NationStates Jolt Archive

DEFINING for the purposes of this resolution, a "recreational drug" as a chemical substance whose primary purpose is to act upon the central nervous system where it alters brain function, resulting in temporary or permanent changes in perception, mood, consciousness and/or behavior,

AWARE that member nations may not wish to outlaw drugs,

OBSERVING that trafficking of drugs across borders may lead to large untaxed amounts of money being poured from one nation to another,

NOTING that drug trafficking between nations may lead to conflict due to differences in drug laws of member nations,

FURTHER NOTING that drug trafficking in many instances directly funds terrorism and illegal weapon trade,

CONCLUDING that cutting down on international drug trafficking will benefit all nations involved economically and socially,

THEREFORE HEREBY MANDATING all member nations to follow this resolution that is:

§1 ENACTING that nations put immediately into effect laws imposing a fine, imprisonment, or other such forms of correctional action that are allowed by the UN upon drug traffickers.

§2 DEFINING international drug traffickers as any individuals who are caught involved in the international:

-Buying
-Selling
-Otherwise exchanging in any form

of drugs that were not legally passed through the borders of the nations involved.

§3 URGING member nations to consider imposing sanctions on nations who do not follow similar courses of action.

§4 ADVISING each member nation to consider imposing sanctions on nations who do follow similar courses of action, but fail to present their choice of correctional action as sufficient and fitting for the crime committed.

REITERATING, finally, that member nations who do carry out legal drug trade will be able to continue to do so.

STILL CONVINCED that the lessons of history are that this will have the exact opposite of its intended effect...

Approvals: 114
Status: Quorum Reached

Indeed, the quorum has been reached, and so a new thread has been started for the resolution.

Why would you start a new thread when the old one had only two posts?

Just because it is turning into a resolution and is no longer a draft for a proposal. (Inaccurate title)

The mods can rename thread titles.

Oh ok, sorry I guess. not really that important. There wasn't any true discussion about it except from me in the other thread, but I guess I'll just post it here and let the mods delete that one? Doesn't really make a difference to me.

"DEFINING for the purposes of this resolution, a "recreational drug" as a chemical substance whose primary purpose is to act upon the central nervous system where it alters brain function, resulting in temporary or permanent changes in perception, mood, consciousness and/or behavior,"

Yes, this includes Alchohol, Tobacco, and Caffeine, as well as certain medications that may be legal in member nations.

"AWARE that member nations may not wish to outlaw drugs,"

And this Resolution WOULD NOT, I repeat, WOULD NOT harm such nations.

"OBSERVING that trafficking of drugs across borders may lead to large untaxed amounts of money being poured from one nation to another,"

If a nation legally produces drugs and illegal traffickers smuggle it to other countries, the nation loses tax money. Also, If a nation cannot produce its own legal drugs, and instead of importing them with safety checks and other regulations, they are brought in illegally, it can also lead to a loss of tax money.

Drugs that go through borders are safer to use for the population, as they would not be mixed with other harmfull substances.

"NOTING that drug trafficking between nations may lead to conflict due to differences in drug laws of member nations,"
For example, The US was quite mad at Columbia for some time for not enforcing its drug laws. Same with Canada during prohibition.

"FURTHER NOTING that drug trafficking in many instances directly funds terrorism and illegal weapon trade,"

Opium = Talliban.
Other drugs: Turkey -> Lebanon -> Syria -> Iran -> Hizballah.

CONCLUDING that cutting down on international drug trafficking will benefit all nations involved economically and socially.

Would definitely improve the economies of nations where they are legal, and help cut down on crime where they are illegal.

"§1 ENACTING that nations put immediately into effect laws imposing a fine, imprisonment, or other such forms of correctional action that are allowed by the UN upon drug traffickers.

§2 DEFINING international drug traffickers as any individuals who are caught involved in the international:

-Buying
-Selling
-Otherwise exchanging in any form

of drugs that were not legally passed through the borders of the nations involved."

