[Jonquiere-Tadoussac]

Edit:This is now the second draft:

Quote: Agreement on Extradition

Category: Political Stability
Strength: Significant

The United Nations:

NOTING that definitions of crimes and their appropriate punishments vary between nations;

FURTHER NOTING that people often commit crimes in nations other than their own;

MINDFUL that perpetrators may leave the nation in which they committed a crime after said act, or after they have been duly tried and convicted for said crime;

REGRETTING that this constitutes a barrier to the just resolution of such crimes;

RECOGNIZING many nations have already signed extradition treaties;

DESIRING to create a coordinated agreement to govern in absense of said treaties;

DEFINING:
a) ?extradition? as a process by which a criminal suspect within one government?s jurisdiction is given over to another government for trial or to serve out a sentence;
b) ?requester? as the member state which requests the handing over of a suspect from another government?s jurisdiction
c) ?requestee? as the member state under whose jurisdiction a suspect falls, and which is requested to turn over said suspect

1. MANDATES that all member nations shall extradite into the custody of a requester any individual within their jurisdiction who:
a) is suspected in a crime in the requester?s jurisdiction, provided that there exists a clear case against said individual, or;
b) has been convicted of a crime in the requester?s jurisdiction and has not served out their sentence;

2. ALLOWS a requestee to deny such a request where:
a) the crime of which said individual is not recognized by the laws of the requestee;
b) there is reason for the requestee to believe that the individual will not receive a fair trial or punishment proportionate to the crime;
c) the expected punishment for the crime is illegal in the requestee?s territory, unless the two governments can agree that an alternate punishment will be used in this case;

3. STRONGLY URGES member nations to refrain from reprisals for denied extraditions under the above conditions;

4. ENCOURAGES member states to agree to international treaties to further coordinate extradition proceedings, and to detail, and eventually reduce, the circumstances under which they intend to reject extradition under Article 2.
[/quote]

Any comments, especially on the category, are extremely welcome.

[Eisophca]

Clause 2 B) there is reasonable doubt that the individual or group will not receive a fair trial or punishment proportionate to the crime;[/quote]
Uh oh. Double negative. What you want is:

Quote: B) there is reason for the requested nation to believe that the individual or group will not receive a fair trial or punishment proportionate to the crime;[/quote]

I would also define "requesting nation" and "requesting nation" at the beginning and use more distinct words for them, otherwise the proposal gets hard to follow.

[Sausage Arabia]

Also bear in mind Resolution #103: "Right to Refuse Extradition".

[Jonquiere-Tadoussac]

Neu HamsterdamFeb 27 2006, 09:13 PMAlso bear in mind Resolution #103: "Right to Refuse Extradition".[/quote]
A couple people have commented elsewhere on this. While I believe this includes enough to go beyond #103 (to include such punishments as torture), I'll make mention of that resolution in the next draft.

And thanks to Ceo for catching the double negative. As I've said elsewhere, you have this uncanny skill for turning up my semantic gaffes!

[Fonzoland]

Maybe you can write in a such a general way that encompasses #103 without mentioning, and later repealing it?

[Eisophca]

You've got some phrasing problems, which I shall now attempt to weed out.

Quote: NOTING that crimes are often committed in nations other than those of the perpetrator's residence;[/quote]
I would consider changing this from passive tense to active tense:

NOTING that people often commit crimes in nations other than their own;

Not sure which is better, just something to think about.
Quote: 
MINDFUL that perpetrators may leave the nation in which they committed a crime after said act, or after they have been duly tried for said crime;[/quote]
It should be "duly tried and convicted for said crime. You're not talking about anyone who wasn't convicted.

Quote: 
CONVINCED that this constitutes a barrier to the just resolution of such crimes;[/quote]
I'm not sure about "CONVINCED", it's not really something you need to be convinced about. Maybe "NOTING WITH REGRET"?
Quote: 
REMINDED that definitions of crimes and their appropriate punishments vary between nations;[/quote]
I would change this to "NOTING" and put it first.
Quote: 
RECOGNIZING many nations already possess extradition treaties;[/quote]
I would say "RECOGNIZING that many nations have already signed extradition treaties". You can't really possess a treaty.
Quote: 
DESIRING to increase the coordination of extradition treaties;[/quote]
Well, you're not really coordinating different treaties. Maybe: "DESIRING to create a UN-wide agreement to govern in absense of said treaties,"

Quote: 
DEFINING extradition as a process by which a criminal suspect held by one government is given over to another government for trial or execution of sentence;[/quote]
You don't serve execute a sentence, you serve it. That change might also help those "EEK DEATHPENALTY NO!" types.

