NationStates Jolt Archive

http://www.nationstates.net/92059/page=UN_proposal/start=25
(THe proposal is contained on teh page in the above link)

I shall also state Malfactopia's proposal on this Resolution:

http://www.nationstates.net/92059/page=WA_past_resolutions/start=12

Description: WA Resolution #13: Fair Criminal Trial (Category: Human Rights; Strength: Significant) shall be struck out and rendered null and void.

Argument:

ACKNOWLEDGING that a method of carrying out justice is a crucial factor in society,

CONVINCED a democratic legal system is not essential in maintaining a nation, its government's ability to establish its own laws regarding the issue or establishment of a legal system of its own, and the welfare and current needs of its people,

ALSO ACKNOWLEDGING that the above Resolution has the best intentions for the rights of humanity, but not for individual nations and their ways of life;

CONVINCED that each nation has sovereign rights to make decisions regarding its own laws and have its own views on the concept of "justice" and how criminals are to be punished within a nation's borders, as well as how laws are to be enforced;

STATING that above Resolution inhibits the aforementioned rights of a nation, nullifying part of a nation's power to make decisions about how it interprets the law;

STATING that the above Resolution also negatively impacts the rights of various cultures of other countries, by taking away any chance for the nation to make a decision regarding its own people, according to established customs, traditions, or laws of the people in question;

REGRETTING that the above resolution fails to address how trials might be conducted during times of war, where prisoners of war are concerned, should the laws of a government call for a conflicting method of carrying out pre-established laws;

STATING that the above resolution is not only an indirect way to dictate how a nation should treat its citizens regarding Law and Order, but against the rights of many countries who may not view democracy as the best way to approach government,

STATING ALSO that the Resolution inhibits the rights of the people of said countries by directly affecting their culture, personal beliefs and/or religious beliefs regarding law and order;

REGRETTING that above resolution appears to only have been written with democratic governments in mind, and does not address issues of other forms of government, nor any other alternative methods of justice that might keep the rights of a human being intact, while also promoting the individual policies of the nation's government,

TO PROPOSE this Resolution be repealed for reasons stated above, and for the welfare of our global community as a whole by enabling countries' governments to enact laws of their own will regarding a system of law and order, thus giving back a nation's sovereign rights on the subject of a legal system,

THEREFORE enabling a nation to establish policies that both keep the rights of its people intact and also promote each individual nation's culture and ideaology, without inhibiting the rights of other nations and/or cultures.

There's a fatal flaw in your reasoning: our culture is better than yours. You should really be thanking us for forcing it onto you.

--Sam Benson
etc. etc.

There's a fatal flaw in your reasoning: our culture is better than yours. You should really be thanking us for forcing it onto you.

--Sam Benson
etc. etc.

There is a fatal flaw in your contradiction. The UN is for rights, not against them. By stating what you have just stated, you are directly infringing on my right to govern my country how I see fit. Upon which the governing bodies of Malfactopia may view as an "act of war". I shall try to downplay your insult, however, and keep the peace, but for your sake it would be wise if you thought before you spoke when dealing with other countries.

Besides, I speak for EVERY nation that would rather establish their own legal system than have it decided for them by, what now appears to be, arrogant "higher culture" nations. Thank you for enlightening me as to the true nature of the WA. :hail:
Even if your statement is true, you cannot say the same thing to other countries who feel opposed to this "narrow-minded" resolution that really should never have been passed.

Well, I think you're in need of further enlightenment, so here you go (http://www.nationstates.net/page=faq#WA):
The WA is the world's governing body. It proposes and votes on resolutions, which are then binding on all member nations. In other words, it's a hot-bed of political intrigue and double-dealing.

Your nation can join the WA, but it's not compulsory. As a non-member, you are unaffected by any WA decisions. So if you're happy looking after your nation and don't want to dabble in international politics, don't join up.
...
The WA is your chance to mold the rest of the world to your vision, by voting for resolutions you like and scuttling the rest. However, it's a double-edged sword, because your nation will also be affected by any resolutions that pass. (You can't just obey the resolutions you like and ignore the rest, like real nations do.)
...
The above shouldn't be interpreted to read 'vote for everything by default'. But if you are hankering for absolute sovereignty where you state that 'each nation has sovereign rights to make decisions regarding its own laws', then you're pretty much going to have to suck it, because, for better or for worse, the nature of the WA is to pass resolutions that affect nations' abilities to pass their own laws.

