Proposed 'Declaration on the Rights and Duties of Nations'

[Kris Kringle]

DECLARATION ON THE RIGHTS AND DUTIES OF NATIONS

 

THE COALITION OF THE SOUTH PACIFIC
having acknowledged that one of the aims of our region is to become a beacon of justice and democratic rule and aspiring to contribute to that goal makes effective the following Declaration on the Rights and Duties of Nations.

 

Chapter I

 

(1)
Resident nations shall be those who reside in The South Pacific regardless of their allegiance to other regions or citizenship status and all rights and duties listed in this declaration shall be afforded to them.

 

(2)
Each nation can reside in The South Pacific without ejection or banning unless upon probable cause and following the mechanisms of due process laid out in the Charter and the Code of Laws.

 

(3)
Resident nations shall have the following rights:

1. Voicing support or opposition to the Government and to the Charter and the Code of Laws and advocating for the peaceful reform of either of them and as well voicing their opinions on all matters of their interest
   
   
2. Contacting the Government and receiving adequate responses from the same and when appropriate having their ideas implemented with due credit
   
   
3. Defend themselves in the courts of The South Pacific with all the guarantees of due process of law afforded to citizens
   
   
4. Have a fair participation in the Forum or the Regional Message Board as allowable but the right to access privileged information in the Forum, to vote in elections or be elected for office shall be exclusive to citizens
   
   
5. Send an application of citizenship if not a citizen and have it accepted after fulfilling the requirements unless upon reasonable causes and due explanation of the same with the chance of appealing upon rejection to appropriate immigration authorities
   
   
6. Endorsing and withdrawing endorsements at will while observing the duties and restrictions indicated in the Code of Laws and the present Declaration
   
   

 

Chapter II

 

(4)
Resident nations shall acknowledge the Coalition of The South Pacific as the legitimate government and the Charter and the Code of Laws as lawful documents for the region but no test of allegiance shall be required for being a non citizen resident.

 

(6)
Resident nations shall have the following duties:

1. Recognise the Forum as a legitimate method of offsite governance and communication until nations in the region determine otherwise
   
   
2. Remain under or at the established endorsement cap
   
   
3. Remain within the boundaries of peaceful and appropriate action when advocating their views
   
   

 

Chapter III

 

(7)
This Declaration shall not be interpreted as giving undue or additional privileges or stature to citizens over non citizens and shall not compel either to exercise the rights that are being afforded. Citizens shall upon their accession be bound to the Charter and the Code of Laws as applicable.

 

Nothing in this Declaration shall as well be interpreted as giving nations that participate in the Forum undue privileges over those that choose to restrict their participation to Telegrams or to the Regional Message Board and the Government shall take appropriate steps to engage all resident nations in regional affairs both in the Forum and in the Regional Message Board.

 

(9)
Upon its approval this Declaration shall be law and enforceable throughout The South Pacific.

[God-Emperor]

Chapter I, Article 2, Section 4 would require the admins to change maskings.

[Silentman97]

I wish to vote in dissent to this bill

[Hileville]

This isn't in the same format as the other laws that are placed in the Code of Laws.

[HEM]

Maybe additional bills shouldn't have to fit neatly into the code of laws..?

[Awesomiasa]

I am generally accepting of this piece of legislation, except for Chapter II, Article 4. The allegiance issue is a problem, especially in wartime or during conflict, as shown by incidents such as GE's discharge (No offence, just an example) and even the coup itself, where Carta/Milograd betrayed the region despite agreeing with the laws and conditions of citizenship.

[Hileville]

I also from an administration standpoint object to article 1.3.4 as written.  This is leading me to believe that as written guests would have to have posting privs on the forum and that isn't going to happen.
 
EDIT:  The reason why we are not willing to allow guests to post is it opens us up to different types of spamming on the forums that currently we don't have to worry about at length.  It also creates security vulnerabilities in the forum environment which as admins we cannot allow.

[Kris Kringle]

I am generally accepting of this piece of legislation, except for Chapter II, Article 4. The allegiance issue is a problem, especially in wartime or during conflict, as shown by incidents such as GE's discharge (No offence, just an example) and even the coup itself, where Carta/Milograd betrayed the region despite agreeing with the laws and conditions of citizenship.

I agree with that. The point of this article is allowing for nations to reside in TSP and choose not to be citizens and without necessarily having to pledge support if they are just not that interested in regional politics. Obviously citizens as always would be required to adhere to the Charter.I am open to suggestions though. The point besides the main aim of this bill is to stimulate debate on the issue of rights for non citizens.

[Awesomiasa]

 
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Awesomiasa" data-cid="99553" data-time="1368582999">I am generally accepting of this piece of legislation, except for Chapter II, Article 4. The allegiance issue is a problem, especially in wartime or during conflict, as shown by incidents such as GE's discharge (No offence, just an example) and even the coup itself, where Carta/Milograd betrayed the region despite agreeing with the laws and conditions of citizenship.

