NationStates Jolt Archive

Everyone please support my resolution to create an International Police. Rather than being created with the intent of raising military or police budgets, which most of these sort of policies do, i created this resolution to lower crime through cooperation. Police forces from different nations can work together to capture international criminals such mob bosses and illegal cartel runners. Poorer nations will not have to spend more on police, since each nation will only have to offer what they can. Nations sovereignty will be perserved since nations without police forces will not have to join the International Police. Nations must allow other member nations into their country to legitimate business that does not endanger civilians. While the crime rate in my country is already low, i believe that this resolution will lower crime rates for nearly all member nations.

Problem is, the UN is not allowed to create or control military forces directly, as per the game rules. Otherwise, I'd say go for it, though most nations would probably be in opposition of any international security force.

the UN does not create or control any forces. it just provides a way for different nations to pull their resources.

Sounds good so far. Post the proposal here. I'm to lazy to search for it.

i was pretty tired when i wrote this so the grammar isnt perfect, sorry, but it does a fine job getting across the point.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
International Police

A resolution to improve world security by boosting police and military budgets.


Category: International Security


Strength: Significant


Proposed by: Mad Pimpin

Description: With the international community becoming more open and united, the positive as well as the negative has become widespread. Criminals now can travel between nations and commit crimes in several countries at once. Because the world's community must create its own Internation Police, or InterPol with the purpose of:
1. Creating a comprehensive database of known
a)organized crime leaders
b)drug cartels
c)dangerous criminals that have fled authorities due to a likelihood s/he has moved abroad
2. Helping catch criminals through forensics evidence, witnesses, and police strategies to locate and bring down criminals.
3. Creating an international forum where nations can request aid from other UN members in pursuing a common fugitive.
4. Lowering crime by deterring criminals who believe they can move to avoid being captured.

All UN member nations must allow other member nations performing legitimate police action that does not endanger innocent civilians go about their business, regardless of borders.

Nations with no crime or police force need not comply with sections of this resolution

Nations with no crime or police force need not comply with sections of this resolution
You ought to define "police force," otherwise nations can claim that because they have "security squadrons" rather than police, they don't have to comply with this resolution.

if this proposal gets enough approval from delegates, i'll draft a second, supplemental proposal defining police force and legitimate police action (to exclude hunts for political prisoners, etc).

You'd be better off including your definations in the original proposal as amendments are not allowed.

International police is a good idea.

This is a clear breach of national security. MLSR will refuse foreign armed 'support', and will take this as a simple decleration of war. We are happy to extrodite criminals, but a global police force will be a drain on our economy and safety.

A declaration of war from the entire UN? I'm afraid you'd lose that battle, my friend. Especially when my military alone is larger than your entire population.

We will fight for our basic rights, and will not be bullied into acceptance by larger nations. Armed forces within our borders, whatever their nationality, are a threatening and dangerous presence. Who is to say that they won't stir up trouble? If they chose to do so, MLSR will have no oppertunity to retaliate due to the devastating consequences that will follow from the international community. You have no veto, so let us put this resolution to the vote.

i'll draft up a new proposal on monday, defining police force and legitimate action, correcting any grammar problems the original had, and further expanding upon the protection of civilians from foreign police forces for the sake of nations like MLSR. I will post here monday, take any last minute suggestions, then after tuesday when the current proposal is taken off the docket, i will post the new one. If anyone is actually interested in this and wants to help me in a telegram campaign after that, telegram so we can set something up.

We will fight for our basic rights, and will not be bullied into acceptance by larger nations. Armed forces within our borders, whatever their nationality, are a threatening and dangerous presence. Who is to say that they won't stir up trouble? If they chose to do so, MLSR will have no oppertunity to retaliate due to the devastating consequences that will follow from the international community. You have no veto, so let us put this resolution to the vote.if you had read the original proposal, i already added a section stating that police forces endangering civilians do not have to be allowed in your nation.

Endangering civilians? If they were armed with plastic forks they could be a danger to us. Please, rethink this propsal fully, as I know there are many other countries out there who think like MLSR.

This is a clear breach of national security. MLSR will refuse foreign armed 'support', and will take this as a simple decleration of war.

Presumably you could quit the UN at any time, and the international policing laws would no longer apply to you.

I agree with this resolution, but belive that "All UN member nations must allow other member nations performing legitimate police action that does not endanger innocent civilians go about their business, regardless of borders," needs to be clarified. Also, if the criminal pokes someone in the eye in a nation where that is an offense punishable by death, does the nation he's fled to have to allow police forces determined to bring him to justice go about their work? What if a criminal turns to another nation for political asylum? These points need to be more detailed before I'd support this resolution.

The United Nations has a long and well-documented history of seperating itself from worldly conflict. While certain members of this organisation may or may not agree with this stance, every attempt by a member nation to develop an international police force under the command of the United Nations has met considerable resistance.