-- Samantha Benson

Well, I think you're in need of further enlightenment, so here you go (http://www.nationstates.net/page=faq#WA):

The above shouldn't be interpreted to read 'vote for everything by default'. But if you are hankering for absolute sovereignty where you state that 'each nation has sovereign rights to make decisions regarding its own laws', then you're pretty much going to have to suck it, because, for better or for worse, the nature of the WA is to pass resolutions that affect nations' abilities to pass their own laws.

-- Samantha Benson

And that is precisely why I joined. To help correct the injustices of the WA. So, as you put it, "suck it".
Your foreign phrases are quite strange, and difficult to understand. ;)

It is a strange and disturbing fact that no binding, agreed-upon resolution exists to assure a fair criminal trial in the nations. It is also dissapointing to observe people question such a solid, essential necessity. Are those who oppose this bill so involved in their dictatorship that they ignore basic civil rights, of which the WA has already established?

It matters not how great cultures or governments are, rather what these cultures have to say assure no catalystic operations are performed; this means to perform actions that are not overtly controversial and could cause major strife. If one pays attention, war is what the WA aims quite against.

A wise politician knows that, sooner or later, the basic principles of law that governs the people will soon apply to him/her. For this reason, I say the Fair Trial bill should apply, and any attempt to overturn such a thing is selfish and foolish.

It is a strange and disturbing fact that no binding, agreed-upon resolution exists to assure a fair criminal trial in the nations.
Oh yes there does, otherwise the Malfactopian delegation would be looking a bit silly trying to repeal it. It may have some devastating flaws (kiss goodbye to any secrecy you might be trying to maintain, for example), but it does exist.

Unfortunately while I do think Fair Criminal Trial needs repealing and replacing with something that does the job properly, the argument here seems to be "Wah! You've infringed on my sovereignty!" That's about as flimsy as repeal arguments come, and there's no way I'd support it.

REGRETTING that above resolution appears to only have been written with democratic governments in mind, and does not address issues of other forms of government, nor any other alternative methods of justice that might keep the rights of a human being intact, while also promoting the individual policies of the nation's government,


Just an FYI, most WA member nations are democracies, in some way, shape or form. But you can still be a dictator and still give your people a fair trial.

Could you give some examples of these "alternative methods of justice" you speak of? Because it is entirely possible that a new resolution is needed that allows for such methods. However, Scotchpinestan will not support repealing WA 13 unless and until a replacement is drafted.

And that is precisely why I joined. To help correct the injustices of the WA.Funny, then, that you'd introduce a repeal that runs contrary to that very principle. It's awful damn hard to "correct injustices" in member nations' court systems if some uniformity of standards isn't implemented.

Just an FYI, most WA member nations are democracies, in some way, shape or form.Would you care to source this fantastical claim? (Keeping in mind this is NS, not RL.)

Could you give some examples of these "alternative methods of justice" you speak of? Because it is entirely possible that a new resolution is needed that allows for such methods. However, Scotchpinestan will not support repealing WA 13 unless and until a replacement is drafted.Ah, the old "Show me the replacement!" track. Gotta love the classics. :tongue:

http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a118/teddygrahams113/maguire.jpg

"Wah! You've infringed on my sovereignty!"

Haha, so true!

It is quite odd the WA indeed accepted the first repeal to the first Fair Trial bill with this same argument presented to them. Even though I respect a nation's right to govern it's own people rightfully without interference, dictatorships do NOT deserve such control: they abuse their people, and are more like little children whom seem to have taken an interest in stringing up squirrels and ripping off their hair just for fun: they must be scolded and punished, and their privileges taken away.

Dictators are nothing but the biggest spoiled brats of the world. Only a corrupt dictator could oppose this bill. Still, I respect the fact that some believe that the bill needs revision. I understand this. Still, after all revisions have been made, there should be no more argument.

Tell me, brother Malfectopia, what is it that you think in this bill needs revision?

