NationStates Jolt Archive

Proposed Repeal of Resolution 6 'End slavery'

13-07-2007, 07:33
Resolution #6 'End slavery' is a classic example of what constitutes a well-meaning but impossible resolution. Honest and earnest, it does reflect the intention of the United Nations (U.N.) to better society by acknowledging those acts which have been determined to be deplorable. This manner of resolution, which was common in the hectic days of the early U.N., is slowly being phased out in exchange for resolutions which 1) describe methods of enforcement, 2) describe punishments for infraction, 3) are not covered by other resolutions and 4) meet minimum grammatical standards.
Of special interest is case 3. The act of enslavement is outlawed in fact by articles 4 and 5 of Resolution #26. The rights under Resolution #6 are guaranteed in many specific cases by Resolutions #68, #89, #111, #115, #127, #138, #149, #159, #175, #187, #198 and in spirit by Resolutions #53 and #164. Also, Resolutions #31, #103, #159, #190 and #211 allow for situations which clearly infract with good reason these statutes. The letter of the law in Resolution #6 is reckless in the extreme. This law prevents all imprisonment in U. N. states, a rampantly ignored and clearly unintentional right.
This proud state now moves to prune this twisted branch of mangled law that the U. N. might entertain more thorough and logical methods of preventing this heinous act. Faldawi resolves that Resolution #6 ‘End slavery’ be rendered null and void.

[End proposal]

I assume this was removed from the queue (after careful reading of the requirements) because of the house of cards provision. The fact that things are apparently removed from the proposal listing and that some clear infractions clutter it for days troubles me, but that is neither here nor there. The true question is, considering that this proposal is quite flawed and needs revision, especially the travel provision which by wording grants terrible freedoms, how could it be removed without comparison to other overlaping resolutions?
13-07-2007, 19:03
We think it's far more likely that the proposal was deleted for violation of the Branding rule.

There's an on-going effort by several members to replace the two well-meaning but badly flawed resolutions on slavery with effective legislation. We'd suggest the representative check this thread and get involved in the effort if he wishes:

Lorelei M. Ahlmann
The Most Glorious Hack
14-07-2007, 05:12
A little bit of both, really. The branding caused me to pull the trigger, but the laundry list of existing Resolutions isn't so hot either.