NationStates Jolt Archive

This is the first draft of the proposed convention. It does have some flaws - the intervention part and the funding the imprisonment part are somewhat lacking in details, because I really could not work out what I wanted to say, let alone how to say it. So further comments on style, format and content will be welcome (really welcome!).

Also I realise there will be a huge sticking point in this for a number of nations. This proposal not only ignores national sovereignty, it jumps up and down on it until it is dead. But that was the point of it (as detailed in the draft).

(OOC : My computer is broken, and I am using a five year old laptop to write all this. It lacks a lot of good software, most notably a spell checker. So if any of you do notice any spelling mistakes or typos, could you point them out so I can correct them for the future? Thanks!)

Note - this has not yet been submitted to the UN. It is here as a draft for comments and refinement so that when it is submitted it is in the best state it can be.

Please note - there is another draft lower down. Please review that one rather than this one, as there have been a few changes. Thank you


EON Convention On Genocide

A Resolution to improve worldwide human and civil rights

Category: Human Rights
Strength: Strong
Proposed By: TilEnca

Description: An agreement between nations to classify, investigate, punish and prevent genocide in the world

Preamble

We, the members of the UN, do hereby state our belief in the following :-

That the mass extermination of a people is a heinous crime, and should be treated as a crime against all people.
That it is a crime of such proportions as to exceed the jursidiction of any one nation.
That those who commit such a crime should be brought to justice by the international community.
That retribution is not the same as justice and should not be treated as such.


Article 1: Definition And Limits

Genocide is defined as the systematic and deliberate extermination of a society, or part of a society, based on arbitrary criteria (such as skin colour, religion, race, genetic conditions or ethnicity, however this should not be considered an exhaustive list). Those covered by this resolution are those protected by The Universal Bill of Rights.

Extermination includes, but is not limited to:- murder, torture, enslavement, rape, forced pregnancy and familial seperation.

Genocide is committed or instigated by the state, or by groups acting on behalf of the state. Should there be a claim for a private group being responsible for genocide, this can also be brought before the Pretenama panel (to be described later) to confirm the validity of the claim.

Genocide has no statute of limitations.

If Genocide is used in self-defence, on the assumption there is no alternative to save a nation's society, it is still considered genocide, and will be brought before the Pretenama panel to confirm the validity of the action. However the acceptance of Genocide used in self-defence is not a mandate to launch pre-emptive invasions or attacks against other nations.

Article 2: The Pretenama Panel

The Pretenama Panel is a body that can be instituted by the UN as and when it requires it. It is not a standing panel, but rather one that is created when the UN requires it's services. More than one Pretenama Panel can be operational at the same time.

It is made up of representatives from fifteen UN member nations. These representatives must be diplomats, or lawyers. Each nation can supply only two members to the panel. No nation can serve on more than one panel at the same time. The members of the panel can be challanged by those accused as well as those who are accusing, as the independence of the panel is paramount.

The Pretenama Panel is granted all the powers it requires to investigate Genocide and try people for the crime. It will also have the powers to demand the extradition of suspects, witnesses and other people connected with the crime they are investigating. If the extradition is challanged the panel must show proof of the requirement. This power can only extend to the extradition from UN member nations.

The Pretenama Panel will meet in a location decided by the panel members. The nation hosting the panel will be required to provide adequate security.


Article 3: Investigation and Intervention

Member Nations are required to submit to an investigation ordered by the Pretenama Panel instituted by an accusation of Genocide.

If no evidence is found, the panel is disbanded.

If evidence is found then the panel has the power to take in to custordy those who are suspected to be responsible. This does not invalidate the powers they are granted under Article 2.

Neither the Panel, nor the United Nations have the power to order nations to war to prevent genocide in another nation, whether it is a UN member state or not. Nor can the Panel, nor the United Nations send any invasion force of their own.

Article 4: Legal Proceedings

The Pretenama Panel - as stated - will be the legal authority that brings those accused of genocide to justice. It will act in accordance with the Fair Trial Resolution, and will proceed on the basis that anyone brought before the Panel is innocent until proven otherwise.

The Panel will have the power to sentence those convicted, within the limits by the existing resolutions.

The Panel will not have the power to sentence anyone to death. The Eon Convention is defined to preserve human rights, and to defend the life of those in the UN. To this end the use of the death sentence would be counter-productive.

Those acquitted by the panel are free to go, and may not be tried for the crime by national states. However a person acquitted of Genocide can be brought before The Pretenama Panel again should new evidence be brought before them.

The Panel will have the power to chose where the sentence should be served, on the condition that the prisoner(s) will not be msitreated, tortured or otherwise abused whilst in custordy. The UN will reserve the rights to send inspectors to the prison where a prisoner is being held to confirm the conditions.

Once a prisoner has discharged their sentence for the crime, they will be free to go. However, in the interests of international security and to protect future human rights, the said prisoner will be forbidden from holding public office in any UN Member Nation from then on.

Article 5: Coda

We, the UN Member States, agree to abide by this convention to ensure that genocide is recognised as something that will not be tolerated by all members of the UN.


Thanks,
Tori.

So either people are reading this and don't care, they are reading this and think it is fine, or they are reading this and not understanding it so leaving it alone.

If it really is acceptable in this format then I will submit it within the week. But, despite my obvious genius and clear aptitude for writing political documents, I am not ready to belive this can be submitted and passed in this form, but I don't know what I am missing or wrong about.

Please don't take this the wrong way ... but it is kinda long.

I love long stuff. Many people don't. So that could be part of the reason this is flying low.

What you should do, is copy and paste the current text into the proposal submission area. See if you are too long or just right. Looking at what you've got, I think you actually have exceeded the character limit. Don't worry. The predecessor to the Good Samaritan Laws and Needle Sharing Prevention did too! They both were edited on the fly.

