[Call.Debate.Obs.] Call for debate on: "Establishing regular convening in the Assembly"

Pacifica
, ,
1
World Forum

RES # (YYYY)

Emblem of the World Forum

Assembly of the World Forum

Distr.: General
DD Month YYYY

Call for Debate # adopted by the Assembly on DD Month YYYY

Call for debate on:Establishing regular convening in the Assembly

Preamble

Initiate debate on providing opportunity for regular, voluntary convention of Representatives, Committee experts, and World Forum Administrative Staff. Purposes which would be discussing discrepancies arising from conflict of law where international human rights instruments are inexistent or unclear. The debate normatively calls upon the universal jurisdiction of erga omnes and ius cogens.

Section A — Call for debate on:Establishing regular convening in the Assembly

(1) Call for debate on establishing regular convening of the Assembly in aims of clarifying secondary instrumentation within international law and customs.

Section B — Explanation of Necessity

(1) Due to arising disagreements on rules of procedure as observable in standard measure of complaint initiated by Pelinai.

(2) Nature of these disagreements covering issues mentioned in the preamble, observable as;

  1. Ensuring the enforcement of: Charter of the World Forum Article I Section A No. 2., 3.;

  2. Disputes over Article III subsections 1-3 coverage and implementations.

(3) Necessity arising from limits set by World Forum Resolution 6 in the aspects of:

  1. Section A limiting participants and;

  2. Section C No. 1., 4. limiting deliberation by annual convention.

Section C — Utilising available measures

(1) Utilising WFR 1D - Debate and voting procedures and WFR 6 - Leaders’ Debates in the Assembly, in particular:

(2)

  1. Section B No.2 of WFR6, in which its observer states’ status is explicitly defined.

  2. Section C No. 1. of WFR 1D on debate procedures, which allow Nasphilitae, as an observer, to call for debate on political matters.

Section D — Suggested (Implementation)

(1) Establishing a channel of communication between non-leader permanent Representatives in the World Forum, alike that of WFR6;

(2) Providing legal framework for enactment of secondary instrumentation in matters related to:

  1. Interpretation disputes.

  2. Unclear ius cogens.

  3. Boundaries between ius cogens, erga omnes and national sovereignty.

3 . Implementation on rulings of the matters mentioned in sub-sections 2.a.-2.c. would take the form of a legal opinion and thus be non-binding.

– Addressed: Jan Saats - Speaker of the World Forum, Ambassador for the Republic of Eflad.

– Head Ambassador of the Grand Duchy of Nasphilitae (observer mission) to the World Forum, Adrianna Rolston.

1 Like
2

(Assuming, the Speaker allows the debate to happen and also assuming, Kate only used the resolution template to organise her thoughts and not to sneak in a resolution draft, which would not be allowed for Nasphilitae according to the rights cited from WFR 1d)

Mrs Ambassador,

I only have one question: Are you aware, the WF does have committees, including a committee for international law, which also hears opinions from representatives of non-members, NGOs or other experts, if necessary, and provides suggestions for discussions or rulings to the Assembly?

Helene Meise
Vice-Speaker of the World Forum
Ambassador of the Federal Republic of Gianatla

1 Like
3

Your Excellency*,

Comments addressing intent, in conjunction with questioning of awareness, illustrate failures which this call for debate seeks to address.
Observable in four underlying points expressed.
Firstly, if the instrument cited worked as it intended, why has it not been solved?
Secondly, the conflict of procedures, wherein one Resolution allows for observers to call for a debate but provides no clear means of doing so; As such I have used available means and modified them, clearly, with no malice intent, but because of previous allowance for this to occur.
Thirdly, while well-aware of the Committee for International Law, I fail to see any clear, economic and transparent criteria for what constitutes the conditional of “necessary”.
Finally, I fail to see how any of the points raised, address what this debate call seeks to achieve. On the contrary, it is the lack of substantive application in alternative methods suggested, on more than one occasions, for why I believe a deliberate discussion is in place.