Quote: 
3. RESOLVES that governments which deny extradition under these criteria need fear no reprisal, military or otherwise.[/quote]
I think that "need fear" is a good way of putting it. However, I would make clear that denying extradition doesn't grant you immunity from all war. How you have it looks good. And besides, tbe requested government can always use I.G.N.O.R.E. cannons.

[Jonquiere-Tadoussac]

Have changed to second draft, thanks for the input thus far.

Please feel free to tear at this one as well!

[Eisophca]

Here we go again!

Quote: Agreement on Extradition

Category: Political Stability
Strength: Significant

The United Nations:

NOTING that definitions of crimes and their appropriate punishments vary between nations;[/quote]
I would change "definitions" to "conceptions" or a similar word. "Definitions" sounds too dictionary-like.
Quote: 
FURTHER NOTING that people often commit crimes in nations other than their own;[/quote]
Nice.
Quote: 
MINDFUL that perpetrators may leave the nation in which they committed a crime after said act, or after they have been duly tried and convicted for said crime;[/quote]
This is very closely linked to the clause before it. Could you put them together somehow? Maybe by adding an "and" at the end of the first one, and using MINDFUL and ALSO MINDFUL.
Quote: 
REGRETTING that this constitutes a barrier to the just resolution of such crimes;[/quote]
Nice.
Quote: 
RECOGNIZING many nations have already signed extradition treaties;[/quote]
I think RECOGNIZING that many nations... sounds better, but that's minor and just my opinion.
Quote: 
DESIRING to create a coordinated agreement to govern in absense of said treaties;[/quote]
Nice.
Quote: 
DEFINING:
a) ?extradition? as a process by which a criminal suspect within one government?s jurisdiction is given over to another government for trial or to serve out a sentence;
B) ?requester? as the member state which requests the handing over of a suspect from another government?s jurisdiction
c) ?requestee? as the member state under whose jurisdiction a suspect falls, and which is requested to turn over said suspect[/quote]
Don't forget that extradition doesn't apply to just suspects, but also escaped convicts.

I would also add "for the purposes of this resolution" after DEFINING. I once saw a n00b in a forum who claimed that a resolution was bad and deserved to be repealed because it defined stuff badly for the entire UN. Adding those words gives opponents of the repeal some good ammunition
Quote: 
1. MANDATES that all member nations shall extradite into the custody of a requester any individual within their jurisdiction who:
a) is suspected in a crime in the requester?s jurisdiction, provided that there exists a clear case against said individual, or;
B) has been convicted of a crime in the requester?s jurisdiction and has not served out their sentence;[/quote]
I think you mean "is suspected of a crime" in clause a). Also, I would make it more clear that one nation has to request. Even though its in the definition, not everyone will connect them. Perhaps change the definition of "requester" to just "nation that wants to prosecute someone outside of their nation", change the word to "prosecuting nation" (which would also improve readability: requester/requestee is a bit difficult to differentiate between), and then say "1. MANDATES that all member nations shall, upon request of the prosecuting nation, extradite into the custody of a prosecuting nation any individual within their jurisdiction who:", or some less clunkly alternative.
Quote: 
2. ALLOWS a requestee to deny such a request where:
a) the crime of which said individual is not recognized by the laws of the requestee;
B) there is reason for the requestee to believe that the individual will not receive a fair trial or punishment proportionate to the crime;
c) the expected punishment for the crime is illegal in the requestee?s territory, unless the two governments can agree that an alternate punishment will be used in this case;[/quote]
OK. Perhaps a clause saying that extradition may be denied if the two nations are at war or other conflict?
Quote: 
3. STRONGLY URGES member nations to refrain from reprisals for denied extraditions under the above conditions;[/quote]
I'm not sure everyone knows what "reprisal" means.
Quote: 
4. ENCOURAGES member states to agree to international treaties to further coordinate extradition proceedings, and to detail, and eventually reduce, the circumstances under which they intend to reject extradition under Article 2.[/quote]
Good.

Most of my suggestions here are pretty nitpicky, but might minorly improve the resolution.