NationStates Jolt Archive

Repeal "The Law of the Sea"
A proposal to repeal a previously passed resolution


Category: Repeal
Resolution: #74
Proposed by: Somalialand

Description: UN Resolution #74: The Law of the Sea (Category: Free Trade; Strength: Mild) shall be struck out and rendered null and void.

Argument: this law damges all of the soveirnty a nation has,
To all members, do you want to loose your rights to control what goes around you in the coast,

Dont you want to challange and put regional laws instead of un laws that bans all of us from participating in our coastal affair

just read the following article

"2. That all 'international waters' shall be outside the sovereignty of any member nation and that no nation can claim to have sovereignty over them.
3. That all nations shall have in or above international waters, unless in a Maritime Preservation Zone:
a) Freedom to fish in designated fishing areas, subject to UN quotas.
b) Freedom to fly
c) Freedom of navigation
d) Freedom to lay cables, pipelines and underwater installations, unless in a Maritime Preservation Zone "

you see what i mean, If you want to loose your rights as nation who wants to control its own waters then please be quit and let other nations tell you what to do in your country,


Repeal, repeal,repeal,repeal.






Approvals: 4 (Neudegg, Todovostok, Nerrethans, Legalese)

Status: Lacking Support (requires 133 more approvals)

Voting Ends: Tue Sep 28 2004
________________________________________________________



To all nations considering to repeal the rosolution,

Act fast before a UN controlled by powerful nations and regions moves on you.

Goontopia supports this repeal.

Pethyr gives its support. Praise to the Goddess!

I don't think you understand the law in its entirety:

1. That all areas of sea more than 20 kilometres from an internationally recognised settled landmass or scientific research station are described as international waters. The UN may permit archipelagos to have the 20 kilometre limit start from the outside islands and allow waters inside the archipelago to be claimed by the nation who owns it.

What you have failed to grasp, then, is that all nations STILL HAVE their own waters. They extend 20 kilometers outward in all directions. However, now all nations have the right to use international waters freely, as well they should, seeing as no nation administers the waters farther out at this time.

While in my opinion the reach of nations could probably be extended a small bit, removing this law from the books entirely would be entirely unethical.

I don't think you understand the law in its entirety:

1. That all areas of sea more than 20 kilometres from an internationally recognised settled landmass or scientific research station are described as international waters. The UN may permit archipelagos to have the 20 kilometre limit start from the outside islands and allow waters inside the archipelago to be claimed by the nation who owns it.

What you have failed to grasp, then, is that all nations STILL HAVE their own waters. They extend 20 kilometers outward in all directions. However, now all nations have the right to use international waters freely, as well they should, seeing as no nation administers the waters farther out at this time.

While in my opinion the reach of nations could probably be extended a small bit, removing this law from the books entirely would be entirely unethical.

You seem to fail to understand that no, not all nations have "20km" waters, many can have more than 20km... namely ones outside of the NSUN. And no, we don't have the "right to use international waters freely" at least not within the scope of law, as other nations, once again outside of the NSUN can declare their territorial waters at any limit, and legally speaking, the NSUN has no jurisdiction over any form of "international waters" except whenever the two parties involved are both NSUN members. The NSUN lacks any authority or jurisdiction whatsoever on what lies outside of her membership (which includes lack of jurisdiction over international waters) many of the objectors of this resolution understood that, and made serious attempts to communicate as such to the proposal author and UN during the voting. But those who voted in favor, and the writter were too blind and stupid to understand this uniquely NS concept of the NSUN. And no, my comment of stupidity is not a flame, it's an established fact, and one that still won't be accepted by the pigheaded.

As it stands, this resolution accomplished nothing, but weakening the NSUN against the non-UN NS world.

The United States of Wolf America supports this repeal.

The nation of ITD and all of its colonies, though not a regional delegate, supports the complete repeal of this resolution.

While part of this proposal does cause problems for a lot of nations - the 20Km exclusion limit - the rest of it is, I believe, required for the good of most nations.

So I oppose it's repeal, as there is proposed legislation to extend the 20Km limit to one that most nations find agreeable.

As it stands the only way to amend a resolution is to repeal it and then propose a new one and get THAT voted in.

As it stands the only way to amend a resolution is to repeal it and then propose a new one and get THAT voted in.

Is that true? Can you not rule on another proposal to add to an existing one?

For example saying that

I submit a proposal to extend the 20Km range of the nations (from resolution xxx) to 200Km.

This would not revoke any of the other articles in given proposal, but update it.

(OOC : Does anyone know the answer to this?)

I dont know how to repeal a resolution,

i have tried in the UN place in NS,

i just cant repeal,


But i do support this repealing of this unlawful resolution # 74

I dont know how to repeal a resolution,

i have tried in the UN place in NS,

i just cant repeal,


But i do support this repealing of this unlawful resolution # 74

I am not exactly sure of how it works, but I think you require two endorsements from countries in your region before you can make UN proposals. And a repeal is just proposal with a different hat on :}

The Emirate of Maniacal Monkey Men supports the repeal of this resolution.

Our primary grievance with this resolution is the definition of territorial waters, and the lack of 200km exclusive economic zone. Were those two premises added to the current resolution, we would have no problem and even encourage its passing. That said, we support this repeal.

We all thank you for your support,

Repealing it is the only option, we dont nned to control nations in their own border,

for example me:

I have a lot of coastal waters but this resolution completely strips me of my possesion,

20km is like a walk outside of your nation and you cant even control it,

repeal is the only option.