I think the moderators will not like the panel that is assigned 15 members, but just make sure you don't submit this yet. If the size is right, delete it before hitting submit. Then post a copy here and a link in moderation asking Cog or Hack or somebody else to give it a once over.

As for the general layout, I like the article driven approach and the subject matter, but I'm one of the least picky nations when it comes to voting on something where I think the author worked hard (which you'e done). (For those of you wondering, hard work can either be seen in a long and involved draft process or by references dropped into the proposal / resolution ... it is kinda easy to get a feel for how much work and thought was put into something ... and before you accuse my nation of being soft, we can afford to be, as an old Miervatian saying goes "nothing here is exactly as it appears".) ;)

Please don't take this the wrong way ... but it is kinda long.

I love long stuff. Many people don't. So that could be part of the reason this is flying low.

What you should do, is copy and paste the current text into the proposal submission area. See if you are too long or just right. Looking at what you've got, I think you actually have exceeded the character limit. Don't worry. The predecessor to the Good Samaritan Laws and Needle Sharing Prevention did too! They both were edited on the fly.

I think the moderators will not like the panel that is assigned 15 members, but just make sure you don't submit this yet. If the size is right, delete it before hitting submit. Then post a copy here and a link in moderation asking Cog or Hack or somebody else to give it a once over.

As for the general layout, I like the article driven approach and the subject matter, but I'm one of the least picky nations when it comes to voting on something where I think the author worked hard (which you'e done). (For those of you wondering, hard work can either be seen in a long and involved draft process or by references dropped into the proposal / resolution ... it is kinda easy to get a feel for how much work and thought was put into something ... and before you accuse my nation of being soft, we can afford to be, as an old Miervatian saying goes "nothing here is exactly as it appears".) ;)


I love you :}

But seriously - I was worried about the length, but could not figure out a way to make it shorter without leaving stuff out. I could shorten some of the sentences (instead of the The Pretenama Panel just call it TPP?) and so forth. That might help. Also make the language less formal, but then it becomes less clear and open to abuse/interpretation etc.

As for the actual panel thing - I know it risks the wrath of the moderators, but I am really not sure what else to do. A standing UN committee is probably forbidden, and since this is supposed to be international justice there has to be someone to administer it, and it can't be just one nation due to accusations of bias and so forth.

WRAH!!! I should have listened to my husband and gone in to yak farming instead.

But what the heck - nothing ventured, nothing gained.

Thanks for your comments :}


Hold on - I had a thought about the panel thing.

If the UN can't directly impinge on the role playing aspects of the game, does it matter if the panel exists or not? Cause if someone wants to, they could get a group of nations together to form the panel in role playing, and do the scenario through that, without actually involving the UN in the game, only doing it in it's name.

Did any of that make sense?

OK the parts they might be worried about (and I'm not) are articles 2 and 3:


It is made up of representatives from fifteen UN member nations. These representatives must be diplomats, or lawyers. Each nation can supply only two members to the panel. No nation can serve on more than one panel at the same time. The members of the panel can be challanged by those accused as well as those who are accusing, as the independence of the panel is paramount.

The way I read that is "imginary" people come from somewhere and you've said where.

The way they might read that is that "players" sit on each panel. They'll tell us that this is mandating forum activity and participation ... but it isn't IMHO (but my opinion counts for very little). :/

Here is why I think what you've done is fine:


It is not a standing panel, but rather one that is created when the UN requires it's services.

You are *not* restricting roleplaying, but leaving an open door for it. If anything you are enhancing it IMHO.

Now article 3:

If evidence is found then the panel has the power to take in to custordy those who are suspected to be responsible. This does not invalidate the powers they are granted under Article 2.

This is the part they'll likely be most concerned about. It sounds like that if this panel finds a "ruler" responsible for genocide, that the panel is enpowered to remove that ruler. They'll claim "game mechanics".

I don't see it, because being enpowered doesn't mean that said ruler isn't hiding in a bomb bunker surrounded by surgically altered clones or what-not, so ultimately players can roleplay definance. In practice, I suspect that some roleplayers will actually have fun with this sort of thing, but not being a big II roleplayer, the next step might be to ask for people more familiar with semi-open and closed RP to add their opinions on how roleplaying and UN laws may interact.

(OOC) Is it safe to assume that if the resolution fits in the box, I haven't exceeded the character limit?

A reformatted and slightly edited draft. Mostly to reduce the white space and the length, but also with a few minor alterations to the text, not the intent.

Please note there is a new draft further down. I would be much obliged if you could read that one rather than this. Thank you


EON Convention On Genocide

A Resolution to improve worldwide human and civil rights

Category: Human Rights
Strength: Strong
Proposed By: TilEnca

Description:
We, the members of the UN, do hereby state that :-
The mass extermination of a people is a heinous crime, and should be treated as a crime against all people.
It is a crime of such proportions as to exceed the jursidiction of any one nation.
Those who commit such a crime should be brought to justice by the international community.
Retribution is not the same as justice and should not be treated as such.

Article 1: Definition And Limits

1 Genocide is defined as the systematic and deliberate extermination of a society, or part of a society, based on arbitrary criteria (such as skin colour, religion, race, genetic conditions or ethnicity, however this should not be considered an exhaustive list). Those covered by this resolution are those protected by The Universal Bill of Rights.
2 Extermination includes, but is not limited to:- murder, torture, enslavement, rape, forced pregnancy and familial seperation.
3 Genocide is committed or instigated by the state, or by groups acting on behalf of the state. Should there be a claim for a private group being responsible for genocide, this can also be brought before TPP (to be described later) to confirm the validity of the claim.
4 Genocide has no statute of limitations.
5 If Genocide is used in self-defence, on the assumption there is no alternative to save a nation's society, it is still considered genocide, and will be brought before TPP to confirm the validity of the action. The acceptance of Genocide used in self-defence is not a mandate to launch pre-emptive invasions or attacks against other nations.