First and foremost, merely drawing the troops to support such an entity would put an impossible burden on the majority of member nations and their armed forces. Sophista, as an island nation, has no need for a large infantry force. Were the United Nations to demand a contingent of soldiers, we would be hard pressed to maintain our own internal security while meeting the obligation.

Then there's that nasty business of actually using such a force. It's hard enough getting thousands of nations to agree on simple declarations or other borderline-asinine policy. Were there ever a conflict meritous of international intervention, the blue-helmets wouldn't even get their keys out. Deploying a force on behalf of the world would require the consent and support of the world. Good luck with that.

I see nothing in the proposal about troops or soldiers. Like I said, I disagree with it in its present form, but I have no problem working against international crime by having my police officers working with your police officers to stop a criminal whose crime(s) has affected both our nations.

Taking into account the reccomendations of Nargopia and Fatus Maximus, i have drafted a new resolution but i am still looking for a little more help on it though. Before we get to that though, in response to Sophista, you are missing the point of the resolution. I'm not trying to create an international force, but an internation database. You are not gonna be forced to contribute troops anywhere. Other nations can request help, but dont require. All you have to do is open your borders for legitimate business. Fatus Maximus is right is when he says the purpose is allowing a framework for to nations to bring down a common fugitive. Your army or national security will not be hurt at all.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Description: With the international community becoming more open and united, the positive as well as the negative has become widespread. Criminals now can travel between nations and commit crimes in several countries at once. Because the world's community must create its own International Police, or Interpol with the purpose of:
1. Creating a comprehensive database of known
a) Organized crime leaders
b) Illegal cartel runners or leaders
c) Dangerous criminals that have fled authorities and could likely be hiding in a foreign nation
d) Terrorist
2. Helping catch criminals through forensics evidence, witnesses, and police strategies to locate and bring down criminals.
3. Creating an international forum where nations can request aid from other UN members in pursuing a common fugitive.
4. Lowering crime by deterring criminals who believe they can move to avoid being captured.

All UN member nations must allow other member nations to enter their borders and search for criminals assuming
1. The police are there on legitimate police business(*1).
2. The police do not engage in reckless or deliberate endangerment of innocent civilians while visiting or using excessive force on a suspect.
a) Any nation’s police who violate this will immediately be removed from all foreign nations and will undergo two-month, mandatory safety and sensitivity training seminar before being allowed back onto foreign soil. These nations must still adhere to the articles of this resolution while undergoing the mandatory training.
b) After 3 violations of this rule by one nation, the nation’s police will be banned from performing police action in other nations for 18 months.



Nations with no crime or police force(*2) need not comply with sections of this resolution.

*1 Legitimate police business does not include pursuit of those granted political asylum, political prisoners or opponents, or one-time, chronically harmless criminals. [still need help on this part]
*2 A police is force is a governmental department charged maintaining order, enforcing the law and preventing and detecting crime.

*2 A police is force is a governmental department charged maintaining order, enforcing the law and preventing and detecting crime.
So what happens if a country uses a private police force? This is not meant to be a criticism, but a point I would like to see addressed. Particularly in Enn's case, as our entire police and military presence is controlled and funded through Yssandra Faren's private wealth (please see our Wiki entry in the signature for more information). We would like to participate in such an international database, but currently we would not be able to.

Also, when you say government, do you mean national government, state/province government, or local government? Can the sheriff from Hicksville, Mad Pimpin travel to Fatus Maximus to arrest a drug dealer? Or is it a special national task force of police officers?

how about:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Description: With the international community becoming more open and united, the positive as well as the negative has become widespread. Criminals now can travel between nations and commit crimes in several countries at once. Because the world's community must create its own International Police, or Interpol with the purpose of:
1. Creating a comprehensive database of known
a) Organized crime leaders
b) Illegal cartel runners or leaders
c) Dangerous criminals that have fled authorities and could likely be hiding in a foreign nation
d) Terrorists
2. Helping catch criminals through forensics evidence, witnesses, and police strategies to locate and bring down criminals.
3. Creating an international forum where nations can request aid from other UN members in pursuing a common fugitive.
4. Lowering crime by deterring criminals who believe they can move to avoid being captured.

All UN member nations must allow other member nations(*1) to enter their borders and search for criminals assuming
1. The police are there on legitimate police business(*2).
2. The police do not engage in reckless or deliberate endangerment of innocent civilians while visiting or using excessive force on a suspect.
a) Any nation’s police who violate this will immediately be removed from all foreign nations and will undergo two-month, mandatory safety and sensitivity training seminar before being allowed back onto foreign soil. These nations must still adhere to the articles of this resolution while undergoing the mandatory training.
b) After 3 violations of this rule by one nation, the nation’s police will be banned from performing police action in other nations for at least 18 months.



