IDU Regional Forum
Freedom of Conscience - Printable Version

+- IDU Regional Forum (https://idugov.com/forum)
+-- Forum: Government Square (https://idugov.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=101)
+--- Forum: WA Delegate's Bureau (https://idugov.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=24)
+---- Forum: General Assembly Resolutions (https://idugov.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=25)
+---- Thread: Freedom of Conscience (/showthread.php?tid=223)


Freedom of Conscience - Mikitivity - 08-01-2005

Freedom of Conscience
A resolution to improve worldwide human and civil rights.

Category: Human Rights
Strength: Significant
Proposed by: Ecopoeia

Description:
We, the United Nations, recognise that freedom of conscience is a fundamental human right that transcends national borders and note with regret that the governments of some member states persecute and commit acts of violence against those who merely express beliefs or thoughts that are not state-approved.

Accordingly, we hereby:

1) DEFINE a ?prisoner of conscience? as a person who is detained or imprisoned, not for use of, nor encouragement to use, violence; not for openly supporting nor recommending hatred for racial, religious, sexual or similar reasons to provoke people to discriminate, or to be hostile or violent; but for their political, religious or other beliefs, or their ethnic origin, gender, sexuality, colour or similarly unjustifiable reasons; and accordingly

INSIST that all member states immediately and unconditionally release any prisoners of conscience they are currently detaining and

PROHIBIT member states from detaining prisoners of conscience in the future.

2) DEFINE a ?disappearance? as an instance when a person has been taken into custody by government authorities or by an armed political group, when this person?s whereabouts and wellbeing are kept secret without the full, informed, uncoerced consent of the individual in question; and accordingly

INSIST that any institution or group holding such an individual to reveal the whereabouts and condition of the ?disappeared? person.

3) CONDEMN extrajudicial executions by governments, killings caused by the unnecessary use of lethal force by law enforcement officials and killings of civilians in direct or indiscriminate attacks by governments or armed political groups.

Votes For: 3,767
Votes Against: 1,466
Voting Ends: Wed Aug 3 2005

Freedom of Conscience - Groot Gouda - 08-01-2005

Well, I'm all for this.

Freedom of Conscience - Ecopoeia - 08-01-2005

Thanks to Mikitivity, who invited me to talk here. If anyone has any questions then please let me know and I'll try and answer them.

cheers
Eco

Freedom of Conscience - Mikitivity - 08-01-2005

Quote: INSIST that any institution or group holding such an individual to reveal the whereabouts and condition of the ?disappeared? person.[/quote]

Would this include allowing human rights activitists information on the whereabouts and condition of the detained individuals? For example, could various Red Cross / Red Crecent societies be informed?

Freedom of Conscience - Ecopoeia - 08-01-2005

MikitivityAug 1 2005, 03:51 PM Quote: INSIST that any institution or group holding such an individual to reveal the whereabouts and condition of the ?disappeared? person.[/quote]

Would this include allowing human rights activitists information on the whereabouts and condition of the detained individuals? For example, could various Red Cross / Red Crecent societies be informed? [/quote]
You know, now I look at it, I think 'to reveal' should possibly have been 'make public' instead (Christ, the grammar sucks!). Oops, I guess there's always something that escapes through the editing net. Thankfully, it's minor.

Anyway, I'd still interpret this to mean that the whereabouts of such an individual would be available to such organisations. If families would prefer the information not to made so available, I see the resolution allowing for governments to respect such a wish. I imagine this would be a rare occurrence, however.

Freedom of Conscience - Mikitivity - 08-01-2005

EcopoeiaAug 1 2005, 09:17 AM
You know, now I look at it, I think 'to reveal' should possibly have been 'make public' instead (Christ, the grammar sucks!). Oops, I guess there's always something that escapes through the editing net. Thankfully, it's minor.

Anyway, I'd still interpret this to mean that the whereabouts of such an individual would be available to such organisations. If families would prefer the information not to made so available, I see the resolution allowing for governments to respect such a wish. I imagine this would be a rare occurrence, however. [/quote]

I'll make sure to pass this along to the Mikitivity Rote Kreuz, however, it is possible that the International Red Cross Organization might "ask" this question on the UN forum. Wink

Freedom of Conscience - Keeslandia - 08-01-2005

Keeslandia certainly supports this.

Freedom of Conscience - Grosseschnauzer - 08-01-2005

We suppprt this as well.

Freedom of Conscience - Sober Thought - 08-02-2005

YES.

Freedom of Conscience - Duechlander - 08-02-2005

Duechlander Supports this as well...

Freedom of Conscience - Ecopoeia - 08-03-2005

Blimey. Even my own region isn't unanimous.

Freedom of Conscience - Groot Gouda - 08-03-2005

We're suckers for Human Rights Wink

Freedom of Conscience - Mikitivity - 08-03-2005

Groot GoudaAug 3 2005, 07:59 AM We're suckers for Human Rights Wink [/quote]
Aye!
:wave: