[GA - PASSED] Repeal: “World Assembly Border Policy”

Status
Not open for further replies.

Caius

dude
-
-
-
Pronouns
He/Him
TNP Nation
United States of Dictators
Discord
cayyus
ga.jpg

Repeal: “World Assembly Border Policy”
Category: Repeal | GA #564
Proposed by: Barfleur | Onsite Topic
Replacement: None​


The World Assembly hereby finds as follows:

  1. Resolution No. 564 "World Assembly Border Policy" (hereafter "the target resolution") is a good-intentioned law enacted to further a beneficial goal, namely, the voluntary harmonization of borders across member nations. Such harmonization has been shown to be of great economic and social benefit to those nations which choose to take part in it. Nevertheless, Resolution No. 564 fails in its intended goals, and actively harms member nations, for reasons stated below.

  2. The target resolution's first flaw is in its second clause, which establishes a committee called the WABC and then "[t]asks WABC with processing applications from member states to join a free movement zone." Nations possess all sovereign powers which they have not explicitly forfeited as a condition of membership in this august body. Therefore, any two (or more) nations which wish to form a free movement zone could do so on their own, without intervention from this body or any of its committees. In fact, two (or more) nations would likely negotiate a better and fairer free movement zone among themselves, as their policymakers would:
    • be far more aware of the relevant nations' interests than indifferent (though hardworking and dedicated) gnomes assigned to an international committee;
    • benefit from the ability to engage in more one-on-one discussion with officials of the other nations; and
    • not need to concern themselves with the interests of a potentially infinite number of other nations, in different universes, with different forms of government and attitudes to (and modes of) international travel.
  3. The target resolution's third clause, which "[r]equires that applicant states, in order to be approved by WABC, meet a list of criteria established by WABC which will include an analysis of their border security regarding non-consenting and non-member states," is empty at best and dangerous at worst. This is because:
    • there are no criteria listed upfront, only the promise that future criteria will be dictated by an international committee, a state of affairs which may be expected to result in nations unsure as to whether joining an international free movement zone will be in their national interest, as they will not know what the conditions of joining will be; and
    • the clause's reference to "non-consenting ... states" is not at all clear in terms of what it means; a nation may reasonably choose to allow unrestricted travel from one nation and restrict travel from another based on factors such as existing trade, terrorism, and government cooperation.
  4. Reducing crime and terrorism is a priority of both national governments and of this body. However, the target resolution actively hampers this goal by "allow[ing] unlimited travel across borders at designated points between consenting states without the need of the traveler to present documentation at each border." Requiring member nations to permit individuals to freely cross from one jurisdiction to another without even verifying identity opens the door to widespread trafficking in contraband goods (including stolen property), drugs, weapons, endangered and invasive species, and even sapient beings subject to the worst forms of exploitation. It is good policy to encourage international cooperation on matters of transnational crime; it is shockingly bad policy to require international complicity in such crime.

  5. It is a common refrain that the target resolution, through its mostly optional nature, has negligible effects on most nations, and is therefore not a serious contender for a a repeal. But its tenth clause forces member nations, even those which emphatically reject the artificially-created free movement zone, to conduct relations with such zone through a specially-appointed liaison. Thus, while largely saving its harms for the nations which voluntarily subject themselves thereto, the target resolution cannot be seen as an optional affair which a nation can just as easily opt out of.

  6. On balance, while the target resolution has noble aims, it serves no purpose which member nations cannot serve on their own in a more thorough and efficient manner, and actively undermines many of the objectives that this same body has previously ordained as international law. It therefore warrants a repeal.

Now, therefore, be Resolution No. 564 "World Assembly Border Policy" repealed.
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!


ForAgainstAbstainPresent
9000

"Repeal: 'World Assembly Border Policy'" has passed 14,707 votes (92.1%) to 1,256 (7.9%).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
IFV
Overview

GA 564 "World Assembly Border Policy" established an optional free movement zone for WA member nations. This proposal seeks to repeal that resolution due to numerous issues, including vague wording and sloppy provisions rendering the free movement zone actively harmful to participating nations and the resolution creating an unnecessary administrative burden even for non-participating nations.

Recommendation
The target resolution not only created a poorly established free movement zone that forces participating nations to allow unlimited travel across their borders with no exceptions and is hampered by a jarring lack of actually defined criteria for its operation, but also forces even uninvolved WA members to submit unnecessary paperwork and assign unnecessary representatives. Nothing of value would be lost by repealing it.

For the above reasons, the Ministry of World Assembly Affairs recommends a vote For the General Assembly Resolution at vote, "Repeal: 'World Assembly Border Policy'".

Our Voting Recommendation Dispatch--Please Upvote!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
For here as well. While I rather wish Cretox's version was the one submitted, debated, etc., props to Barfleur, this is a very good go at it.
 
For.
For here as well. While I rather wish Cretox's version was the one submitted, debated, etc., props to Barfleur, this is a very good go at it.
New player is new player, and this hits many of the same points as mine anyway.
 
This proposal has received the requisite approvals to enter the formal queue. Barring it being withdrawn or marked illegal, it will proceed to a vote at Major Update on Thursday, April 14 Sunday, April 10.
 
Last edited:
Against (Non-WA).

In the WALL thread, I pointed out clause 3(b)'s ridiculous insinuation that "non-consenting ... states" causes a variety of issues through unclearness, and said "[clause] 4 claims that the original resolution's clause 4 "Requir[es] member nations to permit individuals to freely cross from one jurisdiction to another without even verifying identity" when it's optional. It applies only to states that consent to the regulations, and I simply don't believe the points made by the repeal justify the claims made in clauses 1 and 6 that the original resolution "actively harms member nations", that "it serves no purpose which member nations cannot serve on their own in a more thorough and efficient manner", and that it "actively undermines many of the objectives that this same body has previously ordained as international law."" regarding several of the repeal's other clauses. I retain that position.
 
"Repeal: 'World Assembly Border Policy'" has passed 14,707 votes (92.1%) to 1,256 (7.9%). This is author Barfleur's 3rd General Assembly Resolution passed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top