[Quintessence of Dust]

Although not presently members of the United Nations, Quintessence of Dust has had its Select Committee on International Relations prepare a draft proposed resolution. We admit we do this as much to further facilitate our assimilation into the region as to realistically bring the issue to the UN floor, but it could potentially provide ideas for other, enfranchised, region members to seek legislative action.

The proposal concerns the practice of 'extraordinary rendition'. Whilst we aware that present UN laws concerning torture are perhaps not of the highest order, we feel there is the basis of prohibition active within UN members. But this does nothing to address the obvious potential for states to send suspects to non-members to be tortured. This is extraordinary rendition, and we believe it should be prohibited.

We would welcome any comments on how to improve the format or substance of this proposal. There was some discussion in the Committee as to whether the proposal might be expanded, for example to illegal detention, and would especially appreciate insight into suggested scope.

-- Deputy Secretary of State Coriolanus Digweed

Quote: The General Assembly,

Recognising the obligations incumbent upon member states to refrain from the use of torture,

Affirming the importance of maintaining a strong stance against all applications of torture,

Seeking means to further eliminate the potential for international complicity in acts of torture,

Deeply concerned by the practice of 'extraordinary rendition', whereby persons are rendered to foreign jurisdictions for the express purpose of having torture conducted,

Believing extraordinary rendition to be a subversion of international law and a significant threat to international human rights,

Determined to prevent member states from any form of involvement in this practice,

1. Defines for the purposes of this Convention torture as any act of physical or psychological violence perpetrated against persons for the purposes of coercion, intimidation, interrogation or the obtaining of information or forced confession;

2. Reaffirms that member states are to criminalise and take active measures to prevent the use of torture, and to refuse admission of evidence gained through torture in any court of law in their jurisdiction, and to release or retry any persons sentenced on the basis of such evidence;

3. Prohibits member states from any involvement in the rendering of persons to foreign jurisdictions if there is a reasonable belief they would be subject to torture.[/quote]

[Yeldan IDU Territory]

Um...this is brilliant.

[Domnonia]

I agree. Why has this never been suggested before. Good work!

[Yeldan IDU Territory]

DomnoniaNov 26 2006, 12:34 PMI agree.  Why has this never been suggested before.  Good work![/quote]
Well that's what I was thinking. Extraordinary rendition has been in the news lately and we seem to discuss torture at least once a week in the UN forum. Why hasn't anybody thought of this before?

It might need a definition of "torture". That's going to be one of the first arguments thrown at it.

How about this: "Defines torture as any act by which severe pain, whether physical or psychological, is intentionally inflicted on a person as a means of intimidation, deterrence, revenge, punishment, sadism, information gathering, or to obtain false confessions for propaganda or political purposes".

Now that's taken more or less word for word from wikipedia. You might also say: "Defines torture, for the purposaes of this Resolution, as any act by which.....".

[Grosseschnauzer]

We might also want to look at the last operative clause to see if it can be strengthened, as some nations might assert they did not have a "well-founded" suspicion, when in fact they were "winking" at the practice.

It really is a new idea for the NSUN that I haven't seen in the NSUN, either.

Good work!

[Quintessence of Dust]

Your points have been gratefully received.

A definition of torture would probably be an idea; we had initially deliberately avoided such, but on reflection, if nations retain too great a say in defining torture, the proposed resolution would be reduced to meaningless. The definition provided is a good one, but the Committee has voiced two main concerns: firstly, that the word 'severe' could allow for a degree of weaselling, given nations could give somewhat abusive definitions to severity; secondly, that the inclusion of 'punishment' could contradict standing UN legislation. Whilst Quintessence of Dust does not approve of cruel and unusual punishment, and would be happy to see greater efforts at eradication thereof within the framework of international law, the subject is not the basis of this proposal.

The final clause could well be strengthened, but we must respectfully assert that it was not our intention to grant the rendering nation the right to determine how well founded this belief might be. We would welcome any suggestions on how to make it clear that this should be a judgment by the international community: even were the qualifier redesignated as 'any suspicion' or some alternative wording, it could still be circumvented.

-- Deputy Secretary of State Coriolanus Digweed

OOC: Regarding the idea that ER has been in the news a lot lately...that actually gives me pause for thought. I don't want people saying that this is just acting out RL things through NS. I might start a roleplay on the subject, to show it is a problem in NS too.

[Embolalia]

Very nice!

And don't worry about RL issues in NSUN: Just look at Tsunami Warning System!

[Antrium]

KedalfaxNov 26 2006, 08:32 PM Very nice!

And don't worry about RL issues in NSUN: Just look at Tsunami Warning System! [/quote]
I'd even say that sometimes having real-life examples is better. Tsunami Warning System was 15,961 for to 2,678 against.

Anyway, I really like this resolution. Great work

[Quintessence of Dust]

The Committee has met again, and agreed certain accommodations to the proposed resolution. These have included a definition of torture, and expansion of Article 3 (previously 2) to include admission of evidence and release of those previously held on the basis of torture-induced confessions, and a more succinct wording of the final clause. They express their hope that such changes are suitable.

-- Deputy Secretary of State Coriolanus Digweed

[Grosseschnauzer]

KedalfaxNov 27 2006, 01:32 AM Just look at Tsunami Warning System! [/quote]
The old-timers here probably don't remember this, but GS came into NS (the game itself) on December 23rd; moved to the IDU just before Tsunami Warning System came to a vote on the UN floor, and within 5 weeks of coming into the game, Tsunami Warning System was approved in the UN with close to, if not the greatest number of affirmative votes for adoption of a UN resolution to this day.