Nations with no crime or police force(*3) need not comply with the articles of this resolution.

*1 The commitment of police abroad may include police from any level of government but must be approved by the nation's national government.
*2 Legitimate police business does not include pursuit of those granted political asylum, political prisoners or opponents, or one-time, generally harmless criminals. [still need help on this part]
*3 A police is force is a governmental department or firm contracted by a governmental body charged maintaining order, enforcing the law and preventing and detecting crime.

I'm not a delegate so my comments won't mean much, but I have to say this anyway :).

I like most of this proposal, but have a problem with one part of it.

I'm not sure I like the idea of having to allow foreign police to cross my border to pursue someone who may or may not be a criminal under our own laws. This sounds like another nation thinks so little of our law inforcement officials ability to detect and arrest crimminals that they're saying "you're cops are useless, stand back, shutup, and let ours do the job".

I have no probs with being compelled to share information on crimminal activity, and paticipating in international co-operation to reduce crime, but the police of Waterana are quite capable of doing their jobs without foreign interference.

I would support the resolution as it stands.

i can add something about how the criminal must have committed a crime that is illegal in both countries except possible in the case of trafficking (for instance transporting pot from a country where it is legal to where it is illegal). I'm willing to take more input on this subject. For instances where one nation does not have a law on the subject, like if one nation doesnt have laws on internet because they have no internet, the host nation can decide what to do.

I am also thinking about adding a limit to how many police can be stationed in a foreign nation and that police must obey regulations of the host country (i.e. surveillance restrictions).

i can add something about how the criminal must have committed a crime that is illegal in both countries except possible in the case of trafficking (for instance transporting pot from a country where it is legal to where it is illegal). I'm willing to take more input on this subject. For instances where one nation does not have a law on the subject, like if one nation doesnt have laws on internet because they have no internet, the host nation can decide what to do.

I am also thinking about adding a limit to how many police can be stationed in a foreign nation and that police must obey regulations of the host country (i.e. surveillance restrictions).

That sounds a bit better.

Perhaps you could consider only allowing foreign police to enter another nation at that nations request. To use your trafficking example, Waterana has legalised pot, but only in an induviduals own home. We also have commercial licenced growers. We allow them to export any surplus weed to other nations, but under strict regulations and only if its legal in that nation. If our nation has traffickers selling weed to a nation where its illegal, then its a crime in both nations, and we would be happy to accept foreign police from the nation concerned to assist our police to put a stop to it. In that and similar circumstances, it would be better and more efficient for them to work together, because they would both working on the same case.

In the case of fleeing fugatives though, I still maintain that Waterana's police are capable of arresting the person concerned, and returing him/her to the country that has the warrant (or whatever else is used) out on them, if our justice system deem they are a criminal and the warrant is justified.

in the case where you are willing to help, i would assume most nations would not risk losing diplomatic relations or risk an international incident and decrease domestic security by sending police abroad. Also, the limit i am thinking about creating will be small, like 1 or 2% of the host nations force so they police take on a role of helping their hosts rather than trying to run the country.

Fair enough, I think I understand what you're saying :).

Its just this sticking point about having to allow the foreign police in whether we like it or not. Our nation too would be in diplomatic hot water if we tried to refuse.

I'll save anymore comments until you put the changes in though :).

maybe the best solution would be to have the international force act more as an information base and an organizing force, negotiating situations that croos borders.

Perhaps, but I support the part of police crossing my borders as long as they are after a criminal that's detrimental to my society. It's all well and good to think that you're capable of catching the criminals that enter your country, but if you refuse to accept help (policemen from a foreign nation, as long as they aren't dangerous to my citizens) in my opinion it's very foolish indeed. You may feel it is an invasion of your nation's rights, but international crime is something that affects EVERYBODY, not just you.

hmmm, sounds interesting..... pitty that it is illegal in the fact that the UN cannot have any armed forces or police, and while on the surface you are stating 'the pooling of information', you are really creating a police force for the UN.

Not really, no. All it is doing is giving existing police forces the authority to pursue international criminals, including sending police officers into another UN member country if necessary.

I think it would have less of a chance of being deleted by the mods if you took out the refrences to police and interpol in the beginning and change the title to Police Cooperation or something simular to that. Even if it seems as if you're trying to create an interantional Police force, it could get deleted.

Yeah, that is a good idea. Clarify the fact that it's police officers of different nations working together, not a UN police force.

i would still run it past a mod first... this is skirting a very fine line.

No, as long as he takes out the refrences to an international police force, it will be fine. Of couse, it couldn't hurt for a mod to look it over.

