View Full Version: Repeal "For the Detained and Convicted"

Sovereigntist Saloon > Proposal Drafts and Other Dirty Schemes > Repeal "For the Detained and Convicted"


Title: Repeal "For the Detained and Convicted"


Mousebumples - May 4, 2011 03:22 PM (GMT)
QUOTE
REPEAL GA#62 - “For the Detained and Convicted”

THE WORLD ASSEMBLY:

UNDERSTANDS that all individuals who are accused of a crime should be accorded certain rights and protections under international law;

REALIZES that the present resolution on the subject has a number of flaws that make it ineffective, at best, and detrimental to WA member nations and their citizens, at worst;

MOURNS that some of the clauses in the resolution’s text allow for the abuse of these rights under the guise of upholding them;

NOTES that Clause 1a proclaims that all who are detained are “considered the accused until proven guilty,” and makes no attempt to ensure that innocence is presumed of all accused until proven otherwise in a court of law.  As such, an accusation, no matter how spurious, may follow an individual throughout the rest of their life, even if they are not convicted of the crime in question;

QUESTIONS the details of Clause 1c, as “outside and inside threats” are referenced but not given any further elaboration; such a lack of clarity creates a loophole that could be exploited by nations wishing to evade compliance with this clause;

BELIEVES that misconduct, as detailed in Clause 2g(i), should also have the potential to result in the loss of exercise time, which is not allowed under the terms of this resolution;

ACKNOWLEDGES that while some short-comings of this resolution are covered under GA#67, Habeas Corpus, inhabitants of World Assembly member nations would be better protected from the abuses outlined above if this resolution were repealed;

ENCOURAGES the drafting of further proposals on this subject to ensure the protection of all who are accused, charged, and convicted of crimes within WA member nations;

REPEALS GA#62, “For the Detained and Convicted.”


Thoughts? Suggested edits? Et cetera?

Nullarni - May 6, 2011 12:38 PM (GMT)
"ACKNOWLEDGES that while some short-comings of this resolution are covered under GA#67, Habeas Corpus, inhabitants of World Assembly member nations would be better protected from the abuses outlined above if this resolution were repealed;"

I hate to say it, but this section does a wonderful job of undermining the entire proposal. I suggest not to give an arguement against the proposal within the very text of it.

Mousebumples - May 7, 2011 03:38 AM (GMT)
QUOTE (Nullarni @ May 6 2011, 07:38 AM)
"ACKNOWLEDGES that while some short-comings of this resolution are covered under GA#67, Habeas Corpus, inhabitants of World Assembly member nations would be better protected from the abuses outlined above if this resolution were repealed;"

I hate to say it, but this section does a wonderful job of undermining the entire proposal. I suggest not to give an arguement against the proposal within the very text of it.

Yes and no. It depends how most people read it.

I wrote that (and read it personally) as "Since we have Habeas Corpus, why do we need this resolution?" Of course, I suppose others could say, "Since we have Habeas Corpus, what harm is it to keep this resolution on the books?"

I'll take that under consideration, at least. Thanks for the feedback. :D




* Hosted for free by zIFBoards