Article 2: The Pretenama Panel (TPP)

1 TPP is a body that can be instituted by the UN when it requires it. It is not a standing panel, but one that is created when the UN requires it's services. More than one TPP can be operational at the same time.
2 It is made up of representatives from fifteen UN member nations. These representatives must be diplomats, or lawyers. Each nation can supply only two members to TPP. No nation can serve on more than one TPP at the same time. The members of TPP can be challanged by those accused as well as the accusers, as the independence of TPP is paramount.
3 TPP is granted all the powers it requires to investigate Genocide and try people for the crime. It will have the powers to demand the extradition of suspects, witnesses and other people connected with the crime they are investigating. If the extradition is challanged TPP must show proof of the requirement. This power can only extend to the extradition from UN member nations.
4 TPPanel will meet in a location decided by it's members. The nation hosting TPP will be required to provide adequate security.

Article 3: Investigation and Intervention

1 Member Nations are required to submit to an investigation ordered by TPP instituted by an accusation of Genocide. If no evidence is found, TPP is disbanded.
2 If evidence is found then TPP has the power to take in to custordy those who are suspected to be responsible, in addition to the powers granted under Article 2.
3 Neither TPP, nor the United Nations have the power to order nations to war to prevent genocide in another nation, whether it is a UN member state or not. Nor can TPP, nor the United Nations send any invasion force of their own.

Article 4: Legal Proceedings

1 TPP - as stated - will be the legal authority that brings those accused of genocide to justice. It will act in accordance with the Fair Trial Resolution, and will proceed on the basis that anyone brought before TPP is innocent until proven otherwise.
2 TPP will have the power to sentence those convicted, within the limits by the existing resolutions. TPP will not have the power to sentence anyone to death. The Eon Convention is defined to preserve human rights, and to defend the life of those in the UN. The use of the death sentence would be counter-productive.
3 Those acquitted by TPP are free to go, and may not be tried for the crime by national states. However a person acquitted of Genocide can be brought before TPP again should new evidence be brought before them.
TPP will have the power to chose where the sentence should be served, on the condition that the prisoner(s) will be held in accordance with The Wolfish Convention on POWs.
4 Once a prisoner has discharged their sentence for the crime, they will be free to go. However, in the interests of international security and to protect future human rights, the said prisoner will be forbidden from holding public office in any UN Member Nation from then on.

Article 5: Coda

We, the UN Member States, agree to abide by this convention to ensure that genocide is recognised as something that will not be tolerated by all members of the UN.

Hold on - I had a thought about the panel thing.

If the UN can't directly impinge on the role playing aspects of the game, does it matter if the panel exists or not? Cause if someone wants to, they could get a group of nations together to form the panel in role playing, and do the scenario through that, without actually involving the UN in the game, only doing it in it's name.

Did any of that make sense?

*nod*

Does to me. But we should still get a mod opinion. Do you have IRC installed? If so, visit #themodcave or the moderation forum.

p.s. you do know that publically saying anything positive about "Mikitivity" is like putting a "I {heart} Hillary!" bumper sticker on your car. It is appreciated, but well ... *risky* ;)

This is the part they'll likely be most concerned about. It sounds like that if this panel finds a "ruler" responsible for genocide, that the panel is enpowered to remove that ruler. They'll claim "game mechanics".

I don't see it, because being enpowered doesn't mean that said ruler isn't hiding in a bomb bunker surrounded by surgically altered clones or what-not, so ultimately players can roleplay definance. In practice, I suspect that some roleplayers will actually have fun with this sort of thing, but not being a big II roleplayer, the next step might be to ask for people more familiar with semi-open and closed RP to add their opinions on how roleplaying and UN laws may interact.

(smile) I do understand. But the only other alternative I could think of was "the panel has the power to give the person committing this terrible crime a smack on the wrist and say "don't do it again then" ". Which, and I could be wrong about this, doesn't have the right tone to it :}

My other hope was that if, say, the First Minster of GeminiLand was carted off for trying to kill all the red-heads in his nation, then the player who owns GeminiLand could replace him with a new leader. That way the nation continues, and GeminiLand has accepted a punishment (all in roleplaying of course. I am not suggesting the nation comes to an end).

Depending on how I feel tomorrow (I have not been sleeping well in the real world, which sucks!) I might venture in to the technical/moderation forums and find out. Cause although writing this is fun, and I am now quite committed to seeing it through, if there is no way it will pass muster infront of the mods, what is the point of continuing?

Formatting note:

Look at the special characters Frisbeeteria used on Rights and Duties.

If you've got a few spare characters left, consider:


Article 1: Definition and Limits

§ 1. Genocide is defined as the systematic and deliberate extermination of a society, or part of a society, based on arbitrary criteria (such as skin colour, religion, race, genetic conditions or ethnicity, however this should not be considered an exhaustive list). Those covered by this resolution are those protected by The Universal Bill of Rights.


That character can be lifted out of MS Word's > Insert Symbols > Special Characters > Section.

Why I like this? When roleplaying, players can say, "According to the Eon Convention on Genocide, Article 2, Section 2, I would like to volunteer to serve on the P. Panel."

Please note there is a new draft further down. I would be much obliged if you could read that one rather than this. Thank you


EON Convention On Genocide

A Resolution to improve worldwide human and civil rights

Category: Human Rights Strength: Strong Proposed By: TilEnca

Description:
We, the members of the UN, do hereby state that :-
The mass extermination of a people is a heinous crime, and should be treated as a crime against all people.
It is a crime of such proportions as to exceed the jursidiction of any one nation.
Those who commit such a crime should be brought to justice by the international community.
Retribution is not the same as justice and should not be treated as such.