I agree with that. The point of this article is allowing for nations to reside in TSP and choose not to be citizens and without necessarily having to pledge support if they are just not that interested in regional politics. Obviously citizens as always would be required to adhere to the Charter.I am open to suggestions though. The point besides the main aim of this bill is to stimulate debate on the issue of rights for non citizens. 
</blockquote> 
That has occurred before, and has worked well. I cannot speak for the administrative portions, so I am otherwise in agreement of this piece of legislation.

[Kris Kringle]

I also from an administration standpoint object to article 1.3.4 as written. This is leading me to believe that as written guests would have to have posting privs on the forum and that isn't going to happen.EDIT: The reason why we are not willing to allow guests to post is it opens us up to different types of spamming on the forums that currently we don't have to worry about at length. It also creates security vulnerabilities in the forum environment which as admins we cannot allow.

I have modified that specific article regarding you concern. Perhaps you could take a look at it?

[Phlontopia]

I can agree to the new change to 1.3.4, it would be nice if the print was a little larger i had to brake out a magnifying glass to read it.
it would also be a good idea for there to be a subset under 1.3.4 stating what is required to join the forms.

[Kris Kringle]

I can agree to the new change to 1.3.4, it would be nice if the print was a little larger i had to brake out a magnifying glass to read it.it would also be a good idea for there to be a subset under 1.3.4 stating what is required to join the forms.

Well technically what is required is to take an oath committing oneself to following the Charter as that is already codified (but I guess we could include it anyway if it's necessary), or at least that is my understanding. Perhaps I might be wrong or the administration team or any official may have something to add on that matter?

[Awesomiasa]

 
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Phlontopia" data-cid="99583" data-time="1368594847">I can agree to the new change to 1.3.4, it would be nice if the print was a little larger i had to brake out a magnifying glass to read it.it would also be a good idea for there to be a subset under 1.3.4 stating what is required to join the forms.

Well technically what is required is to take an oath committing oneself to following the Charter as that is already codified (but I guess we could include it anyway if it's necessary), or at least that is my understanding. Perhaps I might be wrong or the administration team or any official may have something to add on that matter? 
</blockquote> 
It is not technically an oath, more of an agreement, as evidenced below

Q.  So what do I do know?A.  Well you fill out the below forum and await acceptance.

Code:

I, [nation]nation goes here[/nation] accept the terms and provisions of the charter. [b]World Assembly Nation[/b]:  [nation]WA nation here[/nation][b]Other regions/organizations involved with[/b]:

NOTICE: Failure to disclose involvement in Milograd's regime under Other regions/organizations constitutes fraud, a criminal offence. SPSR involvement must be disclosed.

[Hileville]

Awe, that is for citizenship.  This bill seems to be creating a second form of citizenship which is "resident nations".  Which brings me to what I am thinking on this right now.
 
If people are going to join the forum and take an oath accepting the Charter why don't they just become citizens?
 
TNP currently has a system where they have "resident citizens" and RA members.  That system creates two sets of citizens on group is in the legislature and one isn't and the group that isn't has less rights because of that.  The argument often comes up of the group that are just citizens are "second class" to RA members.  I don't really want to see that argument here.
 
I will have to think about this one some more.

[Awesomiasa]

From what I gather, it's like getting a Green Card but not a passport since you'd be a permanent resident and not a Citizen, correct?

[Hileville]

From what I gather, it's like getting a Green Card but not a passport since you'd be a permanent resident and not a Citizen, correct?

 
Kinda.

[Belschaft]

Having gone over this I'm of the opinion that everything this contains is already covered by the Charter and Code of Laws. However, I am attracted to the idea of some kind of declaration of rights, duties and first principles that would serve as a guiding document for The Coalition, to replace the more abstract conventions that we've previously shared. This is particularly useful as we currently have a new influx of citizens less experienced with said conventions.
 
As such, I'm broadly and cautiously in support of this idea. It'll need to be done carefully to make sure the Declaration remains coherent with statute, but assuming that's possible, I encourage the pursuit of this.
 
In keeping with my own convention I'll try and limit my role here to technical work whilst CoA, but if anyone wants advice feel free to contact me.

[Kris Kringle]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Awesomiasa" data-cid="99592" data-time="1368597716">From what I gather, it's like getting a Green Card but not a passport since you'd be a permanent resident and not a Citizen, correct?

 Kinda.</blockquote>Well in fact the bill defines resident nations as both citizens and noncitizens who are in TSP. Anyway, that is why I changed that article to include the RMB and "as allowable", to leave the administration team the discretion on the Forum and if not possible then residents would always have the RMB to have a "fair participation". Of course that could be clarified in the same article if necessary.

