[Draft] National Animal Preservation Act

[Noradise]

The World Assembly,


Stating that the motive of this writing is for the protection and defense of a nation's national animal.

Stating that the national animal symbolizes what that nation believes in.

Defines A national animal as a animal of any kind chosen by the nation to represent their nation.


Stating that no citizen of a nation in the World Assembly shall kill their national animal out of recreational, enjoying, or pleasure-filled pursuit.

Stating that no citizen of a nation that's part of the WA has the right to kill their national animal for the pursuit of eating, hide collection, or the process of taxidermy




Stating that the national animal has the right to roam, to fly, to crawl, to walk, or move anywhere on their nation's land.

Recognizes every nation has differing views on how it should treat their national animal.

Understands that some national animals are more aggressive than others, either naturally, or through provocation.

Therefore exemptions are made when a citizen is attacked by a national animal.

Stating that a citizen of a nation with WA membership has the right to defend himself against a attacking national animal.

Understandably, the citizen being attacked by the national animal, has the right to kill that national animal, but that national animal only.

Stating that if a citizen within a WA nation, as well as a foreigner, immigrant, or visitor violates this law, the punishment of that person will be left up to the government of that nation.

Reconizes that other WA nation's national animals may not be protected in the nation, this bill does not enforce that measure.

This law hereby proclaims, that the national animal of a WA nation shall be protected from all harm, and have the right to be free.

 

[Noradise]

@Comfed ...I know your a expert at the WA level. I know the bill is probably to significant but is there potential here at least?

 

[Great Robertia]

My main issue with this proposal draft is why it is a concern of the WA? Whether a national animal is protected in such a way sounds like a domestic issue, especially if it doesn't grant any protections beyond the borders of that member state as your proposed idea does. Because what this resolution does could easily be done by the legislature of a member nation. Personally, my recommendation would be to find a different topic to legislate on, or try to extend this issue to be more international in nature. Perhaps national animals that migrate between two or more member nations, or which have a habitat that spans multiple member states? It would be very niche, but perhaps there's some room to legislate there.

 

[Davidianian]

One major concern I could see is: what if there is some sort of cultural or religious practice that mandates some sort of ritual killing, or a nation where the citizens rely on cultivating and eating the animal that happens to be their national animal?
This proposal needs to make it clear what its central purpose is; is it about protecting the sovereignty of each nation or is it about humane animal principles superseding the sovereignty of any particular nation?
If you are clear on that, and anticipating pushback, you can then decide whether to modify the proposal to focus on respecting each nation's interests in terms of their national animal, or prioritizing the animals themselves. I say this because your very first statement leads me to think it's about sovereignty, but then the provisions make it seem otherwise.

 

[Fili]

What if a nation has an animal, let's say a deer, that is hunted, and it's a national tradition? A national animal could be a national animal because of hunting tradition in the first place. And it doesn't have to be a long tradition, but just normal sport hunting. It really depends on the animal, but there seems to be some things yet to be answered with this resolution.

 

[Noradise]

@Davidianian and @Fili ,

Thanks for your opinions it definitely opened my eyes to some doors.

@Davidianian , my main aim was to protect the national animal, so humane animal principles superseding the sovereignty of a nation (even though I highly value the sovereignty of a nation), I feel that a nation's "brand", or how there represented on the international stage is through the national animal in a way...I haven't thought of religious traditions or cultivation, so what would be your opinion on it? Do you think there should be exemptions granted for that? In the case of religious freedom, I support a exemption for the ritual I suppose, but with cultivation, there are more than one animal you could use for cultivation, so I don't know if a exemption for that would be necessary?

@Fili , that's also a good point...there could be a exemption for that as well? I'm a novice writer so I don't know if these exemption ideas are good or not to make the bill "complete ".