GA Proposal: Fairness in Elections

[Wischland]

Fairness in Elections

A resolution to increase democratic freedoms.

Category: Furtherment of Democracy

Strength: Strong

Proposed by: Tinhampton

Recalling that an earlier attempt to allow prisoners to vote was defeated by approximately 8,300 votes to 6,000, partially due to issues concerning the enfranchisement of voter fraudsters and disenfranchisement as punishment for a crime which are not present in this resolution,

Believing that those member states which choose to hold democratic elections or referenda should refrain from rendering anyone unable to vote in them simply due to their circumstances, and

Seeking to restore many of the protections for formerly-imprisoned voters that were assured by GA#419 "Voting Equality for Freed Inmates"...

The General Assembly hereby:

a. defines, for the purposes of this resolution:

i. an "election" as an election for public office or a referendum (whether binding or non-binding), and

ii. a "relevant crime" in any given member state as any one of:

any war crime,

any crime against humanity, including torture and all forms of genocide,

a crime involving proven election fraud,

a crime involving the deliberate killing or injury of other people, successful or not, in order to facilitate a political goal, and

a crime involving the overthrow of the government of that member or any of its political subdivisions,

b. requires members to ensure that no person within their jurisdiction is prevented (or otherwise unduly restricted) from voting in a election as punishment for any crime other than a relevant crime; or simply because that person is currently, or has previously been, punished for a crime other than a relevant crime,

c. forbids members and any courts that may be established by resolution from rescinding any person's citizenship in order to bypass Articles b or d in relation to that person,

d. reminds members that they must not prevent any person from voting at any election simply because:

i. that person possesses or does not possess any arbitrary or reductive characteristic, except where such prevention is allowed by prior and standing international law (including future international law on preventing minors from voting) or necessary to ensure that those who are not citizens of a particular member state do not vote in elections organised by that member,

ii. that person is employed, unemployed, a member or a non-member of any trade union, nor simply because

iii. that person is bankrupt or in debt,

e. requires each prison in member states to protect their inmates from being pressured to vote for or against any option, candidate or slate of candidates (or to refrain from voting) by any entity employed by or currently held at that prison in all elections in a manner that seriously impacts those inmates' judgement,

f. orders that those members which choose to hold elections provide adequate voting access to prison inmates equivalent to the voting access enjoyed by the non-incarcerated population,

g. clarifies that this resolution does not mandate that elections be organised in any member state, yet

h. mandates that those members which choose not to hold elections apply Articles b, c, d and f in regards to all people that would otherwise be eligible to vote in any non-election votes it may organise (such as votes organised by a one-party state to determine who joins that party's central leadership committee which only members of that party can vote in), and that any prisons within such members likewise apply Article e to such votes, and

i. insists that all members - whether or not they hold elections - permit those expressions of opposition to their government that are in full compliance with international law.

Co-authored with CoraSpia.

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

[Wischland]

Further Resources:

See NS Forum Discussion HERE

See the WAS Voting Overview HERE

[Vivolkha]

If your goal is to allow prisoners and criminals to vote, why exclude some of them under a list of "relevant crimes" (except for voter fraud, obviously)? Why does the list of relevant crimes include "attempting to overthrow the government", something that the opposition in a nondemocratic country will likely be accused of (I'll get to article i later...)? Also, it could be argued that allowing prisoners to vote or not should be left up to individual nations. That alone will secure the opposition to this proposal for some.

How do you prove that a person had its citizenship revoked specifically to bypass articles b or d?

Article d.i. seems at risk of arbitrary interpretation by member states.

Article g partly defeats the purpose of this entire resolution by explicitly allowing for the lack of elections altogether. Article h is excessively intrusive to the operations of any organization, political or not, and also it should be remarked that its application doesn't seem to have any limit at all in the situations and organizations it can be applied to. Furthermore, the example given in article h seems to contradict the text of article d, or at the very least its spirit.

Article i does absolutely nothing, other than it being a declaration of intentions.

Against.

[Paffnia]

ABSTAINING. I think that voting is a fundamental right, so any crime, even the worst of the worst or voting-related, does not negate that right. That said, the resolution doesn't forbid nations from allowing everyone to vote, so I'm not fully against it.