NationStates Jolt Archive

Description: People who are caught breaking criminalized laws (such as robbery) should grant the government the right to choose to flog the lawbreaker. The floggings can be allowed to take place immediately without trial if the person is caught in the act.

Anyone who commits terrible crimes that causes pain or misfortune to others need to be flogged as one of their punishments.
----------------------

HOW TO PROPERLY ADMINISTER FLOGGINGS:

All floggings must be approved by two law enforcement officers who do not know each other.

A flogging can be warranted immediately without trial only if it can be proven that the person committed a serious crime. An officer who arrests a person after they are seen in the act of a reckless crime has the authority to recommend a flogging to be approved by another officer.

The number of lashes can vary on the severity of the crime, but should never exceed 50 lashes.

Floggings may be made to those who are between the ages of 9 and 70 years of age.

Floggings may be administered by a law enforcement officer
using only a belt like flog, which may have strands. The flog may contain only leather and wooden beads. Leather alone is also acceptable.

Floggins must take place in a police station, or a designated public area should any country chose to make floggings public.

Flogs must be sterilized before every use.

The floggings must be made only on the back side of the criminal, anywhere above the waist and below the neck.

When the flogging is taking place, the floggings must be monitored by an unrelated Law Enforcement officer who does not know the officer that is administering the floggings.

The monitoring officer must evaluate the administering officer's care, and ensure that the criminal is not being over punished or receives any fatal blows.
The monitoring officer may choose to stop any floggings if he feels necessary.

Any person arrested in a crime that cannot be immediately proven, must have a trial to prove their guilt and warrant a flogging.

Y'know, it's really hard to not like something submitted by someone named Cosmo Kramerica, especially when it's this entertaining. While some of our Corporate States are likely to include something like this in their laws, the Conglomerated Oligarchy of Frisbeeteria just can't quite get behind it.

I'm afraid we'll have to describe this as yet another national issue that shouldn't be approved internationally ... much as we'd like to.

I see this as an issue of national sovreignity, as well. Such a thing is to be dictated by the governments of each nation of the world, not by the U.N.

Extra-judicial corporal punishment goes against everything that decent societies stand for, and should not be considered by this international body.

Foreign Minister
Kerflakistan.

It seems to me that this idea was an extension of someone’s silly little fantasy. If you want to be flogged or flog someone go to alt.com. As for my nation, we settle things with our fists or with our wallets right away. A quick negotiation occurs in the immediate vicinity of the supposed ‘crime’ by those involved and by those watching. Judicial systems have little to do with popular justice. In freedomkind we let things settle out on there own.

I see this as an issue of national sovreignity, as well. Such a thing is to be dictated by the governments of each nation of the world, not by the U.N.

Gassarat concurs with this statement. It is each nation's perogative to choose their form of punishment.

Additionally, the "End Barbaric Punishments" resolution of December, 2003 clearly states "The punishments have to fit the crime and not include torture or cruel and unusual punishment." In the "Universal Bill of Rights" Resolution of August, 2003, it states "Article 5 -- All human beings must not be subjected to torture or to cruel or inhuman treatment or punishment." Most explicitly, the "Fair Trial" resolution of July, 2003 states "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." The definition of fair trial was resolved just this weekend.

Thanks for your time, but no.

The people of Guaifenasin are grossly opposed to floggings. That notwithstanding, we are in concurrence that this proposal belongs as a decision on the national level, and we will not support this as a UN member.

The UN has no business limiting human rights, or creating specific laws as reciprocation for specific crimes.

Perhaps if you change it to international crimes warrant floggings, we could see its relevance in the context of the UN.

But we'd still vote against it.

This is a 'bad' proposal. The area in which it attempts to legislate is CLEARLY a matter for each sovreign nation to handle on its own. It is not an issue with which the NS UN should meddle.

Citizens of the Rogue Nation of Creepugnasia are subjected to annual floggings around April fifteenth, as well as subesquent random floggings throughout the year, with the intention of discouraging uprisings in the insurgent political minorities. Our Dictator for Life and Club President has found flogging a very effective means of pursuasion, especially when coupled with the consequences of our more strict marshall law code...namely the revocation of such basic supplies as deodrant and toilet paper. Once the general populace has done without such items, they become far more, shall we say, pliable? Creepugasia needs no international resolution to enforce such a thing...however, said resolution may in fact be supremely helpful in spreading the word of flogging's...um...efficaciousness in the restoration of proper order...in any circumstances. We also recommend maiming with a spoon, because the spoon is a blunt object, and is known to hurt more.