Article 1: Definition And Limits

§1 Genocide is defined as the systematic and deliberate extermination of a society, or part of a society, based on arbitrary criteria (such as skin colour, religion, race, genetic conditions or ethnicity, however this should not be considered an exhaustive list). Those covered by this resolution are those protected by The Universal Bill of Rights.
§2 Extermination includes, but is not limited to:- murder, torture, enslavement, rape, forced pregnancy and familial seperation.
§3 Genocide is committed or instigated by the state, or by groups acting on behalf of the state. Should there be a claim for a private group being responsible for genocide, this can also be brought before TPP (to be described later) to confirm the validity of the claim.
§4 Genocide has no statute of limitations.
§5 If Genocide is used in self-defence, on the assumption there is no alternative to save a nation's society, it is still considered genocide, and will be brought before TPP to confirm the validity of the action. The acceptance of Genocide used in self-defence is not a mandate to launch pre-emptive invasions or attacks against other nations.

Article 2: The Pretenama Panel (TPP)

§1 TPP is a body that can be instituted by the UN when it requires it. It is not a standing panel, but one that is created when the UN requires it's services. More than one TPP can be operational at the same time.
§2 It is made up of representatives from fifteen UN member nations. These representatives must be diplomats, or lawyers. Each nation can supply only two members to TPP. No nation can serve on more than one TPP at the same time. The members of TPP can be challanged by those accused as well as the accusers, as the independence of TPP is paramount.
§3 TPP is granted all the powers it requires to investigate Genocide and try people for the crime. It will have the powers to demand the extradition of suspects, witnesses and other people connected with the crime they are investigating. If the extradition is challanged TPP must show proof of the requirement. This power can only extend to the extradition from UN member nations.
§4 TPPanel will meet in a location decided by it's members. The nation hosting TPP will be required to provide adequate security.

Article 3: Investigation and Intervention

§1 Member Nations are required to submit to an investigation ordered by TPP instituted by an accusation of Genocide. If no evidence is found, TPP is disbanded.
§2 If evidence is found then TPP has the power to take in to custordy those who are suspected to be responsible, in addition to the powers granted under Article 2.
§3 Neither TPP, nor the United Nations have the power to order nations to war to prevent genocide in another nation, whether it is a UN member state or not. Nor can TPP, nor the United Nations send any invasion force of their own.

Article 4: Legal Proceedings

§1 TPP - as stated - will be the legal authority that brings those accused of genocide to justice. It will act in accordance with the Fair Trial Resolution, and will proceed on the basis that anyone brought before TPP is innocent until proven otherwise.
§2 TPP will have the power to sentence those convicted, within the limits by the existing resolutions. TPP will not have the power to sentence anyone to death. The Eon Convention is defined to preserve human rights, and to defend the life of those in the UN. The use of the death sentence would be counter-productive.
§3 Those acquitted by TPP are free to go, and may not be tried for the crime by national states. However a person acquitted of Genocide can be brought before TPP again should new evidence be brought before them.
TPP will have the power to chose where the sentence should be served, on the condition that the prisoner(s) will be held in accordance with The Wolfish Convention on POWs.
§4 Once a prisoner has discharged their sentence for the crime, they will be free to go. However, in the interests of international security and to protect future human rights, the said prisoner will be forbidden from holding public office in any UN Member Nation from then on.

Article 5: Coda

We, the UN Member States, agree to abide by this convention to ensure that genocide is recognised as something that will not be tolerated by all members of the UN.


Along with some formatting suggestions (thank you Mikitivity) I checked with one of the moderators, and so far there is nothing that is apparently illegal within the proposal. Which is always nice.

If there are no further comments, I figure for submitting this on Wednesday night. I realise it is not going to get to the floor first time, but I figured I should start as soon as possible, especially with the holidays coming up in several, if not most, member nations :}

(OOC Note - I am still working on my laptop, but I think I have caught all the spelling mistakes and other random nonsense that was in there. But if anyone does notice anything, please could you tell me before I try submitting it? Thanks :})

§3 Those acquitted by TPP are free to go, and may not be tried for the crime by national states. However a person acquitted of Genocide can be brought before TPP again should new evidence be brought before them.
TPP will have the power to chose where the sentence should be served, on the condition that the prisoner(s) will be held in accordance with The Wolfish Convention on POWs.

I'd recommend removed the carriage return between these two sentences, since they are both a part of paragraph 3.

And white space is your friend (what I tell my co-workers at least). Consider adding a period after each number and then an extra space.


§3. Those acquitted by TPP are free to go, and may not be tried for the crime by national states. However a person acquitted of Genocide can be brought before TPP again should new evidence be brought before them. TPP will have the power to chose where the sentence should be served, on the condition that the prisoner(s) will be held in accordance with The Wolfish Convention on POWs.

I'm glad you talked to the moderators. It sounds like you are making great progress. When you submit this into the queue, remember each day to copy to a local file a list of the Delegates that endorse your proposal. If you don't make it over the Thanksgiving Weekend (which is a hard time to find people on-line), then when you resubmit it you can telegram these delegates again. :)

For the record I was gonna start pestering you for a bump in Dec, because I really do like this proposal. It is what I like to call "roleplay" rich!

I'd recommend removed the carriage return between these two sentences, since they are both a part of paragraph 3.

Actually they were supposed to be two seperate paragraphs :}


And white space is your friend (what I tell my co-workers at least). Consider adding a period after each number and then an extra space.