Beginner's luck? Maybe, maybe not, but Dust, it should give you encouragement!

[Domnonia]

Dust, please let us know when you plan on submitting this proposal. The Domini government, as well as others in the IDU, will surely help build a strong affirmative base through TG campaigns and Jolt forum discussion.

[Grosseschnauzer]

DomnoniaDec 3 2006, 07:41 PM Dust, please let us know when you plan on submitting this proposal. The Domini government, as well as others in the IDU, will surely help build a strong affirmative base through TG campaigns and Jolt forum discussion. [/quote]
And make sure i know, so I can make sure to give this proposal an approval in the UN ueue.

[Quintessence of Dust]

OOC: As previously stated, we are not yet UN members. The hope was that this cause might be taken up by others, or that the draft would be subjected to more scrutiny until such a time as we decided to join.

[Stolidia]

This is certainly an excellent effort. The draft is well written, and the subject is a very appropriate one for NSUN consideration.

I'd suggest you seriously consider deleting clauses 2 and 3. Two reasons.... First, I think you're running perilously close to duplication of NSUNR #41. If I were a moderator, I wouldn't rule it illegal. But I've seen two very bad legality decisions by mods recently, and I've really lost a lot of confidence in their decision-making. Why take the chance? The second reason is that I think proposals have a much better chance if they stick strictly to one subject. Whenever you broaden the scope of a proposal, you add potential fuel for objection and quibbling. Banning extraordinary rendition is an excellent idea. I'd suggest you stick strictly to that. Short and simple.

I'd also suggest you look carefully at how you describe the people covered by the proposal. In one clause, you call them "detainees" and in another, "suspects." My suggestion would be to use "persons" instead. Who cares what their status is? No one should be subject to the practice.

I may have some other nit-picks as we discuss this further, but those are my two significant concerns. (I'm a notorious nit-picker, as many NSUN resolution writers can tell you. It's gotten my NSUN nation, Ausserland, co-authorship of three passed resolutions, so I ain't a-gonna stop. )

A question.... Do you intent to put QoD in the UN? If so, why not do it now so you can submit the proposal yourself? If you're worried about getting endorsements, there are ways that can be handled. If you don't want to put QoD in the UN for some reason, we can discuss submission by someone else. There are tactical considerations involved there.

Anyway, congratulations on an excellent first effort. I'm looking forward to having the dwarven Principality of Ausserland go balls out in support of this.

[Gnejs]

We too would support this in the NSUN. A very nice first draft on a important subject. I've been wanting to write a resolution myself, I just wish I would have thought of this one first

[Grosseschnauzer]

Dust, so you know, it is IDU policy that we make sure all UN member nations in the IDU receive the two endorsements required to submit a proposal.

And it is a tradition that the Delegate will approve a proposal submitted by a IDU member.

[Federation of Disjunction]

Quod,

Firstly I echo the priase of the resolution you've conceptualized and spent time working with.

Secondly is there a barrier to your joining the UN? The body was created precisely for nations of your abilities and I believe both you and the UN would benefit from your joining. Also, UN membership would open another aspect of involvement for you in the IDU.

Please take this as encouragement and not the "hard sell".

[Quintessence of Dust]

We thank the representative of Stolidia for their comments, and apologise for not replying sooner. Certainly, we have taken note of their suggestion that the term 'person' be uniformly used, and have made appropriate recommendations. On the issue of duplication, we would for now prefer to keep the clauses in, to emphasise that the proposal is building from existing torture prohibitions and not saying only that det-... sorry, 'persons', cannot be sent abroad; if it makes a problem of legality for the proposal, then we'll be happy to scrub them.

--Deputy Secretary of State Coriolanus Digweed

[Quintessence of Dust]

Just to let you know, I will be submitting this proposal soon.

Quote: Extraordinary Rendition
Category: Human Rights
Strength: Significant

The United Nations,

Recognising the obligations incumbent upon member states to refrain from the use of torture,

Affirming the importance of maintaining a strong stance against all applications of torture,

Seeking means to further eliminate the potential for international complicity in acts of torture,

Deeply concerned by the practice of 'extraordinary rendition', whereby persons are rendered to foreign jurisdictions for the express purpose of having torture conducted,

Believing extraordinary rendition to be a subversion of international law and a significant threat to international human rights,

Determined to prevent member states from any form of involvement in this practice,

1. Defines, for the purposes of this Convention, torture as any act of physical or psychological violence perpetrated against persons for the purposes of coercion, intimidation, punishment, interrogation or the obtaining of information or forced confession;

2. Prohibits member states from any involvement in the rendering of persons to foreign jurisdictions if there is probable cause to believe they would be subject to torture.[/quote]

[Grosseschnauzer]

Endorsement/Approval made in proposal queue.

Good luck!

[Quintessence of Dust]

Thank you.

[Antrium]

If you ever need help with a TG campaign, let me know. If it passes the first time, you won't need one, obviously, but just in case.

(It's looking like it might even be able to pass on its first time, with only 72 more approvals to go over 2-3 days, which is pretty impressive. Great job! :worship: )

[Grosseschnauzer]

This has just made quprum on the first try!
Congratulations!

[Quintessence of Dust]

Thank you. Now let's hope it stays there.