[Federalist]

Quote: The Right to a Fair Trial
A resolution to improve worldwide human and civil rights.


Category: Human Rights
Strength: Strong
Proposed by: South Oceana

Description: Observing that there is currently no guarantee of justice for those accused of criminal acts.

Noting that convictions are often unsafe due to the absence of any legal requirements for a trial under international law

Remarking that miscarriages of justice are common.

Believing that it should be everyone?s right to be protected from malicious and unfair prosecution by law.

Further believing that the more rigorous examination of evidence seen in a fair trial will lead to fewer innocent people being unfairly punished.

Hereby mandates that all WA member nations guarantee a fair trial to anyone facing prosecution in their territory, in accordance with the following requirements:

Article 1 ? That the accused be seen as innocent until proven guilty beyond all reasonable doubt, thus placing the onus of proof on the prosecuting authority.

Article 2 ? That the defendant be given the right to present his case or to be represented by a person of his choosing.

Article 3 ? That the evidence shall be considered by an impartial jury of no less than 5 people and presided over by a judge with knowledge of the laws being applied and the requirements for a trial.

Article 4 ? That all persons shall have the right to remain silent when questioned, and exercising this right shall not be used as evidence against them in court.

Article 5 ? That information and testimony may not be extracted under duress or using any form of physical or psychological torture.

Article 6 ? That the defendant shall have the right to question any witness who provides evidence.

Article 7 ? That the defendant be entitled to appeal against both the sentence and verdict that has been passed.

Article 8 ? That any punitive sentence passed by a court be proportional to the crime committed.

Article 9 ? That the proceedings of the trial conclude within a reasonable time period.


[/quote]

[Gerainia]

Seems OK; yes.

[Jagera]

I cannot support this; the idea is important, but the resolution has several fatal flaws, as I discussed before, even accounting for the author planning to have appeals addressed elsewhere. I'm reposting my concerns, for those who are lazy like me:

Quote: Admirable, but I have a few problems with this. First and foremost is the final clause, that the accused may waive any rights. What if either a) the accused is subjected to undue pressure to waive or b) the accused does not understand (due to ignorance, mental state, etc) the effects of the waiver. That is a huge, glaring problem for me. Having the right doesn't mean it has to be exercised, anyway, so the ability to waive any rights is unnecessary and dangerous.

Also, the "undue delay" clause seems to be more concerned with the procedure/performance of the actual trial, and not the speed getting to trial. It lays no restrictions on the ability of governments or other areas outside the court and prosecution/defence to affect the speed of the time from arrest to trial.[/quote]

[Federalist]

I would like to point out that the proposal "Fair Criminal Trial" has reached a quorum and is in line for a vote.

[Antrium]

pagemasterApr 12 2008, 10:24 PM I would like to point out that the proposal "Fair Criminal Trial" has reached a quorum and is in line for a vote. [/quote]
I think I prefer that one, so I will vote AGAINST.

[Jagera]

*smacks self on head*

Apparently I wasn't paying attention. I confused "Right to a Fair Trial" with "Fair Criminal Trial", and my above arguments stand against the latter. It seems I didn't read this one yet... taking a look. As for this one...

Most of it seems reasonable, except I really don't like clause 4. I believe this would be the "You have the right to remain silent" idea, but that doesn't really apply in the court. When you are asked a question in court, it should require an answer. I also don't see how this protects from "malicious and unfair" prosecution, and it sets out the right to trial by judge and jury, which, first of all, would apply to any trial (not hearing, admittedly) from petty theft to mass murder. Not the most efficient system. It also doesn't set out what the jury is to do, just that they are to consider the evidence, not pass the verdict.

Still not in favour, as I think a better one could be brought along.

[Federalist]

Passed

[Federalist]

This resolution has passed.

[Gerainia]

What's up next? One that cannot pass because it's concerns have already been adressed.

[Jagera]

It's already been deleted. Interesting, as no other proposals are in queue, and I don't see anything on Jolt addressing this. Anyone know what happens with nothing in queue?

[Grosseschnauzer]

As in the past, the game mods will wait for a proposal to reach quorum, and then put it on the floor for a vote at the next update.

[Federalist]

I read on the jolt forums that the Mods are taking out the "Fair Criminal Trial"