NationStates Jolt Archive

my proposal:

Repeal "Stop privacy intrusion"
A proposal to repeal a previously passed resolution


Category: Repeal
Resolution: #10
Proposed by: Fahadia

Description: UN Resolution #10: Stop privacy intrusion (Category: Human Rights; Strength: Strong) shall be struck out and rendered null and void.

Argument: UNDERSTANDING the ideals and morals behind this resolution

CONCERNED that privacy intrusion is too personal to a national government to be dealt with by an international organization

ADMITTING that the UN is meant to unify nations' political beliefs

REMINDING that the UN has its limits to where it can intervene in national politics

NOTING that democracies also may have spy agencies, which intrude in privacy, but for reasons

CONCLUDING that privacy intrusion limits is decided by the nation itself AND that privacy intrusion is over the limits of UN intervention.

Approvals: 5 (Alistaire, Extremation, The Death Head, WZ Forums, Fahadia)

Status: Lacking Support (requires 99 more approvals)

Voting Ends: Wed Feb 6 2008

The Democratic States of Stopmenow100 will not support this repeal attempt. Stopmenow100 believes all citizens of any nation have inherent rights, and privacy would fall under this umbrella.

In an attempt to maintain an acceptable level of human rights in all nationstates, Stopmenow100 urges all nations to vote 'no' on this proposal.

"I believe that this Proposal would fall under the 'Silly or Illegal Proposals' Thread."

We fully support this proposal. The Royal Office for the United Nations has reviewed all UN resolutions in effect before we applied for membership and it has found that the UN has been approving some resolutions that are, at best, intruding.

We fully support this proposal. The Royal Office for the United Nations has reviewed all UN resolutions in effect before we applied for membership and it has found that the UN has been approving some resolutions that are, at best, intruding.

"So the honored deligation from Bergelland would approve of nations passing legislation that made phone taps for all civilians alowable, even just to listen to that civilian and their lover? I suggest that you re-think your position."

"So the honored deligation from Bergelland would approve of nations passing legislation that made phone taps for all civilians alowable, even just to listen to that civilian and their lover? I suggest that you re-think your position."

No, we would not, but that is not the point here. The point is that the United Nations should not have the power to affect local laws to this depth. We do believe that every one should have their right for privacy, but we also believe in every nation's right to sovereignity.

ADMITTING that the UN is meant to unify nations' political beliefs

No. It isn't. In fact, it's specifically forbidden to do so.

The Republic of The State of New York will not support this measure because it would violate our country's constitution.

Apparently the delegate of The Republic of The State of New York is misunderstanding the effects of the passing of this resolution. It doesn't mean that your nation would have to take away peoples' right to privacy. It means that your nation would not be forbidden to enact such legislation.

CONCLUDING that privacy intrusion limits is decided by the nation itself AND that privacy intrusion is over the limits of UN intervention.

We must concur with the delegation of Shazbotdom that the proposal is illegal. The quoted section clearly attempts to introduce new legislation, something which repeals are strictly forbidden to do.