AT VOTE: Repeal "Nautical Pilotage Act" [Complete] [Complete]

Eluvatar

Eluvatar

TNPer
-
-
Pronouns
he/him/his
TNP Nation
Zemnaya Svoboda
Discord
Eluvatar#8517
Category: Repeal
Resolution: GA#104
Proposed by: Moronist Decisions

Repeal "Nautical Pilotage Act":
Description: WA General Assembly Resolution #104: Nautical Pilotage Act (Category: International Security; Strength: Mild) shall be struck out and rendered null and void.

Argument: The World Assembly,

RECOGNIZES the importance of ensuring the safety of travelers at sea.

BELIEVES that the term “pilotage”, which is left undefined in this resolution, is best defined as “the act of navigating a ship”.

ACKNOWLEDGES that effective pilotage is important for travelers due to the presence of underwater hazards which may cause ships to run aground or capsize.

NOTES that while oversight zones, defined as the sum total of “international waters that are known to be traveled annually by at least a small, but steady subsection of the traveling population”, are required to be “equipped with proper buoyage, lighthouse or mark systems as defined by the World Assembly”, no agency or member nation is held responsible for creating these navigational markers.

QUESTIONS the ability of member nation authorities to sufficiently protect pilotage “from harm, vandalism or theft” in international waters, as WA member nations lack jurisdiction over vessels originating from non-member nations.

POINTS OUT that, since authorities and citizens of member nations “do not have the right or duty to pilotage an area that is within an Oversight-Zone”, voyagers from member nations will, in international waters designated as "Oversight Zones", either have to engage unregulated pilots from non-member nations or alternatively sail without any form of pilotage whatsoever, thus paradoxically increasing the perils of sailing in oversight zones.

REPEALS GA Resolution #104.

Co-authored by Mousebumples
Click to expand...
 
Moronist Decisions:
To President Minister Kerenskij of The Respublika of Zemnaya Svoboda, Delegate of The North Pacific,

Firstly, congratulations on your new delegateship! Hope all goes well for you, Eluvatar.

Secondly, we have a matter of international law that we'd like to request your help with.

While the Nautical Pilotage Act appeared to help protect pilotage in international waters, due to a number of textual problems we note that it, as a matter of fact, prevents good practice in pilotage. We have therefore proposed a repeal proposal for this resolution, and are now seeking your approval for this proposal. A number of problems are detailed in the repeal text. Some of these problems include:

- As written, the text forbids member nations or their citizens from using pilots within so-called “oversight zones” in international waters. This means that, in those international areas most likely to be traversed, ironically, all shipping will have to either engage pilots from non-member nations or do without.
- While the maintenance of navigational markers in oversight zones is provided for, the creation of new navigational markers is not.

A forum thread for this proposal can be found here: viewtopic.php?f=9&t=182713.

We would like to seek your approval for this proposal. If you have any questions, please don’t hesitate to contact me.

Thank you for your attention,

Dr. Johannes Frick
Vice-Minister of Foreign Affairs
Representative to the General Assembly
Click to expand...
 
Grosseschnauzer:
Are they circulating a replacement? Or is this another example of the "find any excuse to repeal everything" disease?
Click to expand...
The latter and the excuses are dumb. It's another "Co-authored by Mousebumples" one. *rolls his eyes*

Like one the problems with their argument is they wanted the resolution to micromanage and tell the WA which department to do a certain request as opposed to letting the gnomes figure that out. If the resolution had micromanaged it would have been grounds for repeal too.
 
Eluvatar:
What do you say to the whole "bans WA pilotage in oversight zones" argument?
Click to expand...
Rereading the text myself it is clear that the original resolution prohibits requiring ships to be piloted by your pilots if they enter particular waters, if these waters are international. The text is not in plain english of course, allowing for this not entirely honest argument.
 
With at least two votes against lodged, I suppose I shall be voting against. That said, I see that the region's WAs as a whole are voting overwhelmingly in favor of repeal:
nationstates:
Amongst The North Pacific residents, voting is currently 153-40 (79% For).
Click to expand...

It's a shame I failed to get an information for voters out, as we could have heard rather more from the region, and possibly our region would have been better informed.

I'm sorry I failed to vote early on this resolution, which would have possibly been rather more effective at advancing the community's view.
 
Voting on this resolution has ended.

Thanks to those nations who cast their votes. Your participation is a great help to the region.

This topic has been locked and sent to the Archives for safekeeping. If you would like this topic to be re-opened for further discussion, please contact the WA Delegate, a Global Moderator, or an Administrator for assistance. Thank you.
 
Voting on this resolution has ended.

Thanks to those nations who cast their votes. Your participation is a great help to the region.

This topic has been locked and sent to the Archives for safekeeping. If you would like this topic to be re-opened for further discussion, please contact the WA Delegate, a Global Moderator, or an Administrator for assistance. Thank you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top