NationStates Jolt Archive

I have withdrawn this draft, for the good suggestions of nations have made me realize I don't support it myself! Thanks to all who contributed.


TITLE: World Citizenship Act
CATEGORY: The Furtherment of Democracy
STRENGTH: Strong

SADDENED by the fact that people are forced to define their allegiance to one country only, which may forbid them the right to move to another country or otherwise impact their ability to improve the world;

REALIZING that this is fairly simple to rectify;

CREATES the United Nations World Citizenship Program (UNWCP) with the purpose of letting people become "World Citizens" (WCs);

MANDATES that any person applying to become a World Citizen must:
1. Be a current citizen of a nation that is a member of the United Nations;
2. Be approved as a citizen in good standing by their nation of citizenship;
3. Not have committed any felonies in any UN member nation in the 15 years preceding their application;

MANDATES that World Citizens will be "citizens" of a "pseudo-nation", holding no territory but being a democratic body with decision-making power on the UNWCP;

MANDATES that World Citizens will be issued World Citizenship Passports that will ensure them rights to enter any United Nations nation except if that nation has cut off all immigration for security reasons;

ALLOWS WCs to remain citizens of their home nation if they so desire, and to not forfeit any rights as a citizen of their nation by becoming a WC;

Suggestions? Mistakes? Corrections? Support? Non-support? Anything?

Draft:


Suggestions? Mistakes? Corrections? Support? Non-support? Anything?

First, we'd like to compliment the representative of Ceorana on presenting a carefully thought out and well written draft. Unfortunately, we could not support it.

We believe that nations have a responsibility -- and therefore, a right -- to control entry and exit across their borders. They owe this to their people, not only to protect their physical safety, but also their health and quality of life. We could not accept the idea of permitting unrestricted access to any nation by anyone who wants it -- even with the "security reasons" exception in place. And, if that provision were to be removed, we don't see what other positive effects the proposal would have.

Hurlbot Barfanger
Ambassador to the United Nations

I think you should add something abourt citizens on life sentences(witheout possibitity of parole) in prisons, and revoking their right to leave their country.

Note: They couldn't be in prison based on discrimination, beccause theUN doesn't allow that.

Also prohibiting taking stolen property and children in joint custody

Thanks for making a proposal granting the right to leave one's country, I've been planning on doing that.


MANDATES that World Citizens will be "citizens" of a "pseudo-nation", holding no territory but being a democratic body with decision-making power on the UNWCP;


I don't understand this clause

First, we'd like to compliment the representative of Ceorana on presenting a carefully thought out and well written draft. Unfortunately, we could not support it.

We believe that nations have a responsibility -- and therefore, a right -- to control entry and exit across their borders. They owe this to their people, not only to protect their physical safety, but also their health and quality of life. We could not accept the idea of permitting unrestricted access to any nation by anyone who wants it -- even with the "security reasons" exception in place. And, if that provision were to be removed, we don't see what other positive effects the proposal would have.

Hurlbot Barfanger
Ambassador to the United Nations

Agreed. This possibility would be a dream scenario for terrorists, assassins, and drug dealers.

Agreed. This possibility would be a dream scenario for terrorists, assassins, and drug dealers.
And even nations at war. It would be easy for Nation A to allow one of its commandos to become a world citizen, then send them over to Nation B for all kinds of nasty tomfoolery.

Gorgias
Speaker to the UN

against, not only for the above stated by Ausserland, but also on the basis that it is one step closer to the UN becoming a nation outright, which isnt it's purpose

How would this effect elections? If I hold a virtual citizenship in every nation in the UN, am I permitted to vote in all nations?

Or if I no longer (technically) hold citizenship in my nation, would my nation be permitted to forbid from voting in my elections?

We would approve of a free trade area with regards to the workforce.
This is not however what thee doth propose.
We feel that regrading elections, once a world citizen and has resided within a certain country for a certain amount of time, say five years, they would automatically become citizens of that nation. Unless something blocked it, be it the state for whatever reason or the WC themselves who wished to remain a citizen of there originator state. Until they became an official citizen of the secondary state, they would citizens of the originator, which is where they would be allowed to elect.
We do wish to ensure that WC do not move to a country, get a job, pay lower taxes to the originator country whilst claiming any relevant benefits within there new country.

