[GA - passed] Combating International Piracy

Status
Not open for further replies.

Magecastle

Wolf of the North
Pronouns
He/Him
TNP Nation
Magecastle Embassy Building A5
Discord
green_canine
ga.jpg

Combating International Piracy
Category: International Security | Strength: Mild
Proposed by: Simone Republic | Onsite Topic


The World Assembly (WA),

Concerned for the need to protect the safety of ships at sea due to deliberate harm, such as piracy, sabotage, or other activities;

Noting that crimes that interfere with shipping frequently transcend national borders and interfere with inter-national trade, for which the WA has a clear interest and provides a suitable forum for resolving issues arising from such crimes;

Hereby defines:

“Privateering” means any ship authorized by a state explicitly for the purpose of looting ships from another state;

“Ships” means any vessel of any type, including (as examples) submarines and offshore drill platforms, excluding any vessels acting under the authority of a state and used for war, national defense and/or civil defense purposes;

For the purposes of this resolution, a “state” means any state (regardless of whether it is a member of WA) and a “member state” means a state that is a member of WA;

  1. Hereby deems anyone intentionally committing (or attempting to commit), with malicious intent, any of the following on any ships to be guilty of an offence:
    1. seizes, exercises control (through munity or other means) a ship, its equipment, its passengers/or its cargo by force or the threat of force; and/or
    2. damages or otherwise harms a ship, its equipment, its passengers and/or its cargo to the extent that it endangers the operation and/or safety of the ship;
    3. the participation by any of its citizens in privateering on behalf of one state against another state, except when acting on behalf of a state that is in a status of war (declared or otherwise) with the said other state;
    4. the aiding, abetting, counselling or procuring of the aforesaid activities in clauses (1a) to (1c) by anyone;
  2. Hereby affirms that a member state shall have priority of jurisdiction over any of the offences in clause 1 of this resolution if the said offence was committed (or allegedly was):
    1. physically within the waters of the said member state, and/or
    2. on a ship under the flag of the said member state, and/or
    3. by or against a citizen of the said member state; and/or
    4. on a ship carrying cargo belonging to a member state, its citizens or its duly incorporated legal persons;
  3. Hereby declares that, for the purpose of the offences in clause 1:
    1. anyone who commits such offence(s) commits an offence against all member states;
    2. any member state shall have the right to stop the happenstance of such an offence and to prosecute anyone accused of such an offence;
    3. the principle of aut dedere aut judicare applies and all member states must, subject to due process, prosecute anyone reasonably accused of such offence(s) (and penalize anyone duly convicted thereof) where no other member state has requested extradition;
  4. Hereby clarifies:
    1. a member state may not authorize any privateering activities against ships under the flag of another state except in times of war against that state;
    2. that this resolution does not exclude any criminal jurisdiction exercised in accordance with national law;
    3. in case of disputes between member states on this resolution (including claims on jurisdiction or extradition (or lack thereof) as per clause 2 and/or clause 3c), such disputes shall be subject to the binding arbitration of the WA Nautical Commission.
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
12001
 
Last edited:
Overview
The proposal at hand is a replacement for GA#20, "Suppress International Piracy", which was repealed due to unclear definitions over the concept of ”privateers” and a clause in the old resolution which assumed that anyone found on a pirate ship is guilty of piracy unless they can prove otherwise (and subject to very restrictive criteria), creating what was perceived by the assembly to be a travesty of justice. This proposal fixes those problems and adds significantly better defined criteria on what constitutes piracy, privateering (private forces plundering and pillaging with the authority of a government), and jurisdiction issues when they may potentially overlap.

Recommendation
We believe that piracy interferes with international shipping and trade and is one of the issues that the General Assembly is ideally suited for resolving, especially at a time when trading across international borders is becoming more and more prevalent. We believe this is a sensible replacement for the repealed resolution and defines a much clearer and concise framework for handling piracy in international waters.

For the above reasons, the Ministry of World Assembly Affairs recommends a vote For the General Assembly Resolution at vote, "Combating International Piracy".
 
Last edited:
(Non-WA) I am for this proposal. It is a comprehensive set of mandates with regards to piracy, appropriately taking into account the international nature of the GA, and there are no flaws that I can see, aside from one minor error in wording. This proposal strikes the correct balance between international compulsion for member-nations to achieve minimal goals, and not overreaching where member-nations are better placed to decide the matter. In this case, the balance that the proposal correctly takes leans more towards the former.
 
This is next up.

Edit: For. There's some funky grammar in the first Section (a and b are not conjugated correctly if they're meant to work as verbal nouns) but otherwise it's fine.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top