[At Vote]: National Control of Elections [Complete]

Pallaith

Pallaith

TNPer
-
-
-
-
Category: Political Stability
Strength: Mild
Proposed by: Bananaistan
Onsite Topic

Description: The General Assembly,

Noting the inviolable right of sovereign nations to choose their own form of government,

Hereby:

1) Reserves to individual member states, limited only by the requirements of international law existing at the time of the implementation of this resolution and subsequently unrepealed, the right to create, implement, amend and/or repeal any and all laws, rules, regulations and/or guidelines regarding elections held within their jurisdiction,

2) Urges member nations which hold elections to ensure that only validly registered electors are granted access to polling stations to vote.
Click to expand...

Please vote for, against, abstain, or present.

[wavote=the_north_pacific,ga]2016_11_07_national_control_of_elections[/wavote]
[wavote=the_north_pacific,ga]2016_11_07_national_control_of_elections[/wavote]
 
The language of this resolution is so poor that it actually subverts its own intent. The first clause is essentially meaningless because it simply reaffirms the right of nations to conduct their own elections as long as they abide by existing international law. The second clause would potentially restrict civil rights in many nations. Although the author uses the word "electors," the clause seems to be talking about voters. Many nations do not require voter registration at all.

For these reasons, the Ministry of World Assembly Affairs recommends a vote against the resolution.
 
Clause 1 has absolutely no bite to it. This is something GA Resolution 2 already gives us. Clause 2, sorry, but I'll decide for my own nation who can be in the polling area, whether that be poll workers, observers, press, whatever...

Against
 
I have received a telegram that looks suspiciously to be a tag:WA by the author. Anyone else get it as well?
 
Against

Seemingly misusing the term "electors" when the author actually means "voters." Clause 2 could be seen as encouraging some form of voter registration, which in many nations would be a restriction of voting rights. Clause 1 is just an absolute mess and is only reaffirming current international law.
 
Europe has voted against the resolution at vote due to its WA campaign. I recall that The North Pacific is a signatory of the WA Accord Against Campaign Spam. To maintain the credibility of the coalition, I recommend (if you would permit me the honour) that the North Pacific vote against the resolution at vote.
 
I'm always in favour of stupid legislation, isn't that why we play this game?

I voted for.
 
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