03-05-2010, 01:43 PM
This is a copy of my argument against the proposal. Note that it's IC.
I agree wholeheartedly with the ambassador from Glen Rhodes. This proposal will undoubtedly impose an unfair burden on countries with less than reputable economies. I vehemently oppose this clause:
Quote: V. Mandates member states to respond to alerts in a manner that will protect the lives of as many civilians as possible,
(a) If the GOPS finds a member state to have ignored an alert, or responded insubstantially to an alert, the member state shall be mandated to pay the victims of the disaster an amount determined by the GOPS.[/quote]
I believe that the power given to the GOPS by this clause is far to excessive. It has been a long held law that if a resident in my home country believes that he/she is entitled to any sort of compensation for negligence against them, then it would be a matter for the civil courts of Hindopia to decide on the validity of those accusations, not some external organisation not bound by Hindopian law. I am not crying the oft heard "national sovereignty" argument, but there has to be a limit on the reach of the World Assembly.
This clause is also ambiguous as to what national government can be sued. If a tsunami strikes the shores of some far distant country and a disaster warning center in Hindopia has advance warning but does not notify the government of the country in danger, is Hindopia liable for the damage and loss of life? I, as a representative of the Hindopian Government, register my vote "Against" this proposal.
-Vargas Harrowsing MC, WA Representative for Hindopia
I agree wholeheartedly with the ambassador from Glen Rhodes. This proposal will undoubtedly impose an unfair burden on countries with less than reputable economies. I vehemently oppose this clause:
Quote: V. Mandates member states to respond to alerts in a manner that will protect the lives of as many civilians as possible,
(a) If the GOPS finds a member state to have ignored an alert, or responded insubstantially to an alert, the member state shall be mandated to pay the victims of the disaster an amount determined by the GOPS.[/quote]
I believe that the power given to the GOPS by this clause is far to excessive. It has been a long held law that if a resident in my home country believes that he/she is entitled to any sort of compensation for negligence against them, then it would be a matter for the civil courts of Hindopia to decide on the validity of those accusations, not some external organisation not bound by Hindopian law. I am not crying the oft heard "national sovereignty" argument, but there has to be a limit on the reach of the World Assembly.
This clause is also ambiguous as to what national government can be sued. If a tsunami strikes the shores of some far distant country and a disaster warning center in Hindopia has advance warning but does not notify the government of the country in danger, is Hindopia liable for the damage and loss of life? I, as a representative of the Hindopian Government, register my vote "Against" this proposal.
-Vargas Harrowsing MC, WA Representative for Hindopia