NationStates Jolt Archive

After having posted different proposals, I want to hear from you first what you think of this proposal before submitting it to a vote. I've used some of the existing UN rules, but modified them to comply with the rules of the WA. So if you have any suggestions regarding this proposal, please react.

Thx a lot.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

The World Assembly Court of Justice

Preamble
The World Assembly Court of Justice acts as a world court. The Court has a dual jurisdiction : it decides, in accordance with international law, the resolutions and the rules of NationStates, disputes of a legal nature that are submitted to it by States, who are a member of the World Assembly (jurisdiction in contentious cases); and it gives advisory opinions on legal questions at the request of the organs of the World Assembly or specialized agencies authorized to make such a request (advisory jurisdiction).
In the exercise of its jurisdiction in contentious cases, the World Assembly Court of Justice has to decide, in accordance with international law, the resolutions and the rules of NationStates, disputes of a legal nature that are submitted to it by States. An international legal dispute can be defined as a disagreement on a question of law or fact, a conflict, a clash of legal views or of interests.
Only States, who are a member of the World Assembly may apply to and appear before the World Assembly Court of Justice. International organizations, other collectivities and private persons are not entitled to institute proceedings before the Court.


Article 1
The World Assembly Court of Justice shall be the principal judicial organ of the World Assembly.
Article 2
1. All Members of the World Assembly are ipso facto parties to the Word Assembly Court of Justice.
2. A state which is not a member of the World Assembly cannot become a party to the World Assembly Court of Justice.
Article 3
1. Each Member of the World Assembly undertakes to comply with the decision of the World Assembly Court of Justice in any case to which it is a party.
2. If any party to a case fails to perform the obligations incumbent upon it under a judgment rendered by the Court, the other party may have recourse to the World Assembly, which may, if it deems necessary, make recommendations or decide upon measures to be taken to give to the judgment.
Article 4
Nothing in the present Resolution shall prevent Members of the World Assembly from entrusting the solution of their differences to other tribunals by virtue of agreements already in existence or which may be concluded in the future, this as a result of their National Sovereignty.
Article 5
1. The World Assembly may request the World Assembly Court of Justice to give an advisory opinion on any legal question.
2. Other organs of the World Assembly and specialized agencies, which may at any time be so authorized by the World Assembly, may also request advisory opinions of the Court on legal questions arising within the scope of their activities.
3. Contrary to judgments, and except in rare cases where it is stipulated beforehand that they shall have binding effect the Court's advisory opinions have no binding effect. The requesting organ, agency or organization remains free to decide, by any means open to it, what effect to give to these opinions.
4. Although without binding effect, the advisory opinions of the Court nevertheless carry great legal weight and moral authority. They are often an instrument of preventive diplomacy and have peace-keeping virtues. Advisory opinions also, in their way, contribute to the elucidation and development of international law and thereby to the strengthening of peaceful relations between States.

The Empirial Borders member of the region “Union of Free NationStates”

Article 3
1. Each Member of the World Assembly undertakes to comply with the decision of the World Assembly Court of Justice in any case to which it is a party.
2. If any party to a case fails to perform the obligations incumbent upon it under a judgment rendered by the Court, the other party may have recourse to the World Assembly, which may, if it deems necessary, make recommendations or decide upon measures to be taken to give to the judgment.MetaGaming. The WA has no real function besides voting resolutions into law.

Article 4
Nothing in the present Resolution shall prevent Members of the World Assembly from entrusting the solution of their differences to other tribunals by virtue of agreements already in existence or which may be concluded in the future, this as a result of their National Sovereignty.A few points on this: 1) International agreements have nothing to do with national sovereignty; 2) the WA is under no obligation to respect national sovereignty in the first place; and 3) the WA can essentially override or cancel out any international agreement it pleases. For example, any agreement a member state might have had with another nation or entity to transfer terror suspects for purposes of torturing them? Now illegal (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=13835796&postcount=11).

Finally, this is like the third thread you've created on this topic. I know the mods are especially particular about serial thread-making in this forum, so in the future, please stick to the same thread.

Art. 3 .2 will be removed also the sentence "this as a result of their National Sovereignty".

Finally, this is like the third thread you've created on this topic. I know the mods are especially particular about serial thread-making in this forum, so in the future, please stick to the same thread.

How am I the stick to the same thread if it has been removed?

W

It hasn't. All threads are invisible after 24 hours, but you can find them via the search engine.

EDIT: http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=574433
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=574383

It hasn't. All threads are invisible after 24 hours, but you can find them via the search engine.

EDIT: http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=574433
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=574383
They're both locked though.

Oh I see, well i keep that in mind next time. As I said, it's my first time. So if those threads are locked, I can't add something to it can I?

So if those threads are locked, I can't add something to it can I?
No, you can't post in them once they are locked. Just keep using this thread for all future revisions.

You've taken on a fairly difficult subject here and this proposal still needs a lot of work. As it is, the preamble reads like an encyclopedia article and as OMGTKK pointed out, you've got some metagaming and other problems in there. Mainly it's still just way too similar to the original ICJ documents. It's OK to borrow from RL laws and treaties, but copy/pasting won't work. They have to be altered significantly and adapted to nationstates. I'll try to post some suggestions later today. The main thing is to be patient. This type of proposal will take a lot of work and probably many revisions.

They're both locked though.Sorry, it was 8 in the morning here when I posted that.

Never thought it would be that difficult haha, but I can be verry patient. So this is just a start, if we could work together I believe something good can come out of this.

Article 2
1. All Members of the World Assembly are ipso facto parties to the Word Assembly Court of Justice.
The "Word Assembly Court of Justice," huh? Word. :-)

The Kennyites have already brought up the problems with referral back to the WA and appeals to NatSov, so...
The Empirial Borders member of the region “Union of Free NationStates”

If this line appears in your proposal, it will get deleted for branding.

I hate to be a wet blanket, but does this do anything other than create the WACJ? This has the vague feel of just setting up a committee (the Court) without any accompanying law, which makes fitting it into a category a tad problematic. (Note: I am not a mod, nor do I play one on TV. This is hovering around one of the fuzzier lines in the rules, though, and when you've got this more thoroughly worked out you might want to get a mod's opinion on it before submitting it.)

Never thought it would be that difficult haha, but I can be verry patient. So this is just a start, if we could work together I believe something good can come out of this.
Well first, what do you want this court to do? What sort of cases do you see coming before it? Keep in mind that many of the functions of a World Court are performed in NationStates by the Moderators. You can't really codify moderator actions without meta-gaming. You also can't have it do things which would alter the way the game works. That's a game-mechanics violation. You can't have the court rule on the legality of WA Resolutions, or do much of anything involving Resolutions.

Basically what you're doing here is setting up a committee. Now you have to think of something for the committee to do. What sort of cases should be within its jurisdiction?.

You also might want to look over a couple of threads dealing with attempts to draft and pass a World Court resolution back in the old UN.

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=404175

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=389083

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=453488

There were a dozen or so others, none of which got anywhere. This is one of the most difficult subjects to try writing a resolution on. Probably why the NSUN never had a world court.

Wow, I read al those drafts and I must say, it seems crazy work. So, I'm not going to bother myself with this and I'm making another proposal about a different subject.

Thx for your advice!

Greetz