NationStates Jolt Archive

Mataradesh is not yet a member of the UN and, consequently, the following proposal will only be submitted after it is granted admission.

We, the people of the Rogue Nation of Mataradesh, do propose that this measure be taken by the UN: that when a nation commits a 'crime against humanity', defined as deliberate and intentional killing of large numbers of civilians of another country for political or other purposes or otherwise purposefully limiting the exercise of freedoms of the citizens of another country, it should be tried by an international tribunal under UN control in which the information surrounding the incident be presented to the UN at large and the issue voted on as if it were a proposal. If found guilty of having committed such a 'crime against humanity', that nation should be given a punishment, again determined by the UN at large.

Would any other nation support this proposal? Has any such proposal already been submitted? Mataradesh is curious to see the view of other nations.

I would support a resolution that sets up punishments for violators of human rights, but of course I cannot endorse it until it becomes a THOROUGH and WELL WRITTEN resolution (we have seen so few lately). I do like the idea however, and would most likely support it.

~Tsar Mikhail Romanov I~

This idea has merit but like All the Russias I would like to see the proposal written out before I make a decision.

OCC: I think the concept of a proposal-like voting system would be considered game mechanics but of course there can be a poll in the fourm.

IC: We woould also like the proposal to include what sanctions the UN should be prepared to influct upon an offender as well as any method of carrying gout the sentence.

Finally, we would like to know more about the composition of said international tribunal.

You're a rogue nation and you're joining the UN?

And you're banning war, too. It's been done. World War II broke out afterwards.

As long as the loosers decide who the war criminals are, we are behind you :)

BTW , I think your description fits "all wars as being war crimes"
:) here here :)

we are in full support of this proposal.

We would like to get one thing clear: would this proposal affect only the nations in the UN or all the countries currently active in NationStates?

You're a rogue nation and you're joining the UN?

And you're banning war, too. It's been done. World War II broke out afterwards.

Well, actually, Mataradesh simply has the label of a rogue nation. If you cared to see its country profile, you would find that it is a democracy. The reason that Mataradesh took the title of Rogue Nation was to see whether or not other would judge it by its name.

Also, I am not banning war. If you look carefully, I said that such 'Crimes Against Humanity' are only mass killings outside of war conditions. That means that when war is occurring between 2 nations, one nation bombing the other and then receiving retaliation is not a crime against humanity. It is the toll of war, which is unfortunate. But a declared war is the choice of its participants.

We would like to get one thing clear: would this proposal affect only the nations in the UN or all the countries currently active in NationStates?

Mataradesh first created the idea on the assumption that it would affect all nations, but its people now see the difficulty of enforcing this, and amend the proposal to affect only UN members.

I would support a resolution that sets up punishments for violators of human rights, but of course I cannot endorse it until it becomes a THOROUGH and WELL WRITTEN resolution (we have seen so few lately). I do like the idea however, and would most likely support it.

~Tsar Mikhail Romanov I~

The people of Mataradesh would be glad to make any amendments to the proposal if it is, in any way, unclear. We hope that the Tsar will inform us of any such imperfections.

I support this proposal, HOWEVER...

I think we should reserve the right to inflict our own justice, if need be without the judgements of the UN, in certain particular cases.

As many of you have witnessed throughout the course of history, the choices made in the democratic process often take far longer than the time allotted for such actions; often in drastic measures and times this causes the loss of many lives.

Some times, say for example in time of attack or war, a nation simply cannot wait for others to decide whether they will help or not.

So, although I support that we should have such trials and regulations, I propose that we reserve the right to, under just cause, retaliate and inflict our own punishments.

If I, or those under my care, are attacked or wronged, I will retaliate as the situation demands.

And I will gladly stand before you, the U.N., on trial for it if need be. Though I hope it does not come to that.

Your Brothers-in-Arms

-The Almighty Ninjas

This idea has merit but like All the Russias I would like to see the proposal written out before I make a decision.

OCC: I think the concept of a proposal-like voting system would be considered game mechanics but of course there can be a poll in the fourm.

IC: We woould also like the proposal to include what sanctions the UN should be prepared to influct upon an offender as well as any method of carrying gout the sentence.

Finally, we would like to know more about the composition of said international tribunal.

As we said, we will be willing to make any clarifications necessary if they are outlined by other nations.

We would like the input of the international community about particulars of sanctions against criminals. Mataradesh had been considering possibilities such as trade/war embargos by the rest of the UN (OOC: widespread ignore).

The international tribunal would consist of regional delegates, who would gather information about the crime and present it as a proposal to the UN.

(OOC: I don't think that the proposal voting would be game mechanics. I would think that the heading would be '(country) guilty of crimes against humanity?' and go on to list the facts of the case. However, it would be best that it bypassed the whole proposal state altogether, going immediately to vote, which would be game mechanics. So perhaps a poll is better. I don't know...)

I support this proposal, HOWEVER...

I think we should reserve the right to inflict our own justice, if need be without the judgements of the UN, in certain particular cases.

As many of you have witnessed throughout the course of history, the choices made in the democratic process often take far longer than the time allotted for such actions; often in drastic measures and times this causes the loss of many lives.

Some times, say for example in time of attack or war, a nation simply cannot wait for others to decide whether they will help or not.

So, although I support that we should have such trials and regulations, I propose that we reserve the right to, under just cause, retaliate and inflict our own punishments.

If I, or those under my care, are attacked or wronged, I will retaliate as the situation demands.

And I will gladly stand before you, the U.N., on trial for it if need be. Though I hope it does not come to that.

Your Brothers-in-Arms

-The Almighty Ninjas

We understand and support this. If, in an undeclared act of violence, your people are harmed by another nation, you may do as you please with them, as long as it is in self-defense. However, in a situation of declared war, in which one country formally declares war aginst another and the other accepts...that is a situation between those countries. Mataradesh and the UN will not interfere in such situations. However, our people think it best to make sure that there is a penalty for undeclared acts of mass violence, in addition to any retaliation they may receive from the victim.

(OOC: is it possible to be removed from the UN?)

As long as the loosers decide who the war criminals are, we are behind you :)

BTW , I think your description fits "all wars as being war crimes"
:) here here :)

As I said, the proposal doesn't include war which is declared. It includes random acts of mass killings before a declaration of war, and makes allowance for retaliation by the victim.

*bump*

I just read the title, and I am all for crimes against humanity. The more the better!!! :wink:

i just cant accept the arrogance of some to judge everyone!

i would NOT support it!

i just cant accept the arrogance of some to judge everyone!

i would NOT support it!

*cough* We have taken great lengths to assure everyone that all decisions will be made by the UN as a whole.