Lastly and most crucially, if Representatives of member-states find the current solutions viable, they will simply close the debate. I’ve provided one alternative suggestion, though there may be many more, which is what I have sought to inspire.

– Head Ambassador of the Grand Duchy of Nasphilitae (observer mission) to the World Forum, Adrianna Rolston.

(Assuming, that this is clearly tagged as IC and also assuming, that addressing Adrianna as myself is not patronizing, which would not be allowed as per ic/ooc thread rules or any common decency. Spoil OOC and don’t make assumptions, especially patronizing ones, particularly in the same reply when referring to an Ambassador with “Mr/s”.)

1 Like
4

Honourable Delegates,

It is the firm belief of the Kingdom of Stoinia that the proposed legislation would bog down the goals of the World Forum by additional bureaucracy. We don’t wish for this institution to become sluggish. Therefore, we do not consider it viable and motion to close this debate.

Tudor Segărceanu
Ambassador of the Kingdom of Stoinia

5

Call for Debate: Proposal Availability Networked Evaluated Logistical Systems Integrated Security “(PANELSIS)”

(Conduit Indice and Revision)

This document presents a call for debate, included in it is an indice of conduits, structured as to appropriate accessibility; It renders the call reiterated, no imperatives are contained.

Purpose, authorisations, and contents:

– Purposes for calling of this debate is collectively addressing, discussing, evaluating, consulting; By voluntarily participating state-representatives and experts; Management and modelling of the World Forum, in aims of facilitating, simplifying, and developing its principles through re-assessing the organisational structure.
– Adequately considering limitations of the World Forum in currently available mechanisms for oversight and availability in risk management and coordinated security respectively; While also responsibly bound to consolatory actions only, as directed by its observer status.
– The following non-binding observations and prescribing adjustments are to be understood non-imperatively, merely commentator initiating; Consolidated in the agreed upon “PANELSIS Conduits”.

Proposal Availability:

With respect to the General Assembly, the Speaker of the Assembly, the Deputy Speaker, Heads of Committees and sub-committees;

→ Their functions and efforts in mandated and recommended activities risk efficiency in delivered administration and implementation to member and observer states. Auditing, inspecting, investigating, managing, and recommending implementations poses an organisational self-jeopardization from task overload in conjunct with the encapsulated structures.
—> We Conduit to functional re-modelling of tasks through a decomposition of nodes, akin to a flow block format, while preserving cardinality of the implementations.

Networked Evaluated Logistical Systems:

With respect to the national sovereignty, the previous Conduit, and emphasizing global <==> local needs;

→ Ensuring polynomial interpolation of cardinality requires also participated decentralisation of member and observer states, in the form of internal auditing.
—> We Conduit to a dual-evaluation protocol, bridging existing World Forum ↔ member and state institutions; accounting for both the limiting of bureaucratization and lack of coordination-implementation through a simplified, formulaic, feedback tunnel.

Integrated Security:

With respect to the IACO, the WaW, and the International Court, as well as all international security forces;

→ Premonition looms in the lack of law enforcement standardisations, variance among national internal security, safety of or freedom from endangerment to the right to life; Observable in developing countries lack of adequate funds and resources, as well as in the global environmental crisis.
—> We Conduit to the intentions behind this calls original re-modelling of intensifying the periodic frequency of multilateral communications and cooperation; specifying to a suggested minimum of once a trimester.


WE HEREBY PRONOUNCE RENDITION OF THE ORIGINAL CALL WHILE REITERATING THAT THIS CONDUIT INDICE IS MERELY A SET OF REMARKS AND SUGGESTIONS, WHICH RENER A DEBATE SESSION JUSTIFIABLE; WHILE ALSO INFORMING THAT THIS CONDUIT INDICE NEED NOT MANDATE THE TOPICS NOR CONCLUSIONS OF SUCH A DEBATE, AS WE WILL ACCEPT SOLUTIONS PRESENTED AND AGREED UPON BY THE MEMBER STATES; IF THIS CALL IS TO BE ACCEPTED.

— Presented: Md. Adrianna Rolston.

— Author: Candice Cohen. (Authorisation received)