NationStates Jolt Archive

1. Definition

“Adult” means a person who has reached the age of majority;

“Child” means a person under 12 years old;

“Offence” means a criminal or penal offence defined by each WA nation;

“Proceeding” means a criminal or penal trial held under this resolution;

“Young person” means a person who has reached 12 years old but is less than the age of majority;.

2. No proceeding must be commenced against a person for an offence, which the person was alleged to have committed when the person was a child.

3. (a) This resolution shall only apply if a young person is alleged to have committed an offence.

(b) This resolution applies even if the young person becomes an adult before or after proceeding has been commenced or during the time the young person is on sentence.

4. If a young person is charged with an offence, the crown must provide to the parent of the young person, by registered mail, notice indicating the charge, date and location of proceeding, and the place of detention if the young person is detained.

5. (a) A young person can only be prosecuted in a youth court, separate from any adults.

(b) Any detention of young person before preceding must be separate from any adult.

6. If a youth person is found guilty, the custody
(a) cannot be greater than if an adult is found guilty of same offences and,
(b) must be separate from an adult and,
c) cannot last more than 24 months.

7. The name of a young person accused of any offence and the name of his family members must remain confidential at all time even if the young person is found guilty.

8. All records of offence must be destroyed when a young person becomes an adult and all custody has been served.

MapleLeafss;14060787']1. Definition

“Adult” means a person who has reached the age of majority;

“Child” means a person under 12 years old;

Opposed. What about those who would normally reach puberty far sooner or far later? We honestly cannot support a resolution that limits itself only to humans when we've seen signs that humans are far from the only species out there.

“Offence” means a criminal or penal offence defined by each WA nation;

“Proceeding” means a criminal or penal trial held under this resolution;

“Young person” means a person who has reached 12 years old but is less than the age of majority;.

See above on the age issue.

2. No proceeding must be commenced against a person for an offence, which the person was alleged to have committed when the person was a child.

3. (a) This resolution shall only apply if a young person is alleged to have committed an offence.

(b) This resolution applies even if the young person becomes an adult before or after proceeding has been commenced or during the time the young person is on sentence.

Opposed on this as well. If a young person successfully assassinates the Empress, they will die. Period. If the law doesn't kill them, then the public will... only, our legal system will be nicer about it. We cannot, and will not, allow for certain crimes to be committed, no matter the age, due to what the crimes are.

4. If a young person is charged with an offence, the crown must provide to the parent of the young person, by registered mail, notice indicating the charge, date and location of proceeding, and the place of detention if the young person is detained.

Too government-specific.

5. (a) A young person can only be prosecuted in a youth court, separate from any adults.

(b) Any detention of young person before preceding must be separate from any adult.

This contradicts #2.

6. If a youth person is found guilty, the custody
(a) cannot be greater than if an adult is found guilty of same offences and,
(b) must be separate from an adult and,
c) cannot last more than 24 months.

Opposed. If a youth is found guilty of espionage, we will not hesitate to sentence them the same as an adult, due to the willfulness and knowledge necessary to pull it off. That means a minimum of ten years in prison, with the possibility the person may be executed for the crime. We don't go out of our way to make imperial secrets difficult to get just to toss someone in prison for a measely 24 months when they do get them.

7. The name of a young person accused of any offence and the name of his family members must remain confidential at all time even if the young person is found guilty.

Opposed. Reasons are pretty muchs stated already. We're not going to keep quiet on some items.

8. All records of offence must be destroyed when a young person becomes an adult and all custody has been served.

Should our opposition to this one be a surprise?

Diplomat Xen Felgras

Opposed. What about those who would normally reach puberty far sooner or far later? We honestly cannot support a resolution that limits itself only to humans when we've seen signs that humans are far from the only species out there.

Puberty has nothing to do in this resolution. This resolution doesn't talk about sex. It talks about criminal procecussion of a "young person"

This contradicts #2.