There was originally a lot more whitespace, but I got concerned about submission length :}


I'm glad you talked to the moderators. It sounds like you are making great progress. When you submit this into the queue, remember each day to copy to a local file a list of the Delegates that endorse your proposal. If you don't make it over the Thanksgiving Weekend (which is a hard time to find people on-line), then when you resubmit it you can telegram these delegates again. :)


Damn it. I had forgotten Thanksgiving. That would be this coming Thursday, right? I might hold off until Monday to submitt it :}


For the record I was gonna start pestering you for a bump in Dec, because I really do like this proposal. It is what I like to call "roleplay" rich!

(grin) Thanks :}

I have been somewhat remiss in my duties recently. Hopefully this analysis will go some way towards redeeming me in the eyes of those who elected me to my position:

Description:
We, the members of the UN ... exceed the jursidiction of any one nation.
"JurISdiction".

Article 2: The Pretenama Panel (TPP)

§1 TPP is a body that ... when the UN requires it's services. More ...
"its"

§3 TPP is granted ... If the extradition is challanged TPP must ...
"challEnged,"

§4 TPPanel will meet in a location decided by it's members.
"its"

Article 3: Investigation and Intervention

§2 If evidence is found then TPP has the power to take in to custordy those who ...
"custody"

Article 4: Legal Proceedings

§3 Those acquitted ... TPP will have the power to chose where the ...
"choose"

And that's it for pedantry. As for the content and intentions of the proposal... wonderful! Truly, those repsonsible for the drafting of this document should feel very proud of their efforts. You have my full support. Please inform me when the proposal is submitted and I shall contact the ACA's regional delegate to ensure they place their endorsement.

Warm regards

Varia Yefremova
Speaker to the UN

Looks like all the discussion is on how to write it all, so I'll just say that I like the resolution and I'll support it when it is submitted.

I have been somewhat remiss in my duties recently. Hopefully this analysis will go some way towards redeeming me in the eyes of those who elected me to my position:


"JurISdiction".


"its"


"challEnged,"


"its"


"custody"


"choose"

And that's it for pedantry. As for the content and intentions of the proposal... wonderful! Truly, those repsonsible for the drafting of this document should feel very proud of their efforts. You have my full support. Please inform me when the proposal is submitted and I shall contact the ACA's regional delegate to ensure they place their endorsement.

Warm regards

Varia Yefremova
Speaker to the UN


Thank you :} I will make the changes before I submit it. And then buy a new computer.

(OOC - What with me being English, I had forgotten that this weekend was a holiday in the US. So I am going to put off posting this until Monday or Tuesday, so that it does not get overlooked over the weekend)


EON Convention On Genocide

A Resolution to improve worldwide human and civil rights

Category: Human Rights Strength: Strong Proposed By: TilEnca

Description:
We, the members of the UN, do hereby state that :-
The mass extermination of a people is a heinous crime, and should be treated as a crime against all people.
It is a crime of such proportions as to exceed the jurisdiction of any one nation.
Those who commit such a crime should be brought to justice by the international community.
Retribution is not the same as justice and should not be treated as such.

Article 1: Definition And Limits

§1. Genocide is defined as the systematic and deliberate extermination of a society, or part of a society, based on arbitrary criteria (such as skin colour, religion, race, genetic conditions or ethnicity, however this should not be considered an exhaustive list). Those covered by this resolution are those protected by The Universal Bill of Rights.
§2. Extermination includes, but is not limited to:- murder, torture, enslavement, rape, forced pregnancy and familial separation.
§3. Genocide is committed or instigated by the state, or by groups acting on behalf of the state. Should there be a claim for a private group being responsible for genocide, this can also be brought before TPP (to be described later) to confirm the validity of the claim.
§4. Genocide has no statute of limitations.
§5. If Genocide is used in self-defence, on the assumption there is no alternative to save a nation's society, it is still considered genocide, and will be brought before TPP to confirm the validity of the action. The acceptance of Genocide used in self-defence is not a mandate to launch pre-emptive invasions or attacks against other nations.

Article 2: The Pretenama Panel (TPP)

§1. TPP is a body that can be instituted by the UN when it requires it. It is not a standing panel, but one that is created when the UN requires its services. More than one TPP can be operational at the same time.
§2. TPP is made up of representatives from fifteen UN member nations. These representatives must be diplomats, or lawyers. Each nation can supply only two members to TPP. No nation can serve on more than one TPP at the same time. The members of TPP can be challenged by those accused as well as the accusers, as the independence of TPP is paramount.
§3. TPP is granted all the powers it requires to investigate Genocide and try people for the crime. It will have the powers to demand the extradition of suspects, witnesses and other people connected with the crime they are investigating. If the extradition is challenged TPP must show proof of the requirement. This power can only extend to the extradition from UN member nations.
§4. TPP will meet in a location decided by its members. The nation hosting TPP will be required to provide adequate security.

Article 3: Investigation and Intervention

§1. Member Nations are required to submit to an investigation ordered by TPP instituted by an accusation of Genocide. If no evidence is found, TPP is disbanded.
§2. If evidence is found then TPP has the power to take in to custody those who are suspected to be responsible, in addition to the powers granted under Article 2.
§3. Neither TPP, nor the United Nations have the power to order nations to war to prevent genocide in another nation, whether it is a UN member state or not. Nor can TPP, nor the United Nations send any invasion force of their own.

