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: support for the world cort
Details
Submitted by[?]: Alderdath Lebrali Demkratti
Status[?]: passed
Votes: This bill is a resolution. It requires more yes votes than no votes. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.
Voting deadline: December 2046
Description[?]:
| the senate of the Kundrati Union supports the idea of a world court |
Proposals
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 00:55:41, May 01, 2005 CET | From | Alderdath Lebrali Demkratti | To | Debating the support for the world cort |
| Message | see http://www.takeforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=309&mforum=particracy |
| Date | 01:38:51, May 01, 2005 CET | From | Free Market Party | To | Debating the support for the world cort |
| Message | We do not like the idea of other nations creating laws for citizens of the Kundrati Union. We will vote against this. |
| Date | 06:37:16, May 03, 2005 CET | From | Universal Humanists | To | Debating the support for the world cort |
| Message | Since the World Court does not create laws, nor does its jurisdiction exceed those matters covered under international law (which other countries already have the right to act upon), we would support this bill. |
| Date | 21:02:42, May 03, 2005 CET | From | Free Market Party | To | Debating the support for the world cort |
| Message | We are perfectly capable of setting up our own courts to handle these types of laws within our nation. The World Court is about extending our legal infuence outside our boundaries, and about letting other nations extend their influence into our nation. We are the Senate; we should be able to set up whatever type of court we wish for the Kundrati Union. We don't need this unless the goal is to move towards a world government. |
| Date | 06:15:40, May 04, 2005 CET | From | Universal Humanists | To | Debating the support for the world cort |
| Message | International Law exists whether we legislate internal laws or not. By recognizing a World Court, we have an opportunity to participate in the international decision-making processes that affect Kundrati's national and international interests. The World Court may be a way to have our international grievances resolved without the need for more drastic measures. Also, the World Court would not have jurisdiction to decide issues of Kundrati national law. |
| Date | 09:49:59, May 04, 2005 CET | From | Free Market Party | To | Debating the support for the world cort |
| Message | The World Court would have jurisdiction over the Kundrati Union, I would assume. Otherwise it is a pointless organization. This is not acceptable to the FMP. Kundrati national law should be the only law of Kundrati. If there happens to be an international law that we approve of then let us codify it into national law. This has already occurred, and there is nothing stopping it from happening in the future. We do not need international laws when we possess the power to make such laws national laws. We do not need any World Court to enforce international law when the international laws we approve of have been codified into national law and are therefore subject to our national courts. To put it bluntly, we can handle this ourselves. We do not need to outsource any part of our justice system. Nor should we look to enforce our laws on foreign nations. Just because we believe a particular law is a good thing does not mean we should look to set up a court to enforce it. Leave such matters to the national legislatures of the foreign nations. We can, however, look to create treaties between like minded nations, but this is a much different process than setting up a justice system that is outside any national border. The nation should be the ultimate governing body. We do not need to create organizations to govern nations, nor to dole out justice to nations. [OOC—The world court is pointless since it can’t actually do anything. I also don’t approve of having trials take place on the Particracy forum because they will not be visible on our national page. This makes no sense at all to me. It is a poor system that isn’t incorporated into the game and will not work well in practice. The 5 post rule is a ridiculous legal rule that can’t serve justice. I could just make 4 posts and they would have to wait on my fifth. Or, if another member of my nation thinks I we guilty they can make all 5 posts accusing the Kundrati Union of wrongdoing. Then we are screwed. The judges are also chosen on a *purely political* manner. The entire system is absolutely atrocious! It is terribly thought out, and if I am going to play a political game then I expect more. A hell of a lot more!] |
| Date | 18:27:35, May 04, 2005 CET | From | Universal Humanists | To | Debating the support for the world cort |
| Message | We continue to respectfully disagree with the FMP on this matter. The World Court would have jurisdiction to decide issues that involved the Kundrati Union, but would not have jurisdiction *inside* the Union. The court would be in place to settle disputes between nations, as individual actors, and not between individual citizens within the Union, nor between individual citizens in different nations. The relevant nations' internal justice system would continue to deal with such disputes. Also, the World Court is not outsourcing our justice system. Kundrati does not actually have the jurisdiction to legislate internationally --- we can take positions, and pass laws that apply to our citizens, but we have no recourse if another country breaches international law. We cannot enforce our laws in other nations, even with a World Court. The court's jurisdiction lies *outside* the borders of the Kundrati Union. Finally, we respectfully submit that the nation-state and treaty format is not the ideal one for handling the issues of universal human rights and collective security. The system encourages power-blocs, duplicity and bald aggression as methods of handling disputes, and puts the community of nations at increased risk of war and predatory economics. [OOC --- I agree that the proposed system might have some drawbacks or flaws, but the technical structure of the court in game-terms can probably be altered. A discussion on the boards seems in order.] |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 93 | ||||
| no |
Total Seats: 44 | ||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: Before choosing a nation, you may wish to research it first. For more information on the cultural backgrounds of the nations, please see the Cultural Protocols Index: http://forum.particracy.net/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=6365 |
| Random quote: "The only thing that saves us from bureaucracy is its inefficiency." - Eugene McCarthy |