How? Resolution #2 talks about a child (person under 12 years old). #3 and onward talks about "young person" (person over 12 years old but less than the age of majority)


Other than that, you can certainly have your opinion on this resolution.

MapleLeafss;14060817']Puberty has nothing to do in this resolution. This resolution doesn't talk about sex. It talks about criminal procecussion of a "young person"

Puberty itself is important, since some species could, conceivably, end up living their entire lives in 10-12 years. If such a nation exists within the WA, you create a case where the citizens of that nation are immune to being prosecuted for crimes. And, we note that the age you chose is the technical start, on average, of puberty for humans. We fail to see how puberty can be ruled out when it so clearly is linked to the age choice.

How? Resolution #2 talks about a child (person under 12 years old). #3 and onward talks about "young person" (person over 12 years old but less than the age of majority)

Ah. Objection on that part withdrawn, but not on the others.

The presumptions this resolution makes about the membership of this organisation are laughably ill informed. The presumptions conceive of a w.a. where every nation's offspring have the same period of developement, where a "crown" may send a "registered letter" to its citizens and where it would be acceptable to try children it considers below the age of majority yet older than the age of 12 years old as adults.

None of those things is anywhere near universally true.

This resolution is poorly written and poorly conceived.

Urgench and doubtless many other member states would find almost every aspect of this resolution completely impossible for practical reasons to implement.

Urgench has no "crown" which may send letters to its citizens, our postal system does not have a "registered" letter which the Imperial Advocates Office could use to inform parents of its intentions and most importantly our people having a significantly longer life than our 21st century ancestors would barely have finished becoming physically adult by their late twenties. Would we be expected to try everyone between the ages of 12 and 30 as and adult?

Now we do not point these things out because we are claiming the need for legislation to be adapted purely for the eccentricities of Urgench but primarily because there are hundreds perhaps thousands of nations where this ridiculous resolution could not apply.

The authors should put more thought and more research into their legislative efforts.

yours e.t.c. ,

MapleLeafss;14060787']1. Definition

“Adult” means a person who has reached the age of majority;

“Child” means a person under 12 years old;

“Offence” means a criminal or penal offence defined by each WA nation;

“Proceeding” means a criminal or penal trial held under this resolution;

“Young person” means a person who has reached 12 years old but is less than the age of majority;.

I have no issue with the definition of Adult, Offense, and Proceeding.

I do take issue with Child and Young Person. According to this resolution and our nation's ages, we have no Young Person. Only Child and Adult. Our age of majority for what this resolution is doing, is 12. Another nation, 12 might be an elderly person. That's why ages are so hard to pin down.

I would agree that this topic should be legislated on to protect children from being tried as an adult.

No, Young person would be tried in a youth justice court or equivalent separate from any adult. I agree that I should define it better. Also note that the punishment is greatly less than any adult for the same offence, maximum 2 years. Also their name is protected from publication. And all the record of offence must be eliminated when they reached the age of majority so each young person can have a fresh start in life.

I didn't think about different lifespan of different nation. 12 y.o. was based on my nation only but I will change the definition of a child.

MapleLeafss;14061335']No, Young person would be tried in a youth justice court or equivalent separate from any adult. I agree that I should define it better. Also note that the punishment is greatly less than any adult for the same offence, maximum 2 years. Also their name is protected from publication. And all the record of offence must be eliminated when they reached the age of majority so each young person can have a fresh start in life.

I didn't think about different lifespan of different nation. 12 y.o. was based on my nation only but I will change the definition of a child.



Very well perhaps the respected Ambassador may make progress on this bill, but we and many others will reserve the right to have our courts decide on sentencing for themselves, this right being central to the integrity of a national justice system, perhaps a " urges nations to be lenient in sentencing those under the age of majority " clause might remedy this.


yours e.t.c. ,

MapleLeafss;14060787']1. Definition

“Adult” means a person who has reached the age of majority;

“Child” means a person under 12 years old;

“Offence” means a criminal or penal offence defined by each WA nation;

“Proceeding” means a criminal or penal trial held under this resolution;

“Young person” means a person who has reached 12 years old but is less than the age of majority;.
You've read and understood none of the discussion about ages of majority in the last couple of months, have you?