Article 4: Legal Proceedings

§1. TPP - as stated - will be the legal authority that brings those accused of genocide to justice. It will act in accordance with the Fair Trial Resolution, and will proceed on the basis that anyone brought before TPP is innocent until proven otherwise.
§2. TPP will have the power to sentence those convicted, within the limits by the existing resolutions. TPP will not have the power to sentence anyone to death. The Eon Convention is defined to preserve human rights, and to defend the life of those in the UN. The use of the death sentence would be counter-productive.
§3. Those acquitted by TPP are free to go, and may not be tried for the crime by national states. However a person acquitted of Genocide can be brought before TPP again should new evidence be brought before them.
§4. TPP will have the power to choose where the sentence should be served, on the condition that the prisoner(s) will be held in accordance with The Wolfish Convention on POWs.
§5. Once a prisoner has discharged their sentence for the crime, they will be free to go. However, in the interests of international security and to protect future human rights, the said prisoner will be forbidden from holding public office in any UN Member Nation from then on.

Article 5: Coda

We, the UN Member States, agree to abide by this convention to ensure that genocide is recognised as something that will not be tolerated by all members of the UN.


Hopefully this should be the last draft before it gets submitted. Then a whole new world of fun and pain starts :}

Campaigning advice: start collecting a list of the current UN Delegates whom have voted in favour of this resolution and those that vote in favour of the Stem Cell Research proposal / resolution (due up next). When you have several hundred names you can then farm a few out (say 20-40 per supporter) and ask for a bit of help telegramming when you do submit your proposal next week. Next week I should be able to send out about 50 telegrams and would be happy to.

Thanks. I will give it a start now.

Seems to be well-written out, and principles which I would agree to...
you'd have my vote

Firstly my apologies for the lateness of my reply, I have been kept rather busy with another proposal.

The government of Telidia is in broad support of this proposal, however we have some concerns regarding this clause.

§2. Extermination includes, but is not limited to:- murder, torture, enslavement, rape, forced pregnancy and familial separation.

I’m not convinced that genocide can be extended to include anything but murder or systematic killing. Certainly I understand you wish to protect against the ills that so often follow in the wake of genocide, but I feel defining these against the word extermination, does not actually make sense in my humble opinion. Furthermore the majority of those crimes have already been covered in previous resolutions.

Respectfully
Lydia Cornwall, UN Ambassador
Office of UN Relations, Dept for Foreign Affairs
HM Government of Telidia

I’m not convinced that genocide can be extended to include anything but murder or systematic killing. Certainly I understand you wish to protect against the ills that so often follow in the wake of genocide, but I feel defining these against the word extermination, does not actually make sense in my humble opinion. Furthermore the majority of those crimes have already been covered in previous resolutions.


I would have to disagree. While rape and other crimes have been covered, they have not been covered as systematic, large scale crimes.

I am not talking about one guy kidnapping a women in an alley - I am talking about huge numbers of women being kidnapped by huge numbers of men.

And (just for an example) if you take away the children of a whole group of people, and raise them in GeminiLand as Geminias, rather than as TilEncans, could that not be classed as trying to destroy the future of TilEnca in someway? Thus making it Genocide.

The same could extend to forced pregnancy - making TilEncans bring up children who are sired by Geminians.

All these crimes can bring about the end of a group of people, or (on a larger scale) the end of a nation. Which I would class as genocide.

We will do anything possible to support this motion. Our department of Foreing affairs and our U.N embassadors are extremely busy, so we are unable to provide our official response yet, but in the interim, we support this motion. TilEnca Has made some very great efforts to ensure that the wording is free of loopholes and errors, and is palatable by the world as a whole.
We also would like to express our agreement with TilEnca that genocide is not limited to mass extermination through killings. Rape is often used as a particular charge within genocide (that is one example).
We would like to offer our support to TilEnca, and our resources. We will actively petion our U.N delegate (who has over 265 endorsements) as well as other delegates with whom we have some influence and common interest. Our great leader (HRH Prachya) has authorized us to lend whatever resources necessary to see this proposal succeed.

Sincerely,
VR Zork
Minister of Foreign affairs, Senior UN Representative
Department of Foreign Affairs
On behalf of:
HRH Prachya
Sovereign,
and the government of Prachya

I am not talking about one guy kidnapping a women in an alley - I am talking about huge numbers of women being kidnapped by huge numbers of men.

And (just for an example) if you take away the children of a whole group of people, and raise them in GeminiLand as Geminias, rather than as TilEncans, could that not be classed as trying to destroy the future of TilEnca in someway? Thus making it Genocide.

The same could extend to forced pregnancy - making TilEncans bring up children who are sired by Geminians.

All these crimes can bring about the end of a group of people, or (on a larger scale) the end of a nation. Which I would class as genocide.

Perhaps I am too much of a stickler for definition, but I completely understand what you are trying to convey. The intent is clear which is far more important than quibbling over semantics.

I fully support this proposal and wish you every success, if there is anything I can help with, please feel free to contact me.

Warm Regards
Lydia Cornwall, UN Ambassador
Office of UN Relations, Dept for Foreign Affairs
HM Government of Telidia

Ok. There is a minor hitch in submitting this today as it exceeds the maximum length of a proposal.

I know - I could easily edit it. The thing is it exceeds the maximum length by nearly one and a half THOUSAND characters, so it's no small edit.

So - genocide convention on hold :}

Wouldn't this be "Social Justice" rather then "Human Rights"?

And if it puts the reader to sleep, its too long.

Once you submit this wonderfully made proposal I will support it. True, I am an emperor/dictator, but I will not tolerate the killing of innocent people. Better if you made them slaves. :p Kidding! Anyway, a bit too long, shorten it a bit, but still wonderfully made. You have my vote and my region's votes. :cool:

The Emperor of Calvania and Hobbania

Extermination includes, but is not limited to:- murder, torture, enslavement, rape, forced pregnancy and familial seperation.

Extermination should be the cessation of life. This broadens the scope and lessens the credibility of the term Genocide. In short, the term has the suffix for a reason. Forced relocation is a weak justification for broadening the term. TilEncans would not be terminated, they would be re-patrioted to a new civilization and can once again become TilEncans.

