NationStates Jolt Archive

I encourage all to read the proposal and then vote to have the all UN nations vote.

If you specific issues with the proposal, air your concerns here, and proper adjustments could be made (maybe!).

Text?

Sorry bud--just moving a little slow.


Remedies For Detained Aliens
A resolution to improve worldwide human and civil rights.


Category: Human Rights
Strength: Strong
Proposed by: Xananu

Description: ACKNOWLEDGING that many nations indefinitely detain lawful and unlawful aliens when their home countries refuse to accept their return;

FURTHER ACKNOWLEDGING that indefinite detention of aliens simply because they are "nation-less" is abhorrent to human rights;

RECOGNIZING that the "Refugee Protection Act" only protects the rights of refugees during and following times of war;

FURTHER RECOGNIZING the availability of "Habeas Corpus" to detained aliens of a nation;

HEREBY RESOLVES:

Article 1. Any UN-member nation that permits the indefinite detention of lawful or unlawful aliens for any reason shall enact procedures to allow such aliens to seek freedom under the principles of "Habeas Corpus";

Art. 2. Any detained alien that is determined to be "nation-less" despite any habeas corpus proceeding should be permitted to submit a request to the UN or any UN-member nation seeking citizenship;

Art. 3. No nation should be limited by this resolution to ensure specifically-defined concerns for national security;

Art. 4. In considering an alien's request for citizenship, the UN would be advised to create sub-committees to decide such requests so as to not take away from the general business of the UN; and

ENCOURAGES UN-member nations to seek diplomatic and well-reasoned decisions with fellow nations in providing detained or soon-to-be detained aliens a "home nation"; and

STRONGLY ENCOURAGES all nations to avoid indefinitely detaining any alien, and to implement other procedures to avoid such detentions with general human rights concerns in mind.

I'll do a piece-meal analysis tomorrow, but right off the bat I take severe issue with the term "aliens". I really think the term immigrants should be used.

Also, a quick skim brings up a "House of Cards" violation (art 1? - Habeas Corpus anyways).

I think the word aliens needs to be changed but I like the sound of it. I'll wait till others aruge about it before I pick for or against.

Aliens is appropriate because the proposal refers to illegal aliens. They arn't immigrants unless they immigrate legally.

I'll do a piece-meal analysis tomorrow, but right off the bat I take severe issue with the term "aliens". I really think the term immigrants should be used.

Also, a quick skim brings up a "House of Cards" violation (art 1? - Habeas Corpus anyways).

Like the distinguished representative of Forgottenlands, we have taken only a quick look at this proposal and can offer only a few, preliminary comments.
We support the general intent of the proposal and would lean towards supporting it if refined a bit. Our comments....

We believe alien is the technically correct term for use here. An alien is a person who is present in a country but not a citizen thereof. An immigrant is a person who has entered a country with the intention of permanently remaining. The proposal should, as it now does, apply to all aliens, not just immigrants.

The honorable representative of Forgottenlands is, we believe, quite correct in his comment on the "House of Cards" violation. We feel this could be easily avoided by changing "Habeas Corpus" to habeas corpus. This would make reference to the general legal principle rather than the resolution.

Article 3 needs to be reworded. We think we understand what the drafter intends, but the wording is unclear.

We see the principal problem as being the references to "UN citizenship". Is there such a thing? We admit there may be a resolution somewhere establishing it, but, if so, we missed it. If UN citizenship does not now exist, we would oppose any measure to establish it. We believe there are far too many serious problems associated with any sort of trans-national citizenship.

We look forward to the author's continued work on this draft and hope we will eventually be able to support the proposal.

Hurlbot Barfanger
Ambassador to the United Nations

Your suggestions and concerns are well-founded. I was unsure if I should rely on the "Habeas Corpus" resolution or just leave to general legal principles. If I did make a boo-boo, then I will definitely correct it.

I'm sorry that some take offense to the word "alien" but as Ausserland indicates, this is the legal definition of persons in this situation. If you believe another word could be as effective and less offensive, I'm happy to hear it.

I can see why Art. 3 could be confusing. If others are confused, I will revise it.

Question: is it worth even stating the applicability to "UN-member nations"?

The deadline for approving the proposal is this Friday so please either approve it if you like or give me feedback on making it better. I would also like to here what concerns you have it you don't like the proposal. Thanks.