NationStates Jolt Archive

My original intent was to define a Fair Trial, as the resolution itself did not. However, brought up by "Dasri," I see that it already has been defined. Therefore, I declare this CLOSED!

I do not believe this should be open for discussion as some of the first resolutions of the United Nations, even though short get to the point.

We conduct trial by combat and this is extremely fair, there are even opportunities where someone can fight as the Champion for one side or the other (although not both, we discovered how impractical it was to have the Champion represent both sides to a battle to the death.... when the Champion died we forgot to ask him if the left side was the defendant or the prosecution, this was the side where there were the most wounds, the defendant was released... to commit the crime again, sad story really)... Anyway, our way is fair!

Well, erm, doesn't this (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=7030080&postcount=48) cover your concerns?

~ Hari Desana

We have several companies that are paid by the local and national corporations in a region to uphold what is considered to be a fair and speedy trial. This is defined by what the companies see fit, and what the legislation corporation deems as a true violation of law. Our constitution only states that a handful of rights are deemed universal to all citizens within our borders who are actively employed or otherwise contributing to our society in a popular manner. We feel that the definition of the way legislation happens should be determined by the individual sovereign nation. In the case of serious human rights violations, specific issues should be addressed and voted on.