[Passed] Criminalising Espionage in Our Partner Regions

Status
Not open for further replies.
St George

St George

RolePlay Moderator
-
-
-
-
Pronouns
He/Him, They/Them
Section 1.2 of the Legal Code shall be amended as follows:

6. "Espionage" is defined as sharing information with a group or region when that act of sharing has not been legitimately sanctioned by the entity the information is gathered from, as limited by this section.
7. The information shared must not be accessible to a person who is not a member of the region or group it is gathered from except by cracking technical security measures.
8. The information must be gathered from The North Pacific or a foreign power the Regional Assembly has agreed to prohibit espionage against ratified a treaty of alliance with.
9. The preceding clause also applies to foreign powers that the Regional Assembly has, by treaties other than alliances, agreed to prohibit espionage against.
10. The Regional Assembly has agreed to prohibit espionage against Europeia and Albion ratified treaties of alliance with Balder, Equilism, Europe, Europeia, Greater Dienstad, International Democratic Union, Stargate, Tajitu, The East Pacific, and The South Pacific.
11. The Speaker will update the preceding clause as appropriate.
Click to expand...

Section 1.2 of the Legal Code shall be amended as follows:

6. "Espionage" is defined as sharing information with a group or region when that act of sharing has not been legitimately sanctioned by the entity the information is gathered from, as limited by this section.
7. The information shared must not be accessible to a person who is not a member of the region or group it is gathered from except by cracking technical security measures.
8. The information must be gathered from The North Pacific or a foreign power the Regional Assembly has agreed to prohibit espionage against passed a treaty with.
9. The Regional Assembly has agreed to prohibit espionage against Europeia and Albion passed treaties with Albion, Balder, Equilism, Europeia, Greater Dienstad, International Democratic Union, Osiris, Stargate, Tajitu, The East Pacific, The Rejected Realms and The South Pacific.
10. The Speaker will update the preceding clause as appropriate.
Click to expand...

I'm debating removing lines 9 and 10 entirely just to lessen the load on the Speaker, but other than that, I think this is ready to go - we should be criminalising commiting espionage in all our treaty partners, regardless of whom the espionage is undertaken for, if they're a citizen here, they shouldn't be doing it against our treaty partners.
 
Last edited:
I agree that we should generally prohibit spying on our allies. However, I think a bill of this nature also needs to take steps to clarify who our allies are. For instance, you've included The Rejected Realms on that list - presumably because we have a non-aggression pact with them. The intention of that document was not to consider them a treaty ally, and thus they are not on the list of regions that it is a crime to commit treason against. This bill would create an inconsistency there, as it currently stands.

I think the ability to negotiate multiple levels of diplomatic documents is important. We should be able to have a formal relationship with a region without considering them an ally, and thus criminalizing treason and espionage against their governments. This is a vagueness in our law, and I think we should take steps to clarify it, rather than double down on the vagueness.

In short, I agree with the spirit of this bill, but the execution needs more consideration.
 
I agree with COE, maybe it could be worded with something along the lines of "treaty allies"? Allowing us to define our allies, I would also not include the list tbh, just have a definition and people can upkeep a list elsewhere.
 
Section 1.2 of the Legal Code shall be amended as follows:

6. "Espionage" is defined as sharing information with a group or region when that act of sharing has not been legitimately sanctioned by the entity the information is gathered from, as limited by this section.
7. The information shared must not be accessible to a person who is not a member of the region or group it is gathered from except by cracking technical security measures.
8. The information must be gathered from The North Pacific or a foreign power the Regional Assembly has agreed to prohibit espionage against passed a treaty with.
9. The Regional Assembly has agreed to prohibit espionage against Europeia and Albion passed treaties with Albion, Balder, Equilism, Europeia, Greater Dienstad, International Democratic Union, Stargate, Tajitu, The East Pacific, and The South Pacific.
10. The Speaker will update the preceding clause as appropriate.
Click to expand...
As a note, this of course as the title of the spoiler says, is a suggested new draft for this resolution. This is what I think should be included/excluded. As a note, I used organization instead of group due to the fact that organization is a more universal term in NationStates and an organization could simply be defined as an alliance or organized grouping such as Antifa, UDL, etc. I also decided to remove the non aggressive pacted regions. Of course, credits to MadJack for proposing the orginial draft I used to base off above. :P
 
Last edited:
The phrasing of "group" instead of "organization" includes sharing with *non-organized* groups and is, therefore, desirable.

For example, espionage includes leaking information from the Cabinet to the public, or from the Court to a private backroom unofficial server. Your suggestion would exclude both of those.
 
Last edited:
King SillyString:
The phrasing of "group" instead of "organization" includes sharing with *non-organized* groups and is, therefore, desirable.

For example, espionage includes leaking information from the Cabinet to the public, or from the Court to a private backroom unofficial server. Your suggestion would exclude both of those.
Click to expand...
I guess that would make sense. I'll remove that from my suggestive draft.
 
I note the suggestions and will be updating the bill in the coming days.
 
I have updated the draft - glad to hear suggestions on alternative wording for 'secure alliances with'.
 
General Question, Should one of our allied regions suffer from a coup, how would this bill effect our ability to assist in restoring the legitimate government?
 
Dreadton:
General Question, Should one of our allied regions suffer from a coup, how would this bill effect our ability to assist in restoring the legitimate government?
Click to expand...

The treaty would only apply to the legitimate government. So we wouldn’t be able to spy on that government. Spying on the rogues would be encouraged
 
St George:
Updated the draft to include @mcmasterdonia's suggestion.
Click to expand...
Another wording suggestion - instead of "ratified alliances with", perhaps it would be more accurate to say "ratified treaties of alliance with"?

Also I'd note that we have a treaty with Europe now, so they should be included in the list.
 
Last edited:
I feel like new clause 9 could perhaps be clarified. That is to say, what I think it aims to do is to avoid under-inclusion and consequently breaches of our interregional obligations in a scenario of an agreement which is, in general, closer to the terms of a non-aggression pact than to an alliance, save that it includes a provision requiring the prohibition of espionage. However, I'm not sure that it is apparent that that is the effect of it, in that it could also be taken as a clause to avoid non-aggression pacts being deemed to be alliances (and, if that is the course the Assembly intends to take, the treason law should be likewise amended, I should think).

I think that it could be clarified to meet what I think the aim is (and what I think the aim should be) by specifying that: "The preceding clause also applies to foreign powers that the Regional Assembly has, by treaties other than alliances, agreed to prohibit espionage against."
 
Draft updated with @Gorundu's suggestions - I've clarified the intention with Zyvet on discord.

I'd like to make some movement on this so I'll be moving to vote soon.
 
As a consequential amendment due to the change to clause 9, I think clause 10 should after "alliance" have "or agreed to prohibit espionage against". I don't think that it is strictly necessary, as I think that the effect of clause 9 is that such agreements count as alliances for the purposes of clause 8, but it is probably better to be safe that sorry and to avoid a challenge to the Speaker's ability to update it to include such agreements.

As to the principle of the proposal, it seems to me to be wholly agreeable.
 
The motion for a vote is acknowleged, and the bill is now in formal debate for two days, after which a vote will be scheduled.
 
A vote has been scheduled to begin on (time=1573628400) and last for 4 days.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top