[GA - Defeated] Repeal: Preventing the Execution of Innocents

Status
Not open for further replies.
bowloftoast

bowloftoast

Not Just For Breakfast
Discord
bowloftoast

ga.jpg

Repeal: Preventing The Execution of Innocents
Category: Repeal | GA #443
Proposed by: Auralia | Onsite Topic​
General Assembly Resolution #443 “Preventing the Execution of Innocents” (Category: Civil Rights; Strength: Mild) shall be struck out and rendered null and void.

Affirming that member states should take all reasonable steps to avoid executing an innocent person;

Regretting that GAR #443, "Preventing the Execution of Innocents", sought to accomplish this goal by establishing an international judicial mechanism for reviewing capital convictions (herein referred to as the "Division") that is grossly unfair, absurdly complex, full of ambiguities, and seems designed to ban capital punishment in all but name;

Criticizing the target resolution in particular for:

  1. demonstrating a fundamental lack of respect for the judicial systems of member states by subjecting every capital case to invasive World Assembly oversight, even when there is zero evidence of negilgence or malpractice,

  2. engaging in unjust discrimination on the basis of member state population by requiring member states to submit "no more than than one capital case per million inhabitants per year" to the Division, rendering it difficult or impossible for smaller nations of fewer than one million people to use capital punishment,

  3. contributing to violations of the basic principles of justice by forcing member states to treat similarly situated convicts differently with respect to their eligibility for capital punishment, depending on whether the member state happened to exceed the aforementioned quota,

  4. blocking valid limits to discovery, such as personally identifying information that is not material to the case, by requiring that the defense be provided with "all evidence collected in the process of investigation" without exception,

  5. blocking valid limits to the admission of evidence, such as proof of fabrication, by requiring member states to "prohibit evidentiary barriers from barring the defence admission of evidence" without exception,

  6. requiring member states to meet the effectively impossible standard of proving that "there could not arise evidence (foreseeable at the time of trial) that would cast doubt on the guilt of the defendant" rather than the more common standard of proving guilt beyond reasonable doubt,

  7. creating needless delay by requiring an additional post-sentencing discovery period of six months each by the Division and the defense, and by arbitrarily requiring these periods to occur serially rather than concurrently,

  8. arbitrarily prohibiting the execution of those who have brutally tortured and killed only one person as opposed to several,

  9. arbitrarily prohibiting member states from extraditing individuals to other member states with capital punishment if said individuals are likely to be charged with capital offenses, even if said member states agree to abide by the protections of the target resolution,

  10. seemingly permitting a defendant to avoid capital punishment by simply not "exhaust[ing] all available appeals", and

  11. arbitrarily expiring Division certification after only one year even if there have been no material changes to the case record, and providing no clear mechanism for certification to be renewed;
Supporting the passage of true and lasting compromise legislation on the issue of capital punishment;

The General Assembly,

Repeals GAR #443, "Preventing the Execution of Innocents".
Click to expand...
Voting Instructions:
  • Vote For if you want the Delegate to vote For the resolution.
  • Vote Against if you want the Delegate to vote Against the resolution.
  • Vote Abstain if you want the Delegate to abstain from voting on this resolution.
  • Vote Present if you are personally abstaining from this vote.
Detailed opinions with your vote are appreciated and encouraged!
 
Last edited:
The Ministry is nearly equally divided about this repeal. Among Ministry members, there is a majority objection to the practice of capital punishment, but the GA has elected to maintain this punitive option for member nations. GA#443 Preventing the Execution of Innocents (the target of this repeal) was passed to maintain checks and balances, and to create a WA body for sober second thought and review of such cases before executions may take place. The objective being to prevent innocent persons from being executed by overzealous, careless, or corrupted judiciaries. Noble in that cause, GA#443 also has its flaws and is perceived by some as too complex and invasive. As the Ministry vote is nearly equally split, the deciding factor must be the likelihood of passage of any replacing legislation, should the target be repealed. While this repeal makes a competent case in pointing out the flaws in the target, it is the opinion of the Ministry that the pursuant replacement would be unlikely to pass, leaving no protections whatsoever against unsound verdicts leading to the execution of innocents in a criminal context. At present, it is the belief of the Ministry that even a flawed legislation that saves innocent lives is better than no legislation at all.

For this reason, The Ministry of World Assembly Affairs recommends a vote Against this proposal.
 
Last edited:
For (still)
Being opposed to capital punishment does not justify being willfully blind to the many, many flaws in 443.
 
For.

I think it is a mistake that there is an appellate court of appeals. Resolution 443 is more interested in the bureaucratic administration of Justice than in Justice itself.
 
To be serious for a second. Where you lose me completely with 443 is the below and the reasons why I think it needs to be thrown into the trashcan and that can launched into the nearest star.


A.) Creating an international body that can flat out override and ignore national court systems.
-A.a) Also the fact that it mandates that this body be staffed entirely by "Competent" "Jurors and Forensic Scientists", Competent by who's standards? What could be considered perfectly competent forensic practices in one state could be considered junk science for another, you would have to come at it from the lowest common denominator and thereby lowering the standards for competency and standards in all states.

B.) Forcing states to create expensive special prosecutor's offices that could be entirely unnecessary even if Capital Punishment is illegal. It has no carve out for exceptions so all states have to have them no matter what.

C.) Literally creates a system where a terrorist could hire a lawyer get the evidence and how it was procured and then leak the information putting lives at risk. It forbids any barriers for turning over evidence to defense teams even in legitimate cases of national security.

D.) 4.f creates such a nonsensical standard it basically violates its own first article. "Prove" that no evidence can ever arise in the future. Basically flat out makes all capital punishment illegal without access to a Tardis or Delorian.

E.) Meanwhile 4.g creates such a vague criteria for the new international body it basically can set its own definition and gives it unilateral authority to not just send cases back to lower courts but to flat out DISMISS a case based on whatever bar for "due process" and "burden of proof" they decide to use that day.
-E.a) Theoretically its so wide open it creates an opportunity where the body could say "The burden of proof is that it is so conclusive the prosecutor will through sheer determination violate the laws of gravity." and then just dismiss the case and let a terrorist back on the streets.

F.) 5.b literally refers to a Prosecutor's case as a "Narrative" like he was sitting around a campfire telling the latest ghost story to scare the judge into finding someone guilty.

G.) For the love of god 7 violates 1. 1 Says that WA states are perfectly fine to have Capital Punishment and then 7 bars any WA state to extradite to ANY state, WA or not, that has capital punishment. It only allows Extradition to two places. WA Judicial "Institutions" (Which there is currently none to my knowledge that is set up to accept accused criminals) and "Jurisdictions without capital punishment".

H.) 5.c is written in a way that it could literally open death-row inmates to be able to bail themselves out of prison. Because it forces states to grant all inmates convicted of capital offences of "ALL privileges of a defendant" something that NO other inmate gets.

I.) It limits how many criminals a state is ALLOWED to have in a given year by capital how many crimes can be charged in one year based on population.

______________________

Also a list of terms critical for 443 to function that are NOT defined in the resolution.

"Evidence"
"Appellate System"
"Capital Punishment"
"Evidentiary Barrier"
"Burden of Proof"
"Forensic Science"
"Incompetent Person"
"Privileges afforded to [a] defendant"
"Beyond a Reasonable Doubt"
"Unduly Influence"
 
Until someone comes up with a good replacement, I'm against this resolution.
 
Author here. I'm happy to answer any questions.

I must say, though, that I'm confused by the opposition. TNP voted in favour of basically the exact same repeal a few weeks ago. This was the IFV:

Ministry IFV
The target resolution, while intending to modernize WA legal systems and ensure innocents are not unjustly killed, possesses various flaws that may lead to its downfall. Namely, the block of limits on discovery and admission of evidence, as well as requiring cases to meet a requirement of no doubt, well beyond that of reasonable doubt. Furthermore, the resolution possesses multiple points that appear to be selected arbitrarily; including the restriction on the amount of people affected by the crimes committed and the order and separation of the discovery periods by the Division and various council associated with the case. Lastly, a criminal could avoid capital punishment by indefinitely delaying appeals and other avenues that prevent the Division from certifying the case.

In hopes of a redraft or new draft addressing capital punishment in the WA, the Ministry of World Assembly Affairs recommends a close evaluation of the repeal and the target resolution, and a vote For this repeal.

For reference and sake of comparison, the Ministry gave a "No Recommendation" at the original passing of this target resoltuion, such IFV you can find in the following link:
https://www.nationstates.net/page=dispatch/id=1093883​

Many of the people who voted in favour last time appear to have changed their vote this time, including Wonderess, Praetor, Loh, Marcus Antonius, Sanjurika, and Siwale. You're obviously not in any way obliged to explain your votes, but I'd be curious to know why.

I have a replacement draft here if you're interested. As many of you know, the World Assembly has previously passed a number of resolutions on capital punishment. Some banned the practice entirely while others merely imposed restrictions on it while allowing member states to use it. All were repealed. I think my proposal is a sustainable compromise -- it's not a ban, but it's more restrictive than the WA's past resolutions on capital punishment (except for the ban, obviously).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top