NationStates Jolt Archive

RECOGNIZING that international crime is a major problem facing the world today,

DEEPLY CONCERNED BY the negative economic and social impacts of organized criminal activities, and convinced of the urgent need to strengthen cooperation to prevent such activities more effectively at the national, regional and international levels,

STRONGLY CONVINCED that the denying of safe havens to international organized criminals is an effective and necessary tool,

RECOMMENDS the following:

I. Statement of purpose

The purpose of this resolution is to promote cooperation between UN members in the prosecution of international criminals

II. Use of terms

A. Serious Crimes - Offenses that would entail a four or more year prison term, or similar sentence

B. Organized criminal group - Structured group of five or more persons, formed for the express purpose of performing an illegal activity

C. Piracy - Acts of violence or theft by force committed either in coastal or international waters by non-governmental organization.

D. Terrorism - the unlawful use of force against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population or any segment thereof, in the furtherance of political or social objectives

III. Scope of Resolution

This Resolution shall apply to all serious crimes and crimes related to piracy, terrorism, and smuggling perpetuated by organized criminal groups, where such offenses are international in nature.

IV. Specific actions recommended

A. Each UN member shall establish a national clearinghouse for information pertaining to organized crime

1. This functionary shall coordinate and store information and requests for information from legal bodies within the member nation.
2. This functionary shall be responsible for processing requests from other member nations pertaining to crimes covered under the scope of this resolution.

B. Information requests include the following:

1. Taking evidence or statements from witnesses
2. Examination of sites
3. Providing expert evaluations (eg, profiling)
4. Providing appropriate government documentation
5. Identifying proceeds of crime

C. Exceptions - Member nations may decline specific requests for the following reasons

1. Request would violate standing domestic law in that nation
2. Request involves an offense not considered a serious crime under that nation's standing domestic law, unless
a) The crime is associated with piracy, smuggling, or terrorism
b) The crime is considered a capital crime in either nation (eg, murder)

First glance suggestions:

Wow. Long proposal. I think you've included too much detail for the average UN Ambassador to ... how to put this delicately ... give a shit about. Can you compress this down to a broader outline and leave some of the details for the organization to decide bureaucratically? I think it would help.

Another oft-made suggestion is to bring it to the forums BEFORE submitting. That way you can get some feedback and possibly clear up misconceptions before committing yourself to the process. Read the stickies at the top of this forum for some other good suggestions.

Overall, it's a very complete and self-contained proposal, and a hell of an intro to the UN Forum. But I don't think it stands a chance of passage in its current form.

Yeah, I figured I might get burned for submitting before putting a draft of it here. I'd put up a copy of it on The North Pacific regional board for a couple of days, but got impatient, and decided to test the waters, as it were. :)

I'm hoping to get a good idea of what I need to do to make a workable resolution from comments about this one. And here I was hoping that I *hadn't* been too wordy for once.

Thanks for the comments, though.

While I'm still going to 'push' the original version of the proposal, I've been trying to do some tweaking. Here's a possible revision:

RECOGNIZING that international crime is a major problem facing the world today,

DEEPLY CONCERNED BY the negative economic and social impacts of organized criminal activities, and convinced of the urgent need to strengthen cooperation to prevent such activities more effectively at the national, regional and international levels,

STRONGLY CONVINCED that the denying of safe havens to international organized criminals is an effective and necessary tool,

RECOMMENDS the following in an effort to promote cooperation between UN members in the prosecution of international criminals:

I. Each UN member shall establish a national clearinghouse for information pertaining to organized crime

A. This functionary shall coordinate and store information and requests for information from legal bodies within the member nation.

B. This functionary shall be responsible for processing requests from other member nations pertaining to crimes covered under the scope of this resolution. Requests may include, but not necessarily limited to, taking evidence or statements from witnesses, examination of sites, providing expert evaluations, providing appropriate government documentation, and identifying proceeds of crime.