[Kris Kringle]

Having gone over this I'm of the opinion that everything this contains is already covered by the Charter and Code of Laws. However, I am attracted to the idea of some kind of declaration of rights, duties and first principles that would serve as a guiding document for The Coalition, to replace the more abstract conventions that we've previously shared. This is particularly useful as we currently have a new influx of citizens less experienced with said conventions. As such, I'm broadly and cautiously in support of this idea. It'll need to be done carefully to make sure the Declaration remains coherent with statute, but assuming that's possible, I encourage the pursuit of this. In keeping with my own convention I'll try and limit my role here to technical work whilst CoA, but if anyone wants advice feel free to contact me.

That is precisely the point. I figured it would be positive to have a separate declaration to highlight the importance of rights in the business of TSP. Provided that all complies with current laws I believe it would be a fine addition to out democratic commitment.

[Rebel-topia]

I think this, in theory, is awesome. Beyond that, its going to send us down the slippery slope of having "2nd class citizens" as Hile has mentioned. I don't think that is the way to go. Besides, just because you are a citizen, doesnt mean you HAVE to participate in the political side of things. We have MANY citizens who voice their opinions, then dont vote in elections or in the Assembly.
 
If this were to go through, I think it'd be necessary to include it in the welcoming TG (if thats been set up?) to new nations spawning in TSP.

[Awesomiasa]

I think this, in theory, is awesome. Beyond that, its going to send us down the slippery slope of having "2nd class citizens" as Hile has mentioned. I don't think that is the way to go. Besides, just because you are a citizen, doesnt mean you HAVE to participate in the political side of things. We have MANY citizens who voice their opinions, then dont vote in elections or in the Assembly.
 
If this were to go through, I think it'd be necessary to include it in the welcoming TG (if thats been set up?) to new nations spawning in TSP.

 
The game-side welcoming TG has actually been suspended, mainly due to the taxation of having to manually send TGs.

[Kris Kringle]

I think this, in theory, is awesome. Beyond that, its going to send us down the slippery slope of having "2nd class citizens" as Hile has mentioned. I don't think that is the way to go. Besides, just because you are a citizen, doesnt mean you HAVE to participate in the political side of things. We have MANY citizens who voice their opinions, then dont vote in elections or in the Assembly.
 
If this were to go through, I think it'd be necessary to include it in the welcoming TG (if thats been set up?) to new nations spawning in TSP.

 
[font="'lucida sans unicode', 'lucida grande', sans-serif;"]I have addressed those particular concerns in a new 7th article. It's application though would entirely depend on each nation. I don't really see this bill though as creating 2nd class citizens, but rather guaranteeing non citizen residents certain fundamental rights in their region. They may have those already, but I like the idea of the Coalition making a statement on that particular issue, to highlight that citizenship may be a requirement for full participation (and it currently is) but that certain rights are beyond that and belong to each nation.[/font]

[Rebel-topia]

 
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Rebel-topia" data-cid="99629" data-time="1368634029"><div>I think this, in theory, is awesome. Beyond that, its going to send us down the slippery slope of having "2nd class citizens" as Hile has mentioned. I don't think that is the way to go. Besides, just because you are a citizen, doesnt mean you HAVE to participate in the political side of things. We have MANY citizens who voice their opinions, then dont vote in elections or in the Assembly.
 
If this were to go through, I think it'd be necessary to include it in the welcoming TG (if thats been set up?) to new nations spawning in TSP.

 
The game-side welcoming TG has actually been suspended, mainly due to the taxation of having to manually send TGs.
 
</div></blockquote> 
**cough, cough**TalkToSheepa**cough, cough, cough**
 
Sorry about that... bit of a coughing fit... Anyway...
 
 

 
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Rebel-topia" data-cid="99629" data-time="1368634029"><div>I think this, in theory, is awesome. Beyond that, its going to send us down the slippery slope of having "2nd class citizens" as Hile has mentioned. I don't think that is the way to go. Besides, just because you are a citizen, doesnt mean you HAVE to participate in the political side of things. We have MANY citizens who voice their opinions, then dont vote in elections or in the Assembly.
 
If this were to go through, I think it'd be necessary to include it in the welcoming TG (if thats been set up?) to new nations spawning in TSP.

 
[font="'lucida sans unicode', 'lucida grande', sans-serif;"]I have addressed those particular concerns in a new 7th article. It's application though would entirely depend on each nation. I don't really see this bill though as creating 2nd class citizens, but rather guaranteeing non citizen residents certain fundamental rights in their region. They may have those already, but I like the idea of the Coalition making a statement on that particular issue, to highlight that citizenship may be a requirement for full participation (and it currently is) but that certain rights are beyond that and belong to each nation.[/font]
 
</div></blockquote> 
I think this can be mushed into an amendment with a line or 3 in the charter itself.
Affording those who reside in TSP general liberties only works if they choose to participate. The RMB is a great place to start, but posts can get lost very quickly there. Once its pushed off the last page, its in one ear and out the other so to speak... Which is why its hard to run a government on the RMB.

[Helpful Whispers]

Once the issues that many above me have brought up are worked out, I fully support this piece of legislation. Nice work overall.