NationStates Jolt Archive

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=7053478&postcount=46

This is the basis on which The Law of the Sea was declared illegal. I've always wanted to repeal it; I now intend to try. Can I confirm that it is illegal? I obviously respect the right of Cogitation and the moderation staff in general to review decisions, and although I can't see why it would change in this matter, wouldn't want to have a proposal deleted for 'false claims', which now seems to be an offence.

That fact that it made it into queue and was voted into law made it 'legal'. The illegality of the proposal only truly applied to the precedent it set for future resolutions. As Cog stated, we'd have deleted it if we had spotted it in time, but that's irrelevant now. If you want to use that as the crux of your repeal, I'd seek some meatier reasons. There are plenty to choose from.

(This resolution was the only one to ever drive the Frisbeeterian nation to RP war (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=361434) {reasons why are here (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=359922)}. As the RP was never resolved, Frisbeeteria is still technically in a state of war with Sophista, and aspects of the Law of the Sea remain non-binding in both our nations. We'd be delighted to end the war at the successful conclusion of the repeal.)

Well, to take it out of the abstract, http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=461402

I agree there's plenty else to attack, though.

EDIT: I suppose what I'm asking for 'clearance' on is

NOTING that The Law of the Sea has been declared illegal,

AWARE that illegal resolutions can no longer be removed without a repeal,

CONVINCED that it should be a priority of the UN to remove illegal legislation, as the status of such resolutions is extremely confusing, and their continued presence as law damaging,

(And I assume you know Sophista's back in town.)

NOTING that The Law of the Sea has been declared illegal,

AWARE that illegal resolutions can no longer be removed without a repeal,
Nope. That's metagaming.

Moderation rulings have the same force as game rules from the FAQ. While they control what you are *allowed* to post, they are not part of UN law. Since "The Law of the Sea" is in fact a Passed Resolution, it is 'by defintion' not illegal in the UN.

You'd be equally wrong if your resolution stated "it's OK because Frisbeeteria said it was legal". Keep the rules out of the proposals.


(And I assume you know Sophista's back in town.)
Always happy to hear than a retired player has returned to the game. Yay!

Right. Thanks.

So as to avoid creating lots of threads, I'll tag my second question on legality to this thread.

1. REPEALS "The Law of the Sea";

2. DIRECTS the General Assembly to ensure speedy replacement of certain admittedly important aspects of "The Law of the Sea" concerning the sovereignty of territorial waters, and its well-intentioned but ineffectively and dangerously executed attempts to combat piracy.

That second clause isn't too strong, is it? The UN could to my mind still ignore a 'direction', but I do think it's important to stress some of it will need replacing. Nonetheless, I don't want to be seen to be 'making new provisions', which I don't think I am, because I'm only encouraging certain legislation.

"DIRECTS" is a requirement. It mandates that the UN replace Law of the Sea. You want "URGES" or something like that.

URGES it is. Thank you.