II. Exceptions Clause: Member nations may decline specific requests for the following reasons:

A. Request would violate standing domestic law in that nation
B. Request involves an offense not considered a serious crime under that nation's standing domestic law, unless

1) The crime is associated with piracy, smuggling, or terrorism
2) The crime is considered a capital crime in either nation (eg, murder)


This cuts out the entire definitions section. I had originally included the definitions because of ongoing debates on other proposals regarding a couple of the terms, and in the interest of curtailing possible abuses.

I'm happy to see that no one seems to have any major objection resolution, at least. :)

EDIT: Hmm. I hope this isn't considered spam, since I've had three posts in a row with my name on it. My apologies if it is; I'm hoping the time delay makes up for that.

I'm happy to see that no one seems to have any major objection resolution, at least. :)

EDIT: Hmm. I hope this isn't considered spam, since I've had three posts in a row with my name on it. My apologies if it is; I'm hoping the time delay makes up for that.

Is this kinda like an INTERPOL?

And yes, my lack of objections usually means you'll get a yes vote when an idea seems well thought out.

I'd rename it. Crime Prevention Network just doesn't do it for me. This acronymaphilic crowd would probably like something with a sweet ring to it, like RBH or UPCL. *excuse me a moment while I gag*

How about ICC - International Crime Cooperative. Or ICC - International Crime Clearinghouse. The proposal isn't actually about preventing crime itself, it's more to do with sharing information so that national agencies can better deal with it, both before and after.

Ummm ... just spotted kind of a major problem. You've done a nice job of defining the national clearinghouses, but how do they coordinate with each other? Don't you need some international databank or something so folks can share? Wouldn't it be a good idea to specify such a thing? The UPCL did so, use it as a model.

Is this kinda like an INTERPOL?


Interpol does very similar work, yes. I'm actually curious if anyone has RP'd an Interpol like organization into NS.

How about ICC - International Crime Cooperative. Or ICC - International Crime Clearinghouse. The proposal isn't actually about preventing crime itself, it's more to do with sharing information so that national agencies can better deal with it, both before and after.

Ummm ... just spotted kind of a major problem. You've done a nice job of defining the national clearinghouses, but how do they coordinate with each other? Don't you need some international databank or something so folks can share? Wouldn't it be a good idea to specify such a thing? The UPCL did so, use it as a model.

I like the ICC name. My only concern with the Crime Prevention Network is that someone confuse it for a television station. ;) And ICC is, I think, sorta similar to the actual Interpol acronym, if that's at all important.

I debated the international database idea with myself when writing this up. I rejected it at the time for a couple of different reasons.

Basically, it boils down to the idea that I think there should be a very active request/response process for this information, so that the exclusions clause is properly met with each information transaction. This would seem easier if each nation maintained separate databases (in their respective clearing houses) and transmitted (by fax, encrypted email, etc) to the requesting country, once everything was processed.

Also, given the huge differences in privacy and similar laws in each country, it would be a nightmare developing a centralized database that met all necessary requirements (The UPCL gets around this by standardizing copyright law). Much easier instead, for each nation to build according to its domestic law, and vetting any information requests based on that.

I would not support this proposal. What would the UN consider smuggling under this proposal? I like to view my nation as a freethinking Libertarian state. What you would consider smuggling in your nation may be business in my nation. I cannot justify supporting any proposal that would inhibit my population's freedom to conduct their own lives as they see fit. Less government is where I see my nation heading toward, not a world police state.

I would not support this proposal. What would the UN consider smuggling under this proposal? I like to view my nation as a freethinking Libertarian state. What you would consider smuggling in your nation may be business in my nation. I cannot justify supporting any proposal that would inhibit my population's freedom to conduct their own lives as they see fit. Less government is where I see my nation heading toward, not a world police state.

While I appreciate a strong and independent private sector, I do expect businesses in my nation to respect both my laws and those of nations they choose to deal with.

As far as the definition goes, I would use a standard dictionary definition, such as "To import or export secretly, contrary to the law"(1). Considering the 'law' in this case would be the UN's (since the clause does not refer to specific nations), everyone should be on the same page, legality wise.

