[GA - PASSED] Repeal: “Preventing the Execution of Innocents”

Status
Not open for further replies.

Veltvalen

Yes
TNP Nation
Veltvalen
Discord
BobOjmdg #6297
ga.jpg

Repeal: "Preventing the Execution of Innocents"
Category: Repeal | GA #443
Proposed by: Wallenburg | Onsite Topic
Replacement: None​


General Assembly Resolution #443 “Preventing the Execution of Innocents” (Category: Civil Rights; Strength: Mild) shall be struck out and rendered null and void.

Recalling the extensive history of World Assembly delegations addressing the question of capital punishment,

Rejecting the condemnable practice of sacrificing equal protection under the law and the obstruction of justice in order to prevent the execution of convicted felons,

Recognizing GA #535 "Death Penalty Ban" and GA #545 "Military Death Penalty Ban", two extant resolutions that enact bans on capital punishment without handicapping the ability of member states to pursue justice,

The World Assembly hereby repeals #443 "Preventing the Execution of Innocents" on these grounds:



  1. The target dishonestly disguises a death penalty ban as mere regulation for the purpose of preventing wrongful executions.

  2. The target converts member states into safe havens for suspected mass murderers, mobsters, war criminals, and terrorists as a result of the extradition restrictions in section 7.

  3. Several sections make a mockery of justice, embarrassing the World Assembly by their continued existence.
    1. By the creation and application of the Capital Cases division of the Judicial Committee of the Compliance Commission, a committee originally intended solely for the purpose of overseeing the publication of international agreements, the World Assembly imposed cumbersome and excessive oversight of the justice systems of member states. The Capital Cases division practiced oversight over every case in which a convict received a capital sentence, regardless of whether there existed any basis to suspect wrongdoing, negligence, or miscarriage of justice on the part of the member state.

    2. The capital punishment quota established in section 2 obstructed equal protection under the law, requiring member states to sentence criminals convicted of similar crimes to unequal punishments.

    3. Section 4.e facilitated disruptions in judicial proceedings, increasing the frequency of mistrials and the need for appellate verdicts, as a result of demolishing all limits to the defense's admission of evidence, including proof of fabrication or falsification, failure in the chain of custody, and standards of confidentiality.

    4. Section 4.f requires member states to prove that additional evidence, true or false, could not arise to "cast doubt on the guilt of the defendant for any charge which could carry a capital sentence". This raises the standard for conviction from "guilt beyond reasonable doubt" to an impossible standard of "guilt beyond any doubt".

    5. Section 5.a required member states to, following a guilty verdict at trial, grant the defense six months to review evidence, and grant the Capital Cases division another six months after that for the same reason, before carrying out any execution. In conjunction with section 8, which provided that trial certification by the Capital Cases division (and with it the authority to carry out an execution) expires after one year, this prohibited any execution in most member states.

    6. Section 8 permitted convicted criminals to avoid execution indefinitely and to obstruct the course of justice by merely refusing to "exhaust all available appeals".

  4. Section 6 required member states to only adopt execution methods "proven beyond any reasonable doubt not to cause pain or suffering". Since the threat of death itself produces emotional suffering in almost all individuals, and since no authority can prove that any form of execution causes no degree of physical pain or suffering, this again prohibited all execution methods.

  5. GA #535 "Death Penalty Ban" and GA #545 "Military Death Penalty Ban" exceed the desired effects of the target resolution, rendering its restrictions obsolete.
Note: Only votes from TNP WA nations and NPA personnel will be counted. If you do not meet these requirements, please add (non-WA) or something of that effect to your vote.
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!

[TR][TD] For [/TD][TD] Against [/TD][TD] Abstain [/TD][TD] Present [/TD][/TR][TR][TD]8[/TD][TD]3[/TD][TD]0[/TD][TD]1[/TD][/TR]


"Repeal: 'Preventing the Execution of Innocents'" has passed 9,518 votes (77.6%) to 2,747 (22.4%).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Overview

This resolution seeks to repeal GAR#443, "Preventing the Execution of Innocents", a resolution that was originally written to severely restrict the potential usage of capital punishment by WA member states. The resolution contends that GAR#443 is a disingenuous attempt to prohibit capital punishment through its very strict conditions that it imposes for a member state to remain in compliance with it. It further contends that such efforts sacrifice the concept of equal protection under law and engage in the obstruction of justice. Given the two extant resolutions that explicitly prohibit capital punishment, GAR#535 and GAR#545 respectively, the author posits that the target resolution is not only rendered obsolete, but still actively harmful.