It is made up of representatives from fifteen UN member nations. These representatives must be diplomats, or lawyers. Each nation can supply only two members to TPP. No nation can serve on more than one TPP at the same time. The members of TPP can be challanged by those accused as well as the accusers, as the independence of TPP is paramount.

Two groups least likely to be able to find evidence. Forensic experts should be apart of this panel, more so than diplomats and lawyers. So too should be academics or professionals who have great knowledge of the subject matter.

Other than that, this is one the best resolutions proposed in recent history.

Does the UN have judiciary powers? Would it not have to create such power before voting on such a resolution? At present, this appears to be merely a governing body.

Wouldn't this be "Social Justice" rather then "Human Rights"?

And if it puts the reader to sleep, its too long.

That is a double edged sword.

How many nations picked on your resolution for the lack of detail on two areas: consent / sentience?

There is a happy balance, and in this case TilEnca is aimming to make a solid document that won't be neglected in a week. Er, by experienced gamers. ;)

My opinion (which is devalued in many nations) is that the better resolutions aren't the longer or shorter ones, but the documents that you see being included in roleplaying. The UNSC, the IRCO, and Wolfish Convention on POW count as my three most influencial NationStates documents. The UNSC has a fairly active group of roleplayers that don't dapple in the UN much anymore, but they've remained true to their resolution. The IRCO and Woflish Convention are batted back in forth in II.

§3. Those acquitted by TPP are free to go, and may not be tried for the crime by national states. However a person acquitted of Genocide can be brought before TPP again should new evidence be brought before them.

I may be wrong, but I'm pretty sure that in the majority of Constitutions (at least in Canada) this clause would be illegal. You can't try someone for the same crime that they'd been acquitted of.

I may be wrong, but I'm pretty sure that in the majority of Constitutions (at least in Canada) this clause would be illegal. You can't try someone for the same crime that they'd been acquitted of.

Are you talking about "double jeopardy"?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_jeopardy

For example, were police to uncover new evidence conclusively proving the guilt of someone previously acquitted, there is little they can do because the defendant may not be tried again.

Below this on the Wiki entry there is a paragraphy (worthy of reading) about exceptions to the double jeopardy standard:


Double jeopardy is also not implicated for separate offenses or in separate jurisdictions arising from the same act. For example, in US v. Felix (1992), the Supreme Court ruled: "a[n]...offense and a conspiracy to commit that offense are not the same offense for double jeopardy purposes." As another example, a state might try a defendant for murder, after which the federal government might try the same defendant for a federal crime (perhaps a civil rights violation or kidnapping) related to the same act.

Wiki went on to talk about the Simpson civil wrongful death suits and how they were legal.

Are you talking about "double jeopardy"?

Yes, yes I am; and yes, I do realize that there are exceptions. However, by this clause in the proposal, someone could be charged with maiming a race, get acquitted, then get charged with the same crime again, which is wrong. There needs to be seperate clauses outlining the various different crimes that could be classified as "genocide" so that "double jeopardy" is not infringed.

OOC EDIT- I should note that I don't really like Wikipedia since it can be edited by anyone and edited wrongly (an entry on my hometown, Alliston, Ontario, was actually wrong). Not to disparage you, Mikitivity, I just thought I'd mention that as an aside.

Yeah, this clause violates double jeopardy. I recommend a resolution prohibiting double jeopardyif the UN does not have one already.

Miki-those were trials for different acts. Conspiracy v the act, etc. Also, there is a difference between civil and criminal charges being brought by the state and citizenry against an individual.

And yes, wikipedia sucks. That cite is overused and blatantly wrong on several things, it is a...

he who controls the pat controls the future, he who controls the present controls the past...

source of knowledge.

OOC EDIT- I should note that I don't really like Wikipedia since it can be edited by anyone and edited wrongly (an entry on my hometown, Alliston, Ontario, was actually wrong). Not to disparage you, Mikitivity, I just thought I'd mention that as an aside.

:) I share the same concerns. Wiki is great for information where you do already know if what is being written is essentially correct. And for other places, it is exactly as you've described it. I noticed that some of the history of industrial music entry is pretty biased, but I'm also sure that the old alt.music.industrial crowd will eventually start cleaning up that material.

I felt that the basics that I pointed to were OK here.

Miki-those were trials for different acts. Conspiracy v the act, etc. Also, there is a difference between civil and criminal charges being brought by the state and citizenry against an individual.

And yes, wikipedia sucks. That cite is overused and blatantly wrong on several things, it is a...


The United States v. Felix (1992)? What is wrong with it? Seriously.

As for the OJ Simpson case, I think Wiki has it right. He did go to court for a wrongful death civil case *after* being acquited (sp?) from criminal charges. At the time (yup, I'm old enough that I can honestly say I was in college back then) people were asking if that was double jeopardy.

With respect to the Felix case ... perhaps the following will ease your concerns:

http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/90-1599.ZS.html

Held: The Double Jeopardy Clause does not bar Felix's prosecution on either the substantive drug offenses or the conspiracy charge. Pp. 5-13.

Read on:

(a) None of the substantive offenses for which Felix was prosecuted in Oklahoma is in any sense the same offense for which he was prosecuted in Missouri. The actual crimes charged in each case were different in both time and place, and no common conduct links them. In addition, mere overlap in proof between two prosecutions does not establish a double jeopardy violation.

I think that in this case, the Wiki entry is pointing to a defendable US Supreme Court Case, and that Wiki entry did a fair job talking in general terms about double jeopardy in other countries. Wiki works by people contributing to it ... amazingly like NSWiki! *gasp*

Earlier I mentioned that I had reservations about the industrial music entries, and in time I may sign up for Wiki itself and clean things up. The surprising thing there is so many indie artists are web friendly that the artists themselves might often spend a bit of time working on their entries. Hmmm, I didn't think to check the German language edition to see if they have their act pulled together.