2. No proceeding must be commenced against a person for an offence, which the person was alleged to have committed when the person was a child.
The comma's spurious. Apart from that, I have to disagree. Normally parents or guardians are held responsible for the actions of their child in Gobbannium, but technically the proceedings are against the child. In practice, some of the proceedings are against the child too, especially when they don't have parents or guardians.

3. (a) This resolution shall only apply if a young person is alleged to have committed an offence.
Well, duh.


(b) This resolution applies even if the young person becomes an adult before or after proceeding has been commenced or during the time the young person is on sentence.
Fair enough.

4. If a young person is charged with an offence, the crown must provide to the parent of the young person, by registered mail, notice indicating the charge, date and location of proceeding, and the place of detention if the young person is detained.
The crown? A nation might not have a crown if they've managed to misplace their royalty. They aren't even always the prosecuting authority either; I'm sure some corporate-minded nation somewhere has farmed the job out.

The parent? What if the young person has no parents living? And what is this "registered mail" of which you speak?

5. (a) A young person can only be prosecuted in a youth court, separate from any adults.
This is lousy phrasing, but (modulo the definition of "young person") I don't have much of a problem with the concept. The way it's phrased, the judge and everyone else also has to be a YP, which I doubt was what you meant.


(b) Any detention of young person before preceding must be separate from any adult.
Again, clumsy phrasing, and "before preceding" is just plain wrong, but the basic principle is sound. Not that we do the whole detention thing, but I take the point.

6. If a youth person is found guilty, the custody
Young person.

(a) cannot be greater than if an adult is found guilty of same offences and,
I'd rather turn this round and say that the penalties under law can't discriminate unfairly on the basis of the person's youth. Custody isn't the only possible sentence, and at the moment Gobbannium can cheerfully ignore the whole clause because -- all together now -- we don't do the whole detention thing.

(b) must be separate from an adult and,
Again, clumsy phrasing means this doesn't have the effect you're after.

c) cannot last more than 24 months.
No.

7. The name of a young person accused of any offence and the name of his family members must remain confidential at all time even if the young person is found guilty.
While this ought to be the normal case, I'd rather give courts the discretion to lift confidentiality if they think it's justified.

8. All records of offence must be destroyed when a young person becomes an adult and all custody has been served.
No. Sealed perhaps, but never destroyed.

All in all, I'd rather not be dealing with this just yet. We haven't got our approach to adult trial and sentencing right yet, and something like this is only going to make that job harder.

Fair enough about the definition of "young person" and all issues of age.

This resolution's goal is to outlaw criminal charges against very young "child", while young person "adolescent" will be held responsible for their action, but at reduced capacity than an adult. Therefore I disagree with your objection to article 2.

My poor phrasing in article 4,5,6 are noted.

I will add to youth detention centre for young person that will be help in detention so that young detention centre is not like normal prison for adult but more a reeducation centre more focused on behaviour change, education, life training, with plainty of other services for young person (I'm open to suggestions). I also agree that detention should be a last resort and make amendment to my draft.

Article 7 and 8? Maybe make some exception on very violent & repeat crimes???

MapleLeafss;14062954']This resolution's goal is to outlaw criminal charges against very young "child", while young person "adolescent" will be held responsible for their action, but at reduced capacity than an adult. Therefore I disagree with your objection to article 2.
Good luck with that, since I think it's your definition of "child" that is fundamentally unworkable.

If you were to rephase your approach to go for leniency for young people, which you don't do except for the irresponsible 24 months thing, you might have my support. Maybe.

