GA Resolution: Protecting Borrower Rights

[Lenlyvit]

Protecting Borrower Rights

A resolution to improve worldwide human and civil rights.

Category: Civil Rights

Strength: Significant

Proposed by: Imperium Anglorum

The World Assembly,

Believing that the Assembly has a vested interest in protecting the liberty of those individuals who did nothing wrong but fall hopelessly into debt,

Observing that debtors' prisons, debt bondage, and associated punishments are generally punitive against honest but unlucky debtors, serving little more than detaining and punishing the poor,

Seeing that some persons in member nations are incarcerated merely for failing to repay debt obligations undertaken, and believing that this:

a. both reduces the ability for that person to earn income to repay such obligations and does little to induce repayment,

b. creates significant disincentives for entrepreneurs to take risks and invest in new business opportunities, and

c. leads to borrowers moving away from formal borrowing institutions, which can be subject to the protections of the formal legal system, and into the pockets of loansharks to escape the possibility of imprisonment, and

Concerned about policies which disproportionately impact the poor simply because they are poor, hereby, subject to past and future World Assembly resolutions:

1. Defines 'debt' as a non-contingent private obligation to render a sum or sums of money to another person under contract; defines a person with debt as a 'borrower';

2. Prohibits member nations from criminalising, or taking into consideration for purposes of sentencing, the state of being a borrower; forbids member nations from imposing any punishment against borrowers or classes of borrowers by enacting legislation or mass judgement via bill of attainder or similar instruments; frees immediately all persons currently incarcerated and expunges the sentences of all persons currently serving punishment for such reason;

3. Prohibits the holding of any person to labour for the repayment, origination, or discharge of any debt; frees immediately all persons so held; further prohibits member nations from allowing the inheritance of debts incurred after the passage of this resolution, unless (a) those debts are explicitly incurred with such a provision and (b) such a provision is not prohibited under national or international law;

4. Provides to any person, natural or juridicial, an effective remedy against creditors wherein they can discharge or renegotiate all debts incurred, contingent on the liquidation of their assets or development of a credible and suitable plan of payment to those creditors; requires member nation courts to waive court fees from non-vexatious litigants who would suffer undue hardship from being required to pay them;

5. Bars member nations from invoking a person's debts, financial obligations arising from previous state of captivity, fines, or fees as reason to deprive that person of the right to vote in any election, referendum, or plebiscite in which they would otherwise be eligible;

6. Clarifies that this resolution does not prohibit member nation court systems from, with a court order, garnishing wages for repayment of debts or imprisoning persons for contempt of a court order, so long as such judgements are only for coercive and non-punitive purposes; and further clarifies that, for the purposes of this resolution, tax liabilities are not included in any definition of debt or financial obligation.

This is the discussion thread. To cast your vote, go HERE

[Vichya Dominion]

Frankly, in our view, both sides are equally guilty here, to the point where the lawful process of ensuring the borrower to repay said debt in accordance to the book of the law followed to the letter. The state may provide the lawyer to the borrower in case it comes to trial but, if he's found guilty - he is to repay the sum he initially borrowed from the bank. Prohibit the collectors from imposing any further fees on the borrower and have the side initiating the trial to pay any fees necessary to have it started.
Further actions of the borrower are to be defined by the result of the trial.
We are civilised people and have to handle such disputes in the proposed way.
Whenever we see those changed included into the resolution - we will support it and vote FOR it, but for now Vichya Dominion finds it right to ABSTAIN.

~Emilie-Sophie de Belmond,
Vichya Dominion High Templar Exarch.

[Deleted]

I'm pretty okay with this one right up until clause 6, which seems to nullify everything that precedes it.

If a nation can't criminalize the state of being a borrower, but can imprison someone for contempt of a court order coercing repayment, what is preventing nations from simply applying a court order to all borrowers as a matter of process, then finding them in contempt and imprisoning them if they fail to repay?... so long as such judgements are only for coercive and non-punitive purposes How can the motive for the court order possibly be proven? Any nation is being given the opportunity to exploit this loophole simply by saying the court orders are not meant to punish, but, the resulting imprisonment will be exactly the same for the 'borrower'.

For this reason alone, THX, through it's proxy, will vote against.

[Libraziland]

For once I'll be voting for, since dbt slavery is a big no no.