It is a strange and disturbing fact that no binding, agreed-upon resolution exists to assure a fair criminal trial in the nations. It is also dissapointing to observe people question such a solid, essential necessity. Are those who oppose this bill so involved in their dictatorship that they ignore basic civil rights, of which the WA has already established?

I'm not questioning the necessity at all. I just think the resolution goes about it the wrong way. I'm not against a "world court" so long as nations are allowed to keep their own legal systems.
Are you so narrow-minded that you cannot consider the possibility of a worldly legal system that would benefit all nations and not just democracies?
Don't let your prejudice blind you. Being a dictator myself.. has nothing to do with this at all. I would hold the same view were my nation extremely liberal and free.
But i chose this form. So that is how you see me... like how others see other people of various ethnicities, by what is on the "surface".
I just recently increased education funds in my nation. Is that evil?
I rest my case.

It matters not how great cultures or governments are, rather what these cultures have to say assure no catalystic operations are performed; this means to perform actions that are not overtly controversial and could cause major strife.
That's what the resolution this proposal seeks to repeal does, actually. It favors only democracies. It has caused strife (in the forum at least).

If one pays attention, war is what the WA aims quite against.
If one pays attention, they will not find me calling for war at all in that proposal. Nor does it even suggest giving more war powers to other nations. I believe you are being highly off-topic with that statement there. Yes, being against war is a "noble" thing, but we are talking about how the resolution up for repeal affects the legal systems of "all nations", and how it favors only democracies.

A wise politician knows that, sooner or later, the basic principles of law that governs the people will soon apply to him/her. For this reason, I say the Fair Trial bill should apply, and any attempt to overturn such a thing is selfish and foolish.
I say you are wise alright. Wise in your own sight. Just because what on the surface appears to be corrupt and anarchist, does not mean it is so. I can see you have not bothered to read my proposal, nor have you even considered the possibility that I was going to try and come up with a "fairer" fair trial act myself. One that would allow all nations to keep their own way of finding justice, but say, could compromise for a worldly standard of how punishment may be carried out, etc. It is still in the works, actually.

How dare you accuse me of being foolish and selfish when you know next to nothing of my views and plans for the WA. I seek only to benefit it by clearing way what I believe to be a convoluted pile of deadwood. Something that could be simplified, and have a far greater effect not only on how justice is carried out as a global community, but it would keep the peace among the nations as well.

As it is, the current resolution could be considered an "infant", needing to be more defined in its discipline if it is to be more effective than it currently is. Which is to say, minimal effect, as it infringes on civil rights.
I do not respect you as a 'wise politician' due to this post. I find it highly flawed and needing more thought.

Oh yes there does, otherwise the Malfactopian delegation would be looking a bit silly trying to repeal it. It may have some devastating flaws (kiss goodbye to any secrecy you might be trying to maintain, for example), but it does exist.

Unfortunately while I do think Fair Criminal Trial needs repealing and replacing with something that does the job properly, the argument here seems to be "Wah! You've infringed on my sovereignty!" That's about as flimsy as repeal arguments come, and there's no way I'd support it.

The argument, then, should be... the current worldy legal system is a diseased creature, is biased against any other form of government that is not a democracy, and infringes upon the rights of a nation to "introduce national legislation concerning matters of Law, Order, and the welfare and security of its people".

Also the resolution seems to be written with the mind that "other nations do not matter, those insignificant buffoons will learn to fear the power of democracy, [insert intolerant comments about other nations and their cultures/governments here] etc.

So you see... I guess the secret is out.
It is highly flawed.
thus the repeal.

Haha, so true!

It is quite odd the WA indeed accepted the first repeal to the first Fair Trial bill with this same argument presented to them. Even though I respect a nation's right to govern it's own people rightfully without interference, dictatorships do NOT deserve such control:
And let us explore your highly biased reasons.

they abuse their people,
Malfactopia holds it's people's health in high regard, and in fact is awaiting legislation to attempt to rectify current internal matters.
and are more like little children whom seem to have taken an interest in stringing up squirrels and ripping off their hair just for fun:
I fail to see your logic. All I see is a claim made to be factual without any supporting evidence whatsoever.
they must be scolded and punished, and their privileges taken away.
And pray, tell, what has Malfactopia done to deserve such intolerant persecution of how we run this fine nation? Have I threatened any Nation with war? No. Have I murdered any person, based upon race, religion, creed, or simply for the fun of it? No. Have I kept my citizens in the dark mists of ignorance? No, in fact, I have increased funding to the education system, as Malfactopia believes the children are our future.