This is the part that some may debate conflicts the UN drug act clause that: "2) AFFIRMS the right of UN member states to determine their own laws with regard to the legality of any activity involving recreational drugs, including but not limited to the consumption, cultivation, preparation, possession, exchange, and distribution of recreational drugs by any individual or group of individuals, within their own jurisdiction;"

WITHIN THEIR JURISDICTION. This is the key difference. In the current resolution, it speaks of INTERNATIONAL BORDERS, which are not in the jurisdiction of neither country. And it also speaks only of INTERNATIONAL drug traffickers, thereby leaving the jurisdiction of each individual country.

It says in short that 'UN members can choose whether to make legal the exchange of recreational drugs within their own jurisdiction'. And this remains the same after this resolution, which only says that: 'UN members can choose whether to make legal the exchange of recreational drugs within their own jurisdiction, but must pass laws prohibiting illegal interjurisdictional exchange of recreational drugs.

"§3 URGING member nations to consider imposing sanctions on nations who do not follow similar courses of action."
This refers to non-UN members which will not be forced to pass such laws.

"§4 ADVISING each member nation to consider imposing sanctions on nations who do follow similar courses of action, but fail to present their choice of correctional action as sufficient and fitting for the crime committed. "
This refers to UN-members which pass laws that are very light in comparison to the crime, just to comply with the resolution.

"REITERATING, finally, that member nations who do carry out legal drug trade will be able to continue to do so."

And would even HELP, that's right, HELP, legal drug trade.

A further goal of this resolution is to help those nations where drugs are illegal, and have no power to enforce laws stopping incoming drugs from nations where they are legal, because most of the action must be taken by the nation where the drugs are coming FROM. This leads to unhappy relations between nations, and this is contrary to the goals of the UN.

You bring up some good points definitely. Some are purely of your semantical interpretations, but I will reply.

While you define recreational drugs as such, what do the terms "primary purpose" mean exactly? Alchohol's primary purpose as far as I'm concerned is as an antiseptic. Getting drunk off it is entirely secondary. I can and will make up some other things to get around this law in my own nations should it pass.

Oh this makes it easy! Lets see, you don't define drug traffickers(the next clause defines "international drug traffickers"). I can put into effect a law that contradicts your resolution, saying that drug traffickers are immune to prosecution for drug trafficking, as that is a form of correctional action allowed by the UN. Or if we read it another way, the only actions the UN specifically describes for drug traffickers would come out of THIS resolution, which defines no punishment in enough detail to use.

Key word here, "caught". Who's doing the policing? Your clause mandating a law is weak enough to be completely ignored. By including the word "caught" you've effectively neutered your resolution to meaningless.

I'm tempted to help you campaign for it to make sure there is a hurdle against future resolutions that would actually do something. Telegram me if you need help.

The definition is the same as that in the previously passed and not yet repealed UN drug act. If the primary use of Alchohol in your country is as a contraceptive, then this act does not apply to it. And yes you can get around this law that way.
As for the definition of drug traffickers. You bring up a good point because the word trafficking has several meanings. I meant it in the form of 'trade between different countries or places' and 'to trade or deal in a specific commodity or service, often of an illegal nature' *from dictionary.com
And thought it was made pretty clear from the preceding and superceding statements.

Punishment cannot be enforced on someone who is only suspected to do a crime, this is in accordance with fair trial and so on..

Thank you for your offer to help (although for the wrong reasons). And it seems like we have different motives. I am not doing this purely for my nation, but for the betterment of the UN as a whole (where I would benefit as well). Your help is welcomed if it will bring about more approvals, but I'm afraid it would be somewhat redundant as there are already 125 (at this time) approvals while the quorum is 114..
Thank you for your comments.

If you guys don't entirely mind I'm going to repost my arguments in the queue thread. We can discuss it there.

Intelligenstan, to avoid confusion it might be a good idea to request a lock on this thread.

yea good idea

Intelligenstan, to avoid confusion it might be a good idea to request a lock on this thread.

Indeed.

Discussion of the resolution on the floor may be found here: http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=543893

iLock.

--The Modified Democratic States of Cogitation
NationStates Forum Moderator