Yeah, I'd have them look it over. Even if WE think it's ok, it's up to them.

i'm gonna be a while with creating a final drafts. I have a lot of school stuff i need to get done over the next 3 or 4 weeks so if anyone else wants to take the drafts posted here and write their own version to submit, more power to ya.

after a period of hiatus, the People's Republic of Mad Pimpin has returned to the UN and would like to propose this resolution once again. I am still making revisions so input would be appreciated.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Description: With the international community becoming more open and united, the positive as well as the negative has become widespread. Criminals now can travel between nations and commit crimes in several countries at once. Because the world's community must create its own International Police, or Interpol with the purpose of:
1. Creating a comprehensive database of known
a) Organized crime leaders
b) Illegal cartel runners or leaders
c) Dangerous criminals that have fled authorities and could likely be hiding in a foreign nation
d) Terrorists
2. Helping catch criminals through forensics evidence, witnesses, and police strategies to locate and bring down criminals.
3. Creating an international forum where nations can request aid from other UN members in pursuing a common fugitive.
4. Lowering crime by deterring criminals who believe they can move to avoid being captured.

All UN member nations must allow other member nations(*1) to enter their borders and search for criminals assuming
1. The police are there on legitimate police business(*2).
2. The police do not engage in reckless or deliberate endangerment of innocent civilians while visiting or using excessive force on a suspect.
a) Any nation’s police who violate this will immediately be removed from all foreign nations and will undergo two-month, mandatory safety and sensitivity training seminar before being allowed back onto foreign soil. These nations must still adhere to the articles of this resolution while undergoing the mandatory training.
b) After 3 violations of this rule by one nation, the nation’s police will be banned from performing police action in other nations for at least 18 months.
3. The may not send in a police force of greater than 2% of the host nation's total number of police without the permission of the host nation.


Nations with no crime or police force(*3) need not comply with the articles of this resolution.

*1 The commitment of police abroad may include police from any level of government but must be approved by the nation's national government.
*2 Legitimate police business does not include pursuit of those granted political asylum, political prisoners or opponents, or one-time, generally harmless criminals [still need help on this part]. Visiting forces must provide enough transparency to the host nation to ensure that all police action is legitimate.
*3 A police is force is a governmental department or firm contracted by a governmental body charged maintaining order, enforcing the law and preventing and detecting crime.

Additional Notes:
1. This resolution does not call for the creation of a UN armed forces, but rather creates a way for nations to work together in pursuing criminals
2. All member nations are encouraged to use diplomacy with other nations and too never force troops into another country in the absence of extreme circumstance. This resolution is meant to encourage cooperation, not force it. If a nation offers to capture a criminal without the aid of a visiting forces, allow them to do so. DO NOT risk an international incident by invoking the provisions of this resolution.

If the overall idea isn't illegal due to this..

Army, Police, SWAT, etc

The UN doesn't get an army. Nor does it get to form The World Police. This is pretty clear: don't do it.

then this clause may be illegal on its own due to the optionality rule..

Nations with no crime or police force(*3) need not comply with the articles of this resolution.

Illegal on both counts, I'd say.

This is a very interesting idea, however...

With so much wrong in the world today I highly doubt that some nations will accept these "police" people into their country with open arms, chances are with open fire arms, hehehe, see what I did th- oh nevermind.

Other than this fact I would have to say that this should be funder for countries that accept these inforcers into there country.

You ought to define "police force," otherwise nations can claim that because they have "security squadrons" rather than police, they don't have to comply with this resolution.


Was also looking at this part of the propsal and agree you need to clearly define 'police force'. As all our so called police forces come under the same command chain but we have two separate sections to it. What would be our military keeps criminals out of our nation and a police force kicks them out should they get in. Both are under our Narional Defense Service Force so they funtion when needed to support each other in times when it's needed for them to do so. We would thus call our Military -Border Defense Forces- and Police -Interior Defense Forces- and move aways from the term police thus they would not be under this one as it reads.. Also on crime in a nation, that also is a matter of what laws are on the books and how a nation calls actions by it's citizens and deals with them. In one nation you steal a chicken and it's a chrime, here it's only a crime if you get caught and the person who owned it can punish you for taking it. As we see any criminal act on a citizen of our nation as an act of war against our society thus they are delt with under military law (our NDSF) not civilian judges and police.

We do believe that member nations shoud work together to protect all from so called terrorists and criminal that may move from nation to nation in an effort to avoid being caught and punsished for their actions. Thus each should consider this and act on their on to set up such needed forces between nations and regions. As many member nations have such with nations outside the UN thus one might wonder how this would effect those unions for such. As nation X (UN member) may share information with nation Y but nation Z (UN member) will not want to share any with nation Y.. simply because nation Y is outside the UN membership or Z and Y just don't agree on some social issuses... regardless of Y UN status.

Also, if the criminal pokes someone in the eye in a nation where that is an offense punishable by death, does the nation he's fled to have to allow police forces determined to bring him to justice go about their work? What if a criminal turns to another nation for political asylum?

I think that there's already a right to refuse extradition in such cases.