NationStates Jolt Archive

I have a question regarding where the line is drawn on repeals. When does it become proposing new legislation?

On this forum page: http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=386527&page=7&pp=18, is where the clauses in question were originally discussed.

Specifically Post 98 (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=7868383&postcount=98), 104 (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=7868383&postcount=104), and 106 (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=7868383&postcount=106).

Here's the proposed clause to be added to a "repeal 'legalize prostitution'" proposal.

ACKNOWLEDGES that men and women who practice prostitution, should still be entitled to full and equal protection under domestic and international law regardless of the extent to which prostitution is regulated;

Would this be allowed in a repeal proposal? What are the guidelines for what cannot be combined with a repeal proposal?

In the description of a repeal proposal, you describe the motivation for repealing that proposal. It may be worded as "This resolution does not provide for... ...and should be repealed so that it can be replaced with a better resolution." That is, in a repeal proposal, you may state an intent to propose new legislation, but you may not actually propose new legislation.

In your case, though, the suggested clause has more to deal with fair treatment under the law than with prostitution per se. Thus, it would be off-topic from the rest of the proposal and would need to be addressed as a separate proposal. I'll have to confer with another Mod on this, but for now, leave it out.

--The Modified Democratic States of Cogitation
NationStates Game Moderator

Specifically Post 98 (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=7868383&postcount=98), 104 (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=7868383&postcount=104), and 106 (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=7868383&postcount=104).


I'm having problems with those links. They all seem to point to the same post and I am guessing there is other info in the other two posts worth reviewing here.

(I'd also like to disclose to the moderators reading my post, that I'm one of the ones here advocating that this is OK, on the grounds that it isn't adding a right that doesn't already exist under other UN resolutions, specifically under article 4 of the "The Universal Bill of Rights", Resolution #26, adopted on Aug 8, 2003. But this is of course just my opinion.)

The point of the statement is to explain that this resolution will still leave existing civil rights intact, and that is an argument in favour of the repeal, because players have already suggested that this repeal will result in prostitutions no longer getting equality protection under the law.