MapleLeafss;14062954']I will add to youth detention centre for young person that will be help in detention so that young detention centre is not like normal prison for adult but more a reeducation centre more focused on behaviour change, education, life training, with plainty of other services for young person (I'm open to suggestions). I also agree that detention should be a last resort and make amendment to my draft.
Which part of "We don't do the whole detention thing" was unclear? Because we don't. At all. If you write anything into your proposal which makes an assumption about the way a nation's punishment system works, you will be wrong somewhere.

MapleLeafss;14062954']Article 7 and 8? Maybe make some exception on very violent & repeat crimes???
That would be a hostage to fortune and then some. Leave it up to the courts, which should have been defined to be fair and impartial in another resolution if that wasn't a total cock-up. See what I mean about not wanting to deal with this right now?

This still addresses nothing about the issue of children committing high crimes, such as treason and murder.

Which part of "We don't do the whole detention thing" was unclear? Because we don't. At all. If you write anything into your proposal which makes an assumption about the way a nation's punishment system works, you will be wrong somewhere.

Might I add that a detention centre will be optional for each WA nation. Will that satisfy your nation?

This still addresses nothing about the issue of children committing high crimes, such as treason and murder.

Children commiting high crimes will not be held responsible for their action. Young person commiting high crime will be held responsible but at much reduced capacity than an adult.

MapleLeafss;14063011']Children commiting high crimes will not be held responsible for their action. Young person commiting high crime will be held responsible but at much reduced capacity than an adult.

So a 10 year old could, in your nation, walk up and shoot your nation's leader in the head, release a biologically engineered airborn supervirus, and then spout off every government and military secret on live international television and not get punished under law for it? Nevermind how much obvious planning and intelligence the child would have to show to pull it off?

Just because they are children doesn't always mean they are not knowledgeable of what they are doing and the consequences it has.

MapleLeafss;14063011']Might I add that a detention centre will be optional for each WA nation. Will that satisfy your nation?

In the sense that it wouldn't be nonsense, probably. It would make talking about detention centres at all a bit pointless though, wouldn't it?

Think more generically. There are sentences other than detention, and you won't be able to list them all. Stop trying to get so specific and cover the nature of what must be done, not the detail.

We would have a substantial objection to the redefinition of childhood into two seperate stages, child and adolescent. We are sure we are not alone in this but we do not think of childhood as having two functional stages across the board for all persons, adolescence in this case is an abitrary stage who's effect is to force all children to be viewed as semi-adults by the law, this is not how our system treats its young people.

We assess our children on an individual basis to discover their actual level of cognizance of their world and there ability to have understood their actions, but any person under the age of majority is functionaly presumed to be a child untill it can be proved otherwise.

yours e.t.c. ,

We would have a substantial redefinition of childhood into two seperate stages, child and adolescent. We are sure we are not alone in this but we do not think of childhood as having two functional stages across the board for all persons, adolescence in this case is an abitrary stage who's effect is to force all children to be viewed as semi-adults by the law, this is not how our system treats its young people.

We assess our children on an individual basis to discover their actual level of cognizance of their world and there ability to have understood their actions, but any person under the age of majority is functionaly presumed to be a child untill it can be proved otherwise.

yours e.t.c. ,

We feel that not distinguishing between a very young child who can barely speak and walk; and an 'adolescent' who's on verge to go to college or university and can already operate a motor vehicle and work part time in my nation is flawed. It may not have mattered in "Child Protection Act", but not on my resolution where it's question of responsibility and crime. My resolution seek to differentiate those two groups in regard to my resolution only.

And what if these two groups do not exist in every nation of the w.a. Ambassador?

Or what if a nation wishes to be intelligent in how it applies the law and realises that different people develope adult characteristics and wisdom at different rates and therefore decides to evaluate each individual below the age of majority ( and above it for that matter ) brought before its courts to see if they could have been expected to have understood their actions?

What then Ambassador? Should your nation's rather generalised and frankly primitive ideas be forced on these nations?

yours e.t.c. ,