Dictators are nothing but the biggest spoiled brats of the world.
Give me evidence of this claim and i shall consider it.
Only a corrupt dictator could oppose this bill.
Only? I find that claim difficult to beleive. Are you sure you are not blinded by your prejudice and bias? Were Malfactopia say, a democratic nation concerned with free thinkers and poets before the needs of our people as a whole, would you hold the same view?

Still, I respect the fact that some believe that the bill needs revision. I understand this. Still, after all revisions have been made, there should be no more argument.
That may take a long time. The current resolution in question is in dire need of revisions to save its life.

Tell me, brother Malfectopia, what is it that you think in this bill needs revision?

One, it does not consider the diverse community of nations, only one specific form of government; democracy. Might I remind you that democracy can be as corrupt as a dictatorship. I should know, what with Malfactopia's current "benevolent" position.
Evil? Maybe. Cruel, inhumane, and oppressive? No. We are, at the very least, attempting to pass legislation that would give more freedoms and benefits to our people.
Unless you think you can murder others with increased funding to the educational system?

Three, it is the position of Malfactopia that this resolution was written with bias against any type of dictatorship, viewing them all as "corrupt" when in fact, it is possible to both promote human rights AND promote our government policies. We are researching cloning to attempt to save the lives of those in need of donors in the future. We have increased funding to our educational system as the children are our future. We do not murder. WE do not throw tantrums when we can't be Mr. Dictator... we do not attack our neighbors on some insane quest to conquer the world.
So I believe the automatic assumption of Dictatorship = Evil mass murdering nation is defeated.
The resolution is flawed, and could use a major overhaul to consider every form of government. Say a nation has the right to its own legal system, but punishment is dictated by the WA. Or there could be a Worldly High Court for appeals of certain decisions. It is up to us to think of the proper way to go about it.

The argument, then, should be... the current worldy legal system is a diseased creature, is biased against any other form of government that is not a democracy, and infringes upon the rights of a nation to "introduce national legislation concerning matters of Law, Order, and the welfare and security of its people".

Also the resolution seems to be written with the mind that "other nations do not matter, those insignificant buffoons will learn to fear the power of democracy, [insert intolerant comments about other nations and their cultures/governments here] etc.

So you see... I guess the secret is out.
It is highly flawed.
thus the repeal.

Could Your Excellency please point out the clauses that are unworkable under a nondemocratic form of government?

Ambassador Darvek Tyvok-kan
Great Chiefdom of Krioval

Now now. Grand High Justice of Malfactopia will do. XD
And I have decided on my own, that my current edition of this "repeal" isn't very good/crappy. But you've all given me a few "bright ideas".
Thank you. Really, you've all been such an inspiration.
;D

Please, do not feed me your "benevolent dictator" propaganda. Your people have no political freedoms and barely any rights! What are you saying, that simply because you give some education to people, it makes you a dignified saint? I may not be so wise, but I am no fool. My country lives for it's people. Malfactopia, apparently, only lives for yourself. And there is no greater fool than a despot like yourself.

I've been known to approve pretty much any proposal to do away with the Fair Criminal Trial resolution, nearly regardless of how poorly written it is or even if it violates the rules of the WA. Yours is actually decent, so I'm happy to approve it. That said, I don't agree with all your arguments, just your conclusion.

Riley Fluffer
Representing the Federated Democratic States of Xanthal
Designated Agent of the Delegacy of SPACE

...so that's a "no"?

The current W.A. resolution governing fair trial is one our nation despises. It destroyed the legislative system of our nation. A system that had existed for thousands of years and was fairer and frankly better at getting good justice than the system introduced by the Narnians.
We made absolutely no secret of our dismay and horror at this act of barbarism at the time and made it clear that we would support any repeals brought forward to rectify the injustices it created.

The government of the emperor of Urgench warmly welcomes this repeal and will happily assist it's authors in any way they may wish.

yours e.t.c. ,