. TASKS the World Assembly Office of Building Management to construct facilities adjacent to the World Assembly Headquarters for the purposes of housing exiled persons for the duration of any necessary delay incurred as a result of this resolution or of prior unrepealed resolutions,


  7. ALLOWS member states to send exiled persons to the aforementioned facilities for the duration and only for the duration of any necessary delay incurred as a result of this resolution or of prior unrepealed resolutions,


  8. DECLARES that member states utilising such facilities are not absolved of their responsibilities under Clause Three,


  9. MANDATES that member states are required to inform exiled persons, extant and ongoing, of the provisions established herein,


  10. ENCOURAGES member states to provide citizenship to individuals that have been left stateless as a result of breaches of this resolution's mandates,


  11. CLARIFIES that nothing in this resolution prevents member states from declaring a foreign citizen a persona non grata,

I see that this sub-forum has hardly been used in the few years that it has existed. As Minister of WA Affairs, I have a mandate to increase WA participation in the region, so I thought that I'd lead by example and post my failed proposal here for others to comment on. My aims here are twofold: Getting this proposal to pass and getting more TWP citizens interested in the World Assembly. With any luck, this process will aid those two aims.

P.S. I'm thinking of alternative titles. I've narrowed it down to BanNational Sovereignty Regarding Everything and Cute Puppies Act, though other suggestions are welcome.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Overthinkers said:

Personally, I see nothing wrong with the proposal in its present form. I believe this fell victim largely to violators of the Read the Resolution Act...

Me neither. I personally thought it was a well written proposal. I didn't understand why everyone else saw it as horrendous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/5/2017 at 9:07 PM, Willania Imperium said:

Me neither. I personally thought it was a well written proposal. I didn't understand why everyone else saw it as horrendous.

I know at least some were under the impression it interfered with their rights to banject nations from regions.  I wasn't following it very closely myself, but it seemed misinformation was the main cause.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Overthinkers said:

I know at least some were under the impression it interfered with their rights to banject nations from regions.  I wasn't following it very closely myself, but it seemed misinformation was the main cause.

That was one of the concerns, but I can't address it without violating either the Metagaming rule or the Real-Life References rule. I'll look at some of the other comments I got and see if I can address them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Willania Imperium said:

Um.. what are the edits? I can't really see what you changed other than the title, and it seems a bit short. Perhaps "Limitations on Exile" or "Exile Regulations." Something of the sort.

The preamble has been overhauled and the active clauses have been modified slightly. I would spoiler my old drafts for comparison, but this forum doesn't seem to support spoilers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, States of Glory said:

On the contrary, the title is completely accurate.

You're right, but it just doesn't feel right. I mean, have you ever heard of a proposal on regulating wood harvesting called "Chopping?" It just doesn't feel right. Perhaps "Exile Regulations" or "Exile Limitations" might feel better, but "Ban" is just uncomfortable. Plus, some of the noobie regions' WA Delegates might think you are trying to regulate their ability to ban nations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...