Diplomatic Protection Act

James Urquhart

James Urquhart

TNPer
This is my first time presenting legislation. Please give me your constructive feedback. I will check back later.




Diplomatic Protections Act

Scope
An Act to detail the protections and procedures related to foreign nationals and other provisions.

Article I

Diplomatic Immunity

(1) No dignitary who is present in The North Pacific to represent a foreign government shall be detained, subpoenaed as a witness, or prosecuted while they are in The North Pacific.

(2) The Delegate or appropriate Minister may extend Diplomatic Immunity to any person in The North Pacific on diplomatic affairs.

Article II

Declaration of Persona Non Grata

(1) Any foreign national may be declared persona non grata by the Delegate or Regional Assembly.

(2) Foreign nationals who have been declared personae non gratae shall be removed from all areas of The North Pacific, have their diplomatic masking revoked, and not be permitted to reenter The North Pacific, excepting those areas needed to redress their status.

(3) Declarations of persona non grata may be rescinded by the body that made the Declaration.

(4) The Court of The North Pacific may review the Declaration upon request by the affected parties.

Article III

Exception for Citizens

(1) Citizens only enjoy diplomatic immunity for actions taken representing the foreign government. Should it be unclear whether an action was taken; then it shall be assumed that the Citizen did not act as such.

(2) Citizens may not be declared persona non grata, however, the Delegate or appropriate Minister may revoke a citizen's diplomatic status through a public declaration.
Click to expand...
 
I have a number of comments, most of them are critical, however, I do think that the principle of this legislation is worth consideration, albeit that I am not sure whether I would support it as yet.

Firstly, the formatting of the proposal suggests a freestanding Act. This is contrary to the commitment which the Assembly has made to maintain all laws (save the Constitution and Bill of Rights) in a single, organised Code. To be in keeping with the scheme of the Legal Code, the proposal would probably need to be formatted into clauses amending aspects of the Code. The first Article (and the first Clause of the third Article) of the proposal would likely fit somewhere within Chapter 1 of the Legal Code (the Criminal Code); either being added after Clause 1, which bars criminal prosecution of resident nations for crimes not in the Criminal Code, or in Section 1.9, which provides exceptions from crimes. The second Article (and the second Clause of the third Article) would probably fit in part in Chapter 7, which provides for the regulation of the executive, and in part in Chapter 6, which deals with some powers of the Regional Assembly.

Secondly, I am somewhat unsure of involving the Assembly independently of the Delegate in dealing with foreign affairs. Foreign Affairs is generally a matter for either the Delegate or the Delegate and the Assembly at present (war being the notable exception), so giving the Assembly a power to determine diplomatic recognition independently of the Delegate seems somewhat out of step with how the wider system is organised.

Thirdly, some provisions make reference to concepts which do not truly exist in TNP. What does it mean to be "detained" in the context of an online game where a nation can leave the region at any time and can simply cease visiting this forum? Compelled testimony as a witness is something which has not been provided for by law and which the Court has, as yet, not recognised.

EDIT:
Mr. Speaker and Deputies, I motion to vote.
Click to expand...
The proposal has barely been on the floor for two hours; this motion to vote is premature and I suggest you withdraw it.
 
Zyvetskistaahn:
I have a number of comments, most of them are critical, however, I do think that the principle of this legislation is worth consideration, albeit that I am not sure whether I would support it as yet.

Firstly, the formatting of the proposal suggests a freestanding Act. This is contrary to the commitment which the Assembly has made to maintain all laws (save the Constitution and Bill of Rights) in a single, organised Code. To be in keeping with the scheme of the Legal Code, the proposal would probably need to be formatted into clauses amending aspects of the Code. The first Article (and the first Clause of the third Article) of the proposal would likely fit somewhere within Chapter 1 of the Legal Code (the Criminal Code); either being added after Clause 1, which bars criminal prosecution of resident nations for crimes not in the Criminal Code, or in Section 1.9, which provides exceptions from crimes. The second Article (and the second Clause of the third Article) would probably fit in part in Chapter 7, which provides for the regulation of the executive, and in part in Chapter 6, which deals with some powers of the Regional Assembly.

Secondly, I am somewhat unsure of involving the Assembly independently of the Delegate in dealing with foreign affairs. Foreign Affairs is generally a matter for either the Delegate or the Delegate and the Assembly at present (war being the notable exception), so giving the Assembly a power to determine diplomatic recognition independently of the Delegate seems somewhat out of step with how the wider system is organised.

Thirdly, some provisions make reference to concepts which do not truly exist in TNP. What does it mean to be "detained" in the context of an online game where a nation can leave the region at any time and can simply cease visiting this forum? Compelled testimony as a witness is something which has not been provided for by law and which the Court has, as yet, not recognised.

EDIT:
Mr. Speaker and Deputies, I motion to vote.
Click to expand...
The proposal has barely been on the floor for two hours; this motion to vote is premature and I suggest you withdraw it.
Click to expand...
I withdraw the motion from vote.

I wasn't aware everything was directly written into the Constitution or Code.

I'm not sure how to go about an entire reformat and welcome a draft laying that out.

I will however make basic changes in the language as you pointed out in the next 24 hours.

Thanks
 
Mr. Speaker, I feel that the most responsible thing to do is table this proposal until it can be properly formatted and researched.

I motion to table.

I thank the Justice for his imput.

I shall come back in the coming weeks with a revised version.
 
Crushing Our Enemies:
You might find this topic helpful, as an example of how many of our bills are formatted.
Click to expand...
Thank you.
I shall review this soon. Actually it would probably be best to put this on hold for an extended period of time. I'm currently an Attorney on a case in another Region and can't possibly finish this project right now.

You really are a good comrade COE and I appreciate it.
 
I recognize that this proposal has been tabled, however, I have some concerns about its content, and I'm hoping responding early will allow them to be taken into account when the author rewrites this bill.

No dignitary who is present in The North Pacific to represent a foreign government shall be detained, subpoenaed as a witness, or prosecuted while they are in The North Pacific.
Click to expand...
The nature of NS being what it is, we do not have the capacity to detain anybody. We also do not have the capacity to subpoena witnesses. Banning such practices seems very unnecessary to me.

However, TNP does, and IMO should, retain the right to prosecute anybody who a) commits a crime and b) is subject to our laws. Most people who are not citizens or residents are not subject to our laws, but sometimes someone is a citizen of TNP and representing another region as their ambassador. I recognize that an exception clause is included later on, but IMO that clause is not clear, and does not cover all possible situations where we might need to try someone (e.g., a non-citizen resident who commits treason).

Foreign nationals who have been declared personae non gratae shall be removed from all areas of The North Pacific, have their diplomatic masking revoked, and not be permitted to reenter The North Pacific, excepting those areas needed to redress their status.
Click to expand...
This would be unconstitutional. All nations residing in TNP have the right to apply for citizenship, except those who have been admin-banned from the forum, or where the Court has removed that right as a penalty for a crime. Additionally, imposing a "not allowed to enter" policy would likely violate provisions against only being punished for crimes laid out in the criminal code, and not being punished outside of the parameters of a trial.

Should it be unclear whether an action was taken; then it shall be assumed that the Citizen did not act as such.
Click to expand...
I don't know what this means...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top