10-24-2017, 05:39 PM
Some comments based on a first reading. I will probably have some more later.
Quote: The Independent Adjudicative Office (IAO) is created and directed to:
Hold fair and independent evidentiary hearings for claims brought by the WACC, overseen by a panel of independent adjudicators;[/quote]
Who has standing to raise an IAO complaint? Just the Compliance Commission? Can individual member states do so as well?
Quote: Coordinate with the WA General Accounting Office (GAO) to assess and levy a fine and schedule calculated as no more than what will reasonably coerce compliance from member states[/quote]
This clause should also require that the fine be proportionate to the violation. This should remain so even if the only proportionate fine is likely insufficient to coerce compliance. Such is the nature of punishment.
Quote: Promulgate and follow procedure for hearings in a manner consistent with the principals of justice, fairness, and due process;[/quote]
Is there any right to appeal an IAO decision?
Quote: Member states are obligated to enforce the strongest measures of economic sanction available against those member states which refuse to pay IAO fines, subject to the limitations of extant law.[/quote]
This is perhaps the most important clause in the proposal because realistically this is the sole mechanism that the IAO has to enforce compliance.
I note that the clause requires the application of the "strongest possible" economic sanctions in response to any refusal to pay an IAO fine, regardless of the seriousness of the underlying violation of international law. However, as with the fine clause, inducement of compliance cannot be our only concern. There must be a clear proportionality requirement.
You also have to consider how this clause interacts with existing World Assembly resolutions requiring the elimination of trade barriers between member states. Such resolutions generally do not make exceptions for enforcement of non-compliance penalties, so the actual remedies available under this clause might be quite limited.
Quote: The Independent Adjudicative Office (IAO) is created and directed to:
Hold fair and independent evidentiary hearings for claims brought by the WACC, overseen by a panel of independent adjudicators;[/quote]
Who has standing to raise an IAO complaint? Just the Compliance Commission? Can individual member states do so as well?
Quote: Coordinate with the WA General Accounting Office (GAO) to assess and levy a fine and schedule calculated as no more than what will reasonably coerce compliance from member states[/quote]
This clause should also require that the fine be proportionate to the violation. This should remain so even if the only proportionate fine is likely insufficient to coerce compliance. Such is the nature of punishment.
Quote: Promulgate and follow procedure for hearings in a manner consistent with the principals of justice, fairness, and due process;[/quote]
Is there any right to appeal an IAO decision?
Quote: Member states are obligated to enforce the strongest measures of economic sanction available against those member states which refuse to pay IAO fines, subject to the limitations of extant law.[/quote]
This is perhaps the most important clause in the proposal because realistically this is the sole mechanism that the IAO has to enforce compliance.
I note that the clause requires the application of the "strongest possible" economic sanctions in response to any refusal to pay an IAO fine, regardless of the seriousness of the underlying violation of international law. However, as with the fine clause, inducement of compliance cannot be our only concern. There must be a clear proportionality requirement.
You also have to consider how this clause interacts with existing World Assembly resolutions requiring the elimination of trade barriers between member states. Such resolutions generally do not make exceptions for enforcement of non-compliance penalties, so the actual remedies available under this clause might be quite limited.