[SC - FAILED] Repeal "Injunct Yessssss"

Status
Not open for further replies.
Fachu

Fachu

Minister
-
-
Pronouns
He/Him
TNP Nation
RemiorKami
sc.jpg

Repeal "Injunct Yessssss
Category: Repeal | Target: SC #464
Proposed by: Josi Sedai | Onsite Topic
Replacement: None​
The Security Council,

Knowing that the region Yessssss was refounded on 15 August 2023 by nefarious forces, despite the great efforts of Defenders and natives to restore the legitimate government.

Determining that once the region was refounded it ceased to exist, another region was erected with the same name, and despite the similarity is not the same region.

Commiserating the displaced natives of the former region who were forced to find a new home.

Noting that the target resolution, while well-written and composed with benevolent intentions, targets a region that no longer exists and is, therefore, redundant.

Believing that the target resolution should no longer have the force of law, as it targets a region merely because of a similar name.

Acknowledging the passage of SC#476 Repeal: “Liberate yessssss”.

Hereby Repeals SC#464: Injunct Yessssss.
Click to expand...
Note: Only votes from TNP WA nations, NPA personnel, and those on NPA deployments will be counted. If you do not meet these requirements, please add (non-WA) or something of that effect to your vote. If you are on an NPA deployment without being formally registered as an NPA member, name your deployed nation in 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
0000
 
Last edited:
Against for three reasons: 1) the author only obtained native consent after the proposal was posted on the forums, upon being reminded to do so, 2) the proposal is an exact copypaste from their previous repeal of Liberate Yesssss, and 3) this was rushed to the queue without any adjustments.

I think the author should pull this and rewrite an original repeal instead of copypasting.
 
Last edited:
While I'm in favour of a repeal in principle, I'm against this proposal due to the objections as outlined by Picairn.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top