An obvious example of the above would be the "Ban Trafficking in Persons" resolution.

The main purpose of this resolution is to help fortify a nation's police force, not have it intrude unfairly upon another nation. I, as much as anyone, don't wish for the world to become a police state.

(1) - from brainydictionary.com

* The Rep of Komokom briefly checks over proposal, likes, considers future support.

I like the ICC name. My only concern with the Crime Prevention Network is that someone confuse it for a television station. ;) And ICC is, I think, sorta similar to the actual Interpol acronym, if that's at all important.

It is your proposal, so naturally you must do what you feel best, but I do agree that "Network" makes me think of news.

[OOC: There was a resolution to create an International Red Cross, or rather to recognize it. So Interpol, is a recognizable name.]

It is your proposal, so naturally you must do what you feel best, but I do agree that "Network" makes me think of news.

[OOC: There was a resolution to create an International Red Cross, or rather to recognize it. So Interpol, is a recognizable name.]

Oooh, good point. Thank you.

Is there any particular etiquette involved in resubmitting proposals (general time to wait, notifying previous supporters of the resubmission, etc)?

ICC - International Crime Cooperative
It occurs to me that this sounds like an appeal to form the Mafia. Perhaps the Clearinghouse one is better.

Etiquette? Timing. You want to get the weekend crowd and the weekday crowd, and you don't want it killed early by the Major Update. I'd go for a Saturday, noon GMT. That gives you two weekend days to campaign and two weekdays to catch the school crowd, and hopefully puts you on the front page all day Tuesday. Front page exposure on a well written proposal is good for about 50 approvals.

It occurs to me that this sounds like an appeal to form the Mafia. Perhaps the Clearinghouse one is better.

Etiquette? Timing. You want to get the weekend crowd and the weekday crowd, and you don't want it killed early by the Major Update. I'd go for a Saturday, noon GMT. That gives you two weekend days to campaign and two weekdays to catch the school crowd, and hopefully puts you on the front page all day Tuesday. Front page exposure on a well written proposal is good for about 50 approvals.

Another less intrusive method ... hours before your proposal expires copy a list of the endorsers and when you resubmit your proposal telegram them saying that you won't telegram them again if they ask and that you are *only* telegramming delegates who showed an interest in the previous version. If you make changes, point to the thread and highlight why you made changes.

It may take a few cycles, but if interest continues to increase it shows that you are willing to wait. The IDU is currently doing this with two of our proposals (and yes, I'll be bringing comments back to our region for possible changes to the proposals).

Is there any particular etiquette involved in resubmitting proposals (general time to wait, notifying previous supporters of the resubmission, etc)?

It's less etiquette to a fancy dinner and more sales pitch at the used car dealership. You're just trying to get your proposal passed. The only largely recognized elements of protocol is that you be polite, informative, and that you avoid looking the part of spam. And If you follow the previous advice (such as noting that you'll stop contacting a delegate if that delegate so requests), you should be fine with spamming.

And Frisbeeteria has the best method for timing.

One thing to consider, in selling your proposal, is presubmission publicity. The forum is a perfect tool to get fundamental ideas about your proposal out, as well as making any revisions publicly known. This is information in your pocket ready for you to use.

The knowledge base about your proposal is less accurately determined by the post number and more accurately determined by the "viewed" number for your thread. And not all delegates frequent the UN forum. In fact, I doubt you'll get that many extra approvals from a forum thread per se. But, you can, as previously advised by a member nation, refer the delegates you telegram to this forum resource, since most delegates aren't going to waste time reading your arguments in telelgram form. And you can get allies in teh forum who will inform others--and some ambitious, young UN nation might even telegram delegates for you.

Thank you all for the advice. I can definitely see the 'used car salesman' aspect of campaigning for a proposal.

And I want to thank everyone who's supporting the resolution right now, either in forum posts or in approvals.