We are working on a brand new version of the game! If you want to stay informed, read our blog and register for our mailing list.
Bill: Extradition Reform Proposal
Details
Submitted by[?]: Left Libertarian Party
Status[?]: passed
Votes: This is an ordinary bill. It requires more yes votes than no votes. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.
Voting deadline: October 2442
Description[?]:
| We wish to alter the laws to prohibit extradition to nations that treat prisoners inhumanely in addition to the already-existing ban on extradition to countries with the death penalty. Extradition to the latter nations will still be allowed, given assurances that the death penalty will not be applied. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The terms of extradition.
Old value:: Extradition to nations with capital punishment is not allowed, unless there are assurances that the death penalty will not be imposed.
Current: Extradition to nations that practice cruel or inhumane treatment of suspects or in punishment is not allowed.
Proposed: Extradition to nations with capital punishment or with cruel or inhumane treatment of suspects and convicts is not allowed.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 16:26:26, July 28, 2007 CET | From | Aldegar Freedom Party | To | Debating the Extradition Reform Proposal |
| Message | Cruel or inhumane treatment of suspects? The Left Libertarian Party is aware that this constitutes the majority of the undeveloped world? We do not condone cruel and inhumane treatments per se, but we believe that the use of such treatments is culturally contingent - our nation may not condone these practices, but we are a reasonably liberal-democratic nation; who are we to dictate to other nations what they can and cannot do to their convicts? Who are we to condemn these practices that seem so wrong to us, but have been decided upon as reasonable punishment in other cultures? Each nation should be autonomous, and, since these convicts belong to a nation other than our own, they should not be our liability, nor any of our responsibility. If their nation condones mistreatment and harsh punishments, this is unfortunate, but are we so self righteous as to essentially confiscate people, in refraining from exraditing them, from other nations merely because we believe our way of looking at things is right? And should we let gigantic boat loads of illegals etc run free in our nation just because we do not condone the punishment in their country of origin? It sounds nice in theory, but this is reality, and we need to set our priorities right. |
| Date | 20:01:28, July 28, 2007 CET | From | S.C.A.F.R. | To | Debating the Extradition Reform Proposal |
| Message | we strongly agree. |
| Date | 16:26:09, July 29, 2007 CET | From | Party of Moderates | To | Debating the Extradition Reform Proposal |
| Message | We agree witht he ALCP. |
| Date | 22:52:53, July 29, 2007 CET | From | Left Libertarian Party | To | Debating the Extradition Reform Proposal |
| Message | The LLP does not know where the ACLP gets its statistics, but there are only about a half-dozen nations that allow, for example, torture. Moreover, the vast majority of nations bar extradition to nations that treat inmates inhumanely. Only ten, including Aldegar, allow this. We should mention that it is also not acceptable for foreign nations to be dictating to US what to do with the people inhabiting our country, no matter what they've been accused of. In addition, this law does not equate to allowing illegal immigrants free rein of our country, as we would point out that the current laws in our country already specify that illegal immigrants are to be actively sought out and placed in integration centers. Immigrants accused of a crime in another country would obviously not be allowed to "run free". |
| Date | 17:59:59, August 02, 2007 CET | From | Progressive Party | To | Debating the Extradition Reform Proposal |
| Message | The Progressive Party agrees with the aim of this bill, but perhaps not the letter of the law it would enact. We do not hold that whatever any country wants to do to its own citizens is just dandy. We cannot support extradition of prisoners to countries that engage in uselessly cruel punishment. Capital punishment is one thing. In some cases, we can see that it may be needed. However, other punishments are less clearly useful. Should we extradite people who will be disfigured? Maimed permanently? Vivisected? Emasculated? At what point does the punishment become more heinous than the crime? While we don't support the bill as written, it does raise an important point: We cannot export our values, we will allow this point. However, we should be more selective in cases where our values are challenged by the existence of government policies that are manifestly loathsome to our values and way of life. It ISN'T all just relative, else what do our values mean? |
| Date | 18:05:48, August 02, 2007 CET | From | Progressive Party | To | Debating the Extradition Reform Proposal |
| Message | To make it completely clear, the PP position is that this law should not be enacted as-is. However, we do believe that our nation should be very selective in determining whether or not another nation's criminal penalties are beyond the pale. Also, any particular case may or may not have legal merit. We should examine the facts of the case before applying some blanket provision such as the one offered in this bill, or alternately, such as the one first offered in opposition to this bill. Finally, we need to examine the merits of the person who is to be extradited. Would we, for example, extradite a person with valuable scientific knowledge or intelligence value to our nation? Let the extradition policy of our nation reflect both national values and national interests. To that end: 1. Let extradition depend on the country in question. 2. Let extradition depend on the case in question. 3. Let extradition depend on the relative worth to our national interests of the person in question. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 375 | ||||
| no | Total Seats: 0 | ||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 155 |
| Random fact: When your party holds the foreign affairs department, you can create new treaties. However, before writing anything new, it is a good idea to search for existing treaties which already accomplish what you desire. |
| Random quote: "I am thankful for the taxes I pay because it means that I'm employed." - Nancie J. Carmody |