NationStates Jolt Archive

My proposal still needs 14 votes (last time i checked) so please if you agree then approve it! If you don't agree please, give me info and feedback! Voting started early in the morning Thursday (or maybe REALLY late on Wed) the proposal had 22 votes by the end of thursday. Thats a little more than 1/3 of whats needed and we still have Friday Saturday and Sunday
-----------------------------------------------------------
My proposal is to repeal WA resolution #9 "Prevention of Torture" (which I won't quote here but you should read to understand my proposal) here is my Argument:

"Agreeing that torture is morally wrong,
Further agreeing that torture should be outlawed,
Recognizing this law has good intentions but,
The failure to define the phrases: “pain” “severe discomfort” and “suffering” may enable prisoners to demand unrealistically fabulous lives. For instance, a prisoner could claim that his captors were inflicting “severe discomfort” to “extract information” from him by not giving him a daily foot massage. Also a prisoner could claim that in his captors are making him “suffer” by not letting him eat from a five star restaurant every night as a means of “personally punishing” him. Finally a prisoner could charge that his captors are “inflicting pain” upon him by forcing him to sleep on a spring mattress instead of a water bed. Prisons cannot afford for claims like these to force them to give these prisoners extravagant lives. Also if prisoners get to live like this everyone would want to go to prison. "

You have made far too many mistakes honoured Ambassador to hope for any success with this repeal. Firstly it did not go through any consultative phase here at the w.a. before it was submitted. Secondly you did not canvass any support amongst other nations to see if your repeal would be popular. Thirdly you wrote a very poor repeal which makes no cogent arguments for its attempt to divest billions of people of protection against the horrors of torture...


Frankly the list of problems is ever growing, it would bore us and doubtless you too, respected Ambassador, if we elucidated them all so we will truncate the list of mistakes for now, we are sure you get the picture.

Yours e.t.c. ,

Better luck next time, honored ambassador!

Here are indeed problems with this repeal. Let me point out just one of them. This article is in the resolution you would like to repeal:

11. If there is an accusation or probable cause exists to believe that an act of torture has been committed, the competent authorities will proceed properly and immediately to conduct an investigation into the case, and to initiate the corresponding criminal process.

There is no reason to suspect that the competent authorities of a nation will find the spurious claims of these "torture victims" to have any merit at all. They will shoot down any such silly claims. Problem solved.

good point Harmonious Treefolk

Not bad, but I would approve a well laid out proposal. I would agree that prisoners might be demanding fabulous lives over victims, but I don't think the resolution intended to create this effect.

Thank You Ryberg, this is the first proposal I have attempted so i still need to learn a bit more about how to lay out a proposal!

"Agreeing that torture is morally wrong,
Further agreeing that torture should be outlawed,
Recognizing this law has good intentions but,
The failure to define the phrases: “pain” “severe discomfort” and “suffering” may enable prisoners to demand unrealistically fabulous lives. For instance, a prisoner could claim that his captors were inflicting “severe discomfort” to “extract information” from him by not giving him a daily foot massage. Also a prisoner could claim that in his captors are making him “suffer” by not letting him eat from a five star restaurant every night as a means of “personally punishing” him. Finally a prisoner could charge that his captors are “inflicting pain” upon him by forcing him to sleep on a spring mattress instead of a water bed. Prisons cannot afford for claims like these to force them to give these prisoners extravagant lives. Also if prisoners get to live like this everyone would want to go to prison. "

You're joking, right?

We won't be supporting any repeals of Prevention of Torture, much less ones with such ridiculous arguments as this.

David Watts
Ambassador
The Dominion of New Leicestershire

Not bad, but I would approve a well laid out proposal. I would agree that prisoners might be demanding fabulous lives over victims, but I don't think the resolution intended to create this effect.
The Resolution doesn't create this effect. You're not seriously suggesting that “pain” “severe discomfort” and “suffering” should have been defined, are you?

David Watts
Ambassador
The Dominion of New Leicestershire

No, but it seems today some member nations may be searching right down into the very veins of resolution to come up with an excuse.