Recommendation

The Ministry concedes that GAR#443 does have quite severe conditions that would negate the usage of capital punishment to an incredible degree. However, we believe that such conditions are beneficial. It cannot be guaranteed that either of the two extant capital punishment bans will not be repealed some time in the future. Therefore, it is crucial that GAR#443 remain in force as a "backstop" to severely mitigate the implementation of capital punishment in the event that either of the two extant capital punishment bans are repealed . We also reject the notion that the target resolution sacrifices equal protection under law. Just because injustices have already been inflicted does not mean that preventing them through quotas and extensive review processes is verboten. Ultimately, the Ministry finds every attack the author puts forth against GAR#443 to either be misleading or associated with aspects of the target resolution that we regard as positive.

For the above reasons, the Ministry of World Assembly Affairs recommends a vote Against the General Assembly Resolution at vote, Repeal: "Preventing the Execution of Innocents".
 
Last edited by a moderator:
This proposal has achieved the necessary approvals to enter the formal queue. Barring it being withdrawn or marked illegal, it will proceed to a vote at Monday’s Major Update.
 
Separatist Peoples has ruled this resolution illegal on the grounds of an honest mistake:
The WA offers two conditions for execution. Merely not exhausting available appeals is not the sole condition to prevent execution.

That reason alone is an honest mistake.

We await further rulings from the other GenSec members.
 
Last edited:
Separatist Peoples has ruled this resolution illegal on the grounds of an honest mistake:


We await further rulings from the other GenSec members.
Even if it does, given that it’s still on the floor, I won’t lock it.
 
Banana agrees.

I am rather astonished that MoWAA is recommending a vote against this proposal - despite the fact that GC's non-WA vote is the only AGAINST vote in the entire thread.
Our recommendation does not necessarily have to be informed by the vote. It is, but we *do not* have to recommend based on our forum vote.
 
If I could put a word in, the portion that I dislike most about the repeal (though it is not illegal to do it, insofar as such a characterisation is mostly opinion,) is the characterisation that the entire target is obsolete. It isn't.

P Innocents, among other things, prevents member nations from exerting undue influence on defence counsel to misrepresent clients. This is necessary to ensure fair trials and stop wrongful, especially politically motivated, convictions. It also also stops people from being removed from World Assembly jurisdiction to face charges which break World Assembly law. Member nations should not be permitted to bus people they dislike to an off-shore island or some black site in some non-WA country so they can violate human rights.

Repeal would obliterate those clauses also. While I have quickly written up an Omnibus Due Process Act to patch the holes that emerge, the broader claim about obsolescence is a mischaracterisation that seems very economical with the truth. The repeal author also gives no indication – or even mention – as to replacement of those provisions; it seems uncharacteristically sloppy.
 
If I could put a word in, the portion that I dislike most about the repeal (though it is not illegal to do it, insofar as such a characterisation is mostly opinion,) is the characterisation that the entire target is obsolete. It isn't.

P Innocents, among other things, prevents member nations from exerting undue influence on defence counsel to misrepresent clients. This is necessary to ensure fair trials and stop wrongful, especially politically motivated, convictions. It also also stops people from being removed from World Assembly jurisdiction to face charges which break World Assembly law. Member nations should not be permitted to bus people they dislike to an off-shore island or some black site in some non-WA country so they can violate human rights.

Repeal would obliterate those clauses also. While I have quickly written up an Omnibus Due Process Act to patch the holes that emerge, the broader claim about obsolescence is a mischaracterisation that seems very economical with the truth. The repeal author also gives no indication – or even mention – as to replacement of those provisions; it seems uncharacteristically sloppy.
Wouldn't the Omnibus Due Process Act end up being duplication unless P Innocents is repealed though?
 
Present. As a supporter of the death penalty I feel like a Republican voting in New York City (or anywhere with electorates or electoral college systems).
 
"Repeal: 'Preventing the Execution of Innocents'" has passed 9,518 votes (77.6%) to 2,747 (22.4%). However, it is unclear what will happen to this proposal due to GenSec's ruling that it was illegal and a lack of coordination regarding a discard. I will update this thread when a determination is made.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top