NationStates Jolt Archive

Only July 13, 2003, a resolution entitled 'Fair Trial' was passed. However, it is vague and allows for too much interpretation which could potentially endanger defendants' rights. I urge all delegates to consider my newest proposal, entitled " Definition of 'Fair Trial' " which is currently located on page 16 of the United Nations resolution page. It contains the legalese and framework definitions that are necessary to prevent unfair interpretation of the previous statute. Thank you for your time and consideration.


IMPORTANT DOCUMENTS:

THE ORIGINAL STATUTE-
We maitain that all nations, irrespective of their mode of government must, according to the fundamental principles under which the UN was set up, must allow their citizens the right to fair trial, or face eviction from this institution.

MY PROPOSED AMENDMENT-
A statute entitled "Fair Trial" was passed on Sunday, July 13, 2003. However, this statute is vague. All it does it suggest that a 'fair trial' be given, but it never states exactly what a fair trial is.

Thus, it shall be amended that a fair criminal trial shall be defined as one which:
1. Is speedy and efficient.
2. Entitles all defendants to a functional defense.
3. Allows all defendants to confront the witnesses against that defendant.
4. Presumes all defendants to be innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
5. Is held in the venue from which the crime was committed.
6. Entitles a defendant to a jury of his or her peers.
7. Is held before an impartial judge whom shall apply the law as it is read.
8. That renders verdicts which are proportional to the crime.
9. Makes the trial open to the public and media.
10. Entitles the defendant the right to wave any of the above rights or clauses without reason.

It shall also be amended that a fair civil trial shall be defined as a trial that:
1. Is held before a judge that benefits from neither party's results at trial.
2. Awards compensation to one party only if a preponderance of evidence exists.
3. Allows all parties in a court superior to (but not equal to) Small Claims Court the right to hire private counsel as representation.
4. That renders verdicts which are proportional to the infraction.

As such: all litigants, plaintiffs, prosecutors, and varying degrees of defendants will benefit and allow for a clearer interpretation of United Nations law so that due process shall be upheld, making the legal system fairer for all people.

-END DOCUMENTS SECTION-

I don't believe that amendments are legal.

I don't believe that amendments are legal.

That is...correct well you can't just make a No Mental Health Act resolution :D :)

The law is an everchanging set of policies. Amendments are crucial, and thus my proposal continues on that basis.

The bill has been granted 135 approvals. That means that it needs only 14 more in order to reach the floor for a vote. I encourage all delegates to please consider this bill and approve it to rise to the floor, and all non-delegates to encourage their local delegate to approve it.
Thank you for your consideration of the trial system in our world.
-Ninjadom

The bill has been granted 135 approvals. That means that it needs only 14 more in order to reach the floor for a vote. I encourage all delegates to please consider this bill and approve it to rise to the floor, and all non-delegates to encourage their local delegate to approve it.
Thank you for your consideration of the trial system in our world.
-Ninjadom

The bill has been granted 135 approvals. That means that it needs only 14 more in order to reach the floor for a vote. I encourage all delegates to please consider this bill and approve it to rise to the floor, and all non-delegates to encourage their local delegate to approve it.
Thank you for your consideration of the trial system in our world.
-Ninjadom

This isn't really an amendment - this is a new proposal that covers some old ground.

If you look over the list of passed proposals, you'll see many overlapping and even contradictory Resolutions. There are two that call for free education, with the only difference being the listed age. The "Required Basic Healthcare" was replaced in toto by the same author less than a month after passage.

I realize the rules have changed since then, and that some of the early passed resolutions have no weight whatsoever. (Secretary General? Please.) That didn't stop the passage of "Increased Access to Medicine" in addition to the previous two.

This is a good proposal, and deserves the last few approvals it needs for quorum. Frisbeeteria stands behind this fine proposal.

MJ Donovan, CEO, Frisbeeteria

(... and after we've approved this one, approve Rights and Duties of UN States (http://www.nationstates.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=121212) - shameless plug)

We do not think that we will have difficulties with its implementation. We are already mostly in compliance with the proposal and the Holy Light of Kokablel, may it shine forever, will likely permit this. Of course, we will adopt in Kokablelian fashion, fitting it within our managed economy and theocratic judicial structure, but we are quite convinced that we can do so equitably.

We are a stern but just people.

This proposal is now being voted on in the General Assembly. Bumping the original topic.

While I agree with the principle of the proposal, I feel that it is not appopriate for the UN to interfere with the internal judicial systems of nations. The state of a nation's judicial system is an internal matter, not an international one. Rabenswald will vote against this proposal.

Lukas von Rabeswald,
Delagate to the United Nations