unibot
TNPer
Ban on Ex Post Facto Laws
A resolution to improve worldwide human and civil rights.
Category: Human Rights
Strength: Significant
Proposed by: Hiriaurtung Arororugul
Description: Believing that ex post facto laws are violations of both the rule of law and the right of persons to fair treatment by the criminal justice system;
Asserting that one should not be penalised for doing something that is not prohibited by law;
Further, asserting that there can be no crime committed, and punishment must not be meted out, without a violation of the law as it existed at the time;
The World Assembly hereby:
Defines, for the purposes of this resolution, an ex post facto law as a criminal or penal law that retroactively changes the legal consequences of acts or the legal status of facts and relationships that existed prior to the enactment of the law. This includes laws that criminalize acts which were legal when committed and laws which retroactively increase sentences for crimes already committed;
Declares that:
(I) No person may be charged with or convicted of a criminal offence because of any act or omission unless, at the time of the act or omission, it constituted a criminal offence under the law of the jurisdiction in which the charge is brought or under international law.
(II) No nation or governmental subdivision thereof shall enact any criminal or penal law with ex post facto provisions that criminalize an act or omission, or that increase sentencing or punishment. Any such ex post facto provisions in existing criminal laws shall be rendered null and void.
(III) Any persons under sentence as a result of ex post facto laws shall have their sentence for any ex post facto offences nullified and their criminal record expunged of these ex post facto offenses.
Votes For: 1,799
Votes Against: 807
This is a re-working of an older UN resolution, "No Ex Post Facto Ban"
The current WA resolution can be found here.
Most of the intelligent debate is circling around the potential vagueness (it has been clarified in later drafts) of the resolution, as a synopsis the author declared...
Our intent is to ban laws which retroactively criminalize acts or retroactively increase punishments. We don't want to ban laws which would retroactively legalize something or retroactively decrease a sentence.
Additionally, ambassadors have claimed that the last clause is rendered null and void because it is a Ex Post Facto law.
The author defended their legislation by saying...
These criminals you speak of were convicted and imprisoned under an ex post facto law. They were punished for acts which were not crimes at the time those acts were committed. Pardon me for saying this, but I'm not surprised that the prisons of New Buckner would contain such persons. Once this passes they will be released and I honestly would not blame them if they seek retribution against what is obviously a lawless and corrupt regime. However, it is within your government's power to prevent them from seeking such retribution. It is not my problem, nor is it the World Assembly's problem if you neglect to do so.
I personally highly support this legislation, as I would hate to be charged for hanging around naked outside of a aquarium and get charged for it because the government later made it a law in response to me.
It is not an issue of national sovereignty as member nations have time and time again proven incapable of seeing the injustice in Ex Post Facto laws.
I also noticed that our current delegate has voted AGAINST prematurely.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/5444d/5444d2c855b3b1eeb61fc5fa8b35303612e41c9e" alt="Cry :cry: :cry:"