Now that is a good source (biased, I almost went there were it not for the price and weather).

No concerns, explanations a and b are what I said.

Now that is a good source (biased, I almost went there were it not for the price and weather).

The problem with the Cornell site is that it is written for law students and people with an interest in law. It is honestly not written in simple English, while Wiki is ... largely because it is written by people who read simple English.

I think that had I originally pointed to the Cornell site that fewer people would really read the entire page let alone jump from the Sylabus that I linked to, to the actual justice opinions for the same case (which are even stronger worded ... and of course wordier too). ;)

The major problem with Wiki isn't that it is dumbed down and sometimes wrong. It is IMHO more what RomeW pointed out ... it can be changed on the fly, and my just pasting a link with little quoting could have meant that somebody could edit the page away from what I saw.

That said, I *should* have quoted more at what I saw was useful to our international issue of Double Jeopardy. If we get another crack at this draft, let's work on that clause, but it isn't a show stopper for my nation.

Extermination should be the cessation of life. This broadens the scope and lessens the credibility of the term Genocide. In short, the term has the suffix for a reason. Forced relocation is a weak justification for broadening the term. TilEncans would not be terminated, they would be re-patrioted to a new civilization and can once again become TilEncans.


I am sorry, but I really don't agree. If you capture 2000 women, impregnate them and force them to have the children of your nation, I think that would easily class as an attempt to wipe out a society.


Two groups least likely to be able to find evidence. Forensic experts should be apart of this panel, more so than diplomats and lawyers. So too should be academics or professionals who have great knowledge of the subject matter.


Ok. This might not be right. But it does not say that the panel are the only people who can investigate. In the same way the Chief of Police would order an investigation in to a crime, but the police and other groups would do it. And grand juries investigate all the time, using evidence gathered in other sources.


Other than that, this is one the best resolutions proposed in recent history.


Thank you :}


Does the UN have judiciary powers? Would it not have to create such power before voting on such a resolution? At present, this appears to be merely a governing body.

The UN is not the investigating body. The panel is. I realise it's a fine distinction, but this is not the UN investigating genocide, it is a group of nations working under the convention, under the authority of the UN, but it is not the UN doing the investigating.

I may be wrong, but I'm pretty sure that in the majority of Constitutions (at least in Canada) this clause would be illegal. You can't try someone for the same crime that they'd been acquitted of.

May I just point out two (or three) things.

1) UN resolutions overrule local constitutions.
2) This is not the real world
3) There is no UN ruling on double jepordy
4) Genocide is not your average murder. Its the murder of thousands, if not millions of people. I am not sure someone should be able to get away with it because of a technicallity.

Yes, yes I am; and yes, I do realize that there are exceptions. However, by this clause in the proposal, someone could be charged with maiming a race, get acquitted, then get charged with the same crime again, which is wrong. There needs to be seperate clauses outlining the various different crimes that could be classified as "genocide" so that "double jeopardy" is not infringed.

OOC EDIT- I should note that I don't really like Wikipedia since it can be edited by anyone and edited wrongly (an entry on my hometown, Alliston, Ontario, was actually wrong). Not to disparage you, Mikitivity, I just thought I'd mention that as an aside.

No one who is brought before the panel is brought for anything else than the crime of Genocide. And it's a specific genocide, not a general one. So that if you slaughter the entire nation of TilEnca, and for some reason get away with it, then you slaughter the population of GeminiLand then it would be a totally different crime.

But if you do slaughter the whole of TilEnca, I am not entirely convinced you should be permitted to get away with it on a technicality. As I said before :}

And sometimes it can take YEARS to unearth the full extent, or even any evidence of mass murder. So if someone is tried, but there is not enough evidence, then you find the bodies of twenty thousand people in his back yard, do you not think that he should be brought to trial again?

And it would be a different panel in the two cases anyways.

(OOC/IC)

I realise there is a discussion going on here, but would it be possible to move any further disucssions to the thread marked "SUBMITTED" for this? So that all the debate can be kept in one place?

Thanks :}

You might put a link in the other thread to this one:

Convention on Genocide - First Draft <--- add the url

But don't worry, should this reach the floor (and I think it will), I've left a trail of breadcrumbs to help me point to the significant discussions, of which I consider this thread one. :)

Thanks :}

(This is the other thread : http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=377445)

I am sorry, but I really don't agree. If you capture 2000 women, impregnate them and force them to have the children of your nation, I think that would easily class as an attempt to wipe out a society.

The women would still be alive, not wiped out, their history would still exist through them, and their culture could be passed down to their children. Events you describe have actually happened, and cultures resurfaced in revolt to, or after the end of empires.



Ok. This might not be right. But it does not say that the panel are the only people who can investigate. In the same way the Chief of Police would order an investigation in to a crime, but the police and other groups would do it. And grand juries investigate all the time, using evidence gathered in other sources.

But the panel would be deciding what is acceptable evidence and what is not, setting guidelines, and making decisions, without expert opinion. That is not good.

Thank you :}

Your welcome ;)


The UN is not the investigating body. The panel is. I realise it's a fine distinction, but this is not the UN investigating genocide, it is a group of nations working under the convention, under the authority of the UN, but it is not the UN doing the investigating.

If they are working under the color of the UN it is representing the UN. It should have its own experts on the panel to determine the legitimacy of evidence presented. Otherwise it will develop into a body whose decisions are based on emotion as opposed to reason. Not good. I guess my main question is does the UN have the power to adjudicate such matters. On one had, the UN can say it is upholding UN resolutions, on the other, a nation could say it is a war and UN resolutions applying to citizens of a member nation do not apply to those NS it is at war against.