We also feel that if UN member states stay at peace, then there would not be any worrying about commandoes and the like, with terrorists being hunted by security agencies within all nations.

However if the aggresor nation was a member of the UN as was the victim, then borders with both nations should immediatly be shut, and all of there citizens should be returned to there original nations, this would include naturalised citizens.

OOC, there is something wrong with this proposal and i can't quite put my finger on it.

How would this effect elections? If I hold a virtual citizenship in every nation in the UN, am I permitted to vote in all nations?

Or if I no longer (technically) hold citizenship in my nation, would my nation be permitted to forbid from voting in my elections?

According to the last clause, they hold voting rights in their home country. World Citizenship does not affect the citizenship of a person unless they choose to renounce it. Beyond that, it is up to the individual nations to decide whether and how to include WCs in their political process.

I do agree that there is a serious loophole that allows nations to send military commandos and other unwanted persons to other nations. The intent was to make a provision for exceptionally helpful (yes, that's the wrong word, but I can't think of anything better) people to avoid long immigration checks if they are attempting to help the nation, or just travel for pleasure after helping the world in a long-term, positive way. The problem is keeping out imposters, etc.

There's also the problem with the category and strength. It's probably Furtherment of Democracy, because it is an increase of political freedom for those who become WCs. But strong might be a bit much.

I welcome any comments, flames, gestures of support, and especially ways of fixing loopholes that so many others have helpfully pointed out.

Benjamin Qiro
Director of UN Affairs
The Peaceful Idealist Utopia of Ceorana

Weinerdogstan unfortunately can not support this effort. Some nations allow their citizens to hold a dual citizenship, and some might argue that two is too many. I agree with the others in that there is a grave security risk.

Besides, what can a nation count on if not for the allegience of its people?


Fidel,
UN Delegate, Con Thien

Draft:

MANDATES that World Citizens will be "citizens" of a "pseudo-nation", holding no territory but being a democratic body with decision-making power on the UNWCP;


Suggestions? Mistakes? Corrections? Support? Non-support? Anything?


This is the problem here as they can't hold property thus where do they live. Also how do they qualify to vote in any given nation that bases citizenship on property ownership and place of residence. Thus they would fall under visitors to any and all nations and be subject to rules for such.. Thus unless they declare citizenship in given nation they can't be. Also most nations like ours say you can't be a citizen of another nation and also a citizen of ours. If I read this right it would let folks be citizens of this so called 'pseudo-nation' and any other nation they may choose to be citizens of just say they want to be that..

As members of the UN we are sort of citizens of a grand social group since certain proposals set travel between members and how they act between each other. Thus this is not needed and creats more problems than does good...

against, not only for the above stated by Ausserland, but also on the basis that it is one step closer to the UN becoming a nation outright, which isnt it's purpose

Point!

This is the problem here as they can't hold property thus where do they live.
I believe you're mixing up citizenship with residence. They still live in their home nation, but are also part of the UNWCP.

Also how do they qualify to vote in any given nation that bases citizenship on property ownership and place of residence.
If they want to vote, they have to have that nation be their place of citizenship (remember, they can be citizens in one nation and the UNWCP), and then get land in that nation, and then vote.

Also most nations like ours say you can't be a citizen of another nation and also a citizen of ours.
Which is the problem that this resolution is seeking to rectify.
against, not only for the above stated by Ausserland, but also on the basis that it is one step closer to the UN becoming a nation outright, which isnt it's purpose

Suppose it was rephrased so that they wouldn't be citizens of a pseudo nation, but rather members of an international organization?

Ceorana, in my view all problems are secondary compared to this one:

---> DO NOT TOUCH our border controls!!! <---

And the only way to solve it is deleting the proposal. Sorry if I cannot be more constructive. :(

Cobdenian citizen gets world passport and becomes world citizen. World citizen has no Cobdenian visa in this passport, thus is an illegal immigrant. Gets arrested. Gets prosecuted. Gets hanged.

Cobdenian citizen gets world passport and becomes world citizen. World citizen has no Cobdenian visa in this passport, thus is an illegal immigrant. Gets arrested. Gets prosecuted. Gets hanged.
What's your point?