[GA] At Vote: Noninterference in Elections [Complete]

Separatist Peoples

Separatist Peoples

TNPer
I know, I know, I'm a terrible, horrible, no-good, very bad Minister for forgetting that there was a GA resolution at vote! Thou may slayeth me with stones, regardless of the standing of thine sins!

GENERAL ASSEMBLY RESOLUTION AT VOTE

Non-interference in Elections

A resolution to increase democratic freedoms.


Category: Furtherment of Democracy

Strength: Mild

Proposed by: Bananaistan

Description: The General Assembly

Acknowledging the great strides made by this body and individual member states in furthering democracy,

Noting that it is not within the power of this body to extend the right to vote to citizens of all member states,

However concerned that any further WA legislation regarding elections will discourage further democratisation,

Also noting the indivisible right of sovereign nations to choose their own form of government,

And wishing to establish a method by which international election monitors can review and report upon a member state’s elections to further encourage dialogue and commerce between member states,

Hereby

1) Mandates that no member state may directly interfere with another member state’s elections unless requested by the subject member state,

2) Expands the role of the Organization for Electoral Assistance to:

(a) Establish a methodology on certification of elections and electoral systems based upon how free, fair, transparent and regular the elections and electoral systems are,

(b) Upon the request of the government of a member state, to monitor that member state’s election(s) and electoral process, and to certify the election(s) and electoral system pursuant to the criteria above,

3) Reserves to individual member states, within the requirements of existing international law, the power to create, implement, amend and repeal electoral laws, rules, regulations and guidelines regarding elections held within member states.
Click to expand...

For, Against, or Abstain. Obvious variations therein are acceptable.
 
Ministry Determination
Vote Recommendation: FOR

The obvious con to this resolution is that it is, essentially, a blocker. This I find to be very nearly always a negative in a resolution, and tends to significantly restrict the ability of authors and new players alike to pilot themselves through the already murky waters of the General Assembly.

The benefits of this, however, vastly outweigh the cons. While the goals of fairness and equality in elections are excellent goals, it is a reasonable conclusion to make that the more complex the requirements for democratization, the more likely nations new to the process will find themselves discouraged or even in violation of WA law while trying to democratize. This resolution ensures that no additional requirements are placed upon those nations attempting to democratize, allowing a smoother transition.

In addition, it serves to make the point that non-democratic members should have no say over the internal democracies of other nations, and that allowing dictatorships and monarchies to make determinations for democratic elections when they themselves are not affected by such measures is inherently unfair.

In light of these reasons and the presence of several anti-discrimination laws that have passed that cover nearly all blatant abuses that might arise from such a blocker, it is the Ministry's determination that it is in the best interests of The North Pacific and her citizens to vote FOR this proposal.
 
Tally: 2 for, 3 against. I'll change my vote to against shortly.

I'm sure that we have more than 5 WAs in the region, though. So please keep votes coming in.
 
Separatist Peoples:
Might I ask the Against voters why the voted so? Lord Lore explained their vote, but I don't see why the others voted so.
Click to expand...
For me, I see it as an intrusion of nation gameplay and the WA showing its greater support for democracy. Even though yes democracy is all that better, some people like to be dictators simply because its fun or they just don't like democracy. I don't think the WA should show favoritism in such matters.
 
Andrew:
For me, I see it as an intrusion of nation gameplay and the WA showing its greater support for democracy. Even though yes democracy is all that better, some people like to be dictators simply because its fun or they just don't like democracy. I don't think the WA should show favoritism in such matters.
Click to expand...
I don't see it as showing favorites for democracy, I see it as a method of protecting the democratic process for those member states that are already democracies.
 
Darcania:
Andrew:
For me, I see it as an intrusion of nation gameplay and the WA showing its greater support for democracy. Even though yes democracy is all that better, some people like to be dictators simply because its fun or they just don't like democracy. I don't think the WA should show favoritism in such matters.
Click to expand...
I don't see it as showing favorites for democracy, I see it as a method of protecting the democratic process for those member states that are already democracies.
Click to expand...
But that in in of itself is a sponsorship of democracy. There is no protection for say a democracy to say funnel money into a monarchy or oligarchy or etc for similar purposes of changing their state policies and etc. If you protect democracies from Oligarchies, Monarchies, Dictatorships and the like then you must protect them from each other and protect them from democracies.
 
Lord Lore:
Darcania:
Andrew:
For me, I see it as an intrusion of nation gameplay and the WA showing its greater support for democracy. Even though yes democracy is all that better, some people like to be dictators simply because its fun or they just don't like democracy. I don't think the WA should show favoritism in such matters.
Click to expand...
I don't see it as showing favorites for democracy, I see it as a method of protecting the democratic process for those member states that are already democracies.
Click to expand...
But that in in of itself is a sponsorship of democracy. There is no protection for say a democracy to say funnel money into a monarchy or oligarchy or etc for similar purposes of changing their state policies and etc. If you protect democracies from Oligarchies, Monarchies, Dictatorships and the like then you must protect them from each other and protect them from democracies.
Click to expand...
This
 
Fair considerations. I suppose it's inevitable that the democratic WA would favor democracies, but I understand your concerns. I'll pass them along to the author, unless you'd prefer I not, so they can reconsider their proposal for the future.
 
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