Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]

Welcome to The Rejected Realms

Government:

Delegate: Wabbitslayah
Officer: Frattastan (Foreign Affairs)
Officer: Marilyn Manson Freaks (Outreach)
Officer: PowerPAOK (Media)
Officer: Relfa (Culture)

Other Officials:

Speaker: Vulturret
RRA High Commander: Frattastan
RRA Commander: Guy
RRA Commander: Wopruthien
Welcome to The Rejected Realms, NationStates' ejection-free zone!

You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you can only view some areas of the board and you can only post in the Troubleshooting and Suggestions forum. If you register an account, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customising your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Register now!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Repeal "Defense of Self and Others"; Proposed by Bananaistan
Topic Started: Feb 9 2015, 02:12 AM (102 Views)
Christian Democrats
Member Avatar
HMSM James II
This proposal will come up for a vote in about three hours.

In-game debate thread: http://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=328135

Repeal "Defense of Self and Others"
Proposed by Bananaistan
the World Assembly

Approving of the intentions of resolution #183 to allow for a person's right to self-defence,

Regretting that resolution #183 relies on the institution of the "judiciary" despite there being no international law requiring the independence of the judiciary, the proper functioning of the judiciary, or even the existence of the judiciary,

Observing that under the terms of the second operative clause a person cannot be prosecuted for using reasonable force yet under the terms of the third operative clause the decision as to whether reasonable force was used or not is reserved to the judiciary,

Believing that this presents a significant barrier to a member state's prosecution services from initiating prosecutions where the use of reasonable force may be used as a defence in legal proceedings, as the prosecution services themselves are unable to make a determination as to what constitutes reasonable force,

Noting that this is a serious contradiction within resolution #183: an individual cannot be prosecuted for the use of reasonable force yet the determination of whether that individual used reasonable force is a decision reserved to the judiciary,

Regretting that resolution #183 contains a definition of reasonable force which is inexact due to the usage of the vague terminology: "within a reasonable degree of the smallest amount of force",

Contending that the definition used is so unclear that many criminal acts of violence may not be prosecutable due to the lack of guidance to prosecutors, judges and others involved in potential legal proceedings as to what exactly constitutes reasonable force, and by extension, therefore, what constitutes excessive force,

Realising that prosecutors should retain the right to bring prosecutions against those they suspect may have used more than reasonable force and that suspects are entitled to whatever form of fair trial may be used in a member state,

Maintaining that resolution #183 unintentionally introduced an almost all pervasive immunity from prosecution to any person claiming they used reasonable force,

Further believing that the use of reasonable force to defend oneself or others should be no more than a valid defence in legal proceedings,

Hereby:

Repeals resolution #183, "Defense of Self and Others ".

Click here to read the original resolution
"I was born free and desire to continue so."

Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Christian Democrats
Member Avatar
HMSM James II
Against.

The original resolution isn't great, but this repeal proposal is poorly written. Furthermore, I think it exaggerates the problems of Defense of Self and Others.
"I was born free and desire to continue so."

Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Banned: Chester Pearson
Member Avatar
Resouluton Author Extraordinaire
Against
Edited by Chester Pearson, Feb 9 2015, 06:21 AM.
The Right Honourable Chester B. Pearson,

Prime Minister, United Federation of Canada

Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Cormac
Member Avatar
Dedicated
Against.
Cormac Skollvaldr
Resident of the Rejected Realms

"We are all misfits living in a world on fire." - Kelly Clarkson, "People Like Us"
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Opressed Ones
Member Avatar
Dedicated
Against.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Gruenberg
Dedicated
(Not voting.)

Obviously in favour, repeal is well written and makes a solid case against a stupid resolution.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
unibot
Member Avatar
Chief Propagandist
Voted Against.
Posted Image
Former Delegate of The Rejected Realms
Former Editor-In-Chief, Maestro

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Kenny
Member Avatar
WASC Suicide Bomber
Abstain. I wasn't a big fan of this resolution, but the repeal's case is a bit overly legalistic. Pretrial hearings can always sort whether a suspect used reasonable force (if prosecutors would rather not bring charges), without the need for unnecessary and costly trials. I also don't think the resolution gives anyone carte blanche to claim self-defense and avoid prosecution, as the repeal claims. That's just ridiculous.
Edited by Kenny, Feb 9 2015, 07:53 PM.
About us
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Karolingia
Member Avatar
Lost and Confused
For the moment, against.

The repeal suggests that the primary issue with GAR #183 is the assumption of a judiciary. Is this as problematic as the repeal claims? It also talks about the right to a fair trial, so there must be some kind of judiciary assumed in WA law already, at least as far as I can tell.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Banned: Chester Pearson
Member Avatar
Resouluton Author Extraordinaire
Gruenberg
Feb 9 2015, 12:06 PM
Obviously in favour, repeal is well written and makes a solid case against a stupid resolution.
Why? Because it over exaggerates the problems, and is full of legalese? The original resolution was a joke, but the repeal is flat out asinine.
The Right Honourable Chester B. Pearson,

Prime Minister, United Federation of Canada

Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
ZetaBoards gives you all the tools to create a successful discussion community.
Learn More · Register for Free
« Previous Topic · General Assembly · Next Topic »
Add Reply