Post by vitalinia on Jan 18, 2006 0:33:19 GMT -5
Description: UN Resolution #74: The Law of the Sea (Category: Free Trade; Strength: Mild) shall be struck out and rendered null and void.
Argument: The United Nations,
OBSERVING that non-UN members outnumber UN members 3 to 1,
ASSERTING that the attempts of "The Law of the Sea" to claim UN jurisdiction over international waters are misguided, impractical, and illegal,
FULLY CONVINCED that the 20 kilometre allotments granted by "The Law of the Sea" are far too small without allowance for the extension of Exclusive Economic Zones, and further that the undefined and vague status of 'scientific research stations' could lead to abuse by unscrupulous nations,
BELIEVING that the allotment of fishing quotas is inefficiently administered by "The Law of the Sea", but now falls under the jurisdiction of the UNCoESB,
APPALLED at the extensive bureaucracy created by "The Law of the Sea", which would be largely rendered ineffectual by the presence of non-UN navies, and the lack of legislation governing relations between these and UN navies,
CONCERNED by the conflict between the obligations of ships under "The Law of the Sea", and of declared neutral ships,
DEPLORING the designation of definition of piracy to bilateral definition, which would in fact allow ships at will to disrupt trade, in effect fuelling, rather than preventing, international piracy,
NOT BELIEVING 'reasonable grounds' is sufficiently defined to prevent arbitrary, aggressive boarding of ships, and appalled at the breach of confidentiality created by the UN database of searches,
DISREGARDING the claim that the UN can designate no-fishing areas, given the presence of non-UN fishing boats,
DISBELIEVING the sweeping nature of "The Law of the Sea", in attempting to connect a number of entirely separate concerns, such as international security and ecology, to be a productive approach to internationally binding legislation,
FULLY CONDEMNING "The Law of the Sea" for attempting to assert UN jurisdiction over international territory:
1. REPEALS "The Law of the Sea";
2. IMPLORES the General Assembly to ensure speedy replacement of certain admittedly important aspects of "The Law of the Sea" concerning the sovereignty of territorial waters, and its well-intentioned but ineffectively and dangerously executed attempts to combat piracy.
____________________
Quite frankly, I agree with this repeal. I believe the UN's main purpose is to ensure justice and stability in the NS world through the written establishment of human rights and a forum to settle international disputes. UN Resolution #74 undermines those values in that although the intent was good, it leaves open the possibility of "legal" piracy, devaluation of national sovereignty, overstepping the bounds of UN jurisdiction, as well as a host of logistical problems in terms of UN enforcement and subjection of non-UN nation sea vessels to UN laws.
Argument: The United Nations,
OBSERVING that non-UN members outnumber UN members 3 to 1,
ASSERTING that the attempts of "The Law of the Sea" to claim UN jurisdiction over international waters are misguided, impractical, and illegal,
FULLY CONVINCED that the 20 kilometre allotments granted by "The Law of the Sea" are far too small without allowance for the extension of Exclusive Economic Zones, and further that the undefined and vague status of 'scientific research stations' could lead to abuse by unscrupulous nations,
BELIEVING that the allotment of fishing quotas is inefficiently administered by "The Law of the Sea", but now falls under the jurisdiction of the UNCoESB,
APPALLED at the extensive bureaucracy created by "The Law of the Sea", which would be largely rendered ineffectual by the presence of non-UN navies, and the lack of legislation governing relations between these and UN navies,
CONCERNED by the conflict between the obligations of ships under "The Law of the Sea", and of declared neutral ships,
DEPLORING the designation of definition of piracy to bilateral definition, which would in fact allow ships at will to disrupt trade, in effect fuelling, rather than preventing, international piracy,
NOT BELIEVING 'reasonable grounds' is sufficiently defined to prevent arbitrary, aggressive boarding of ships, and appalled at the breach of confidentiality created by the UN database of searches,
DISREGARDING the claim that the UN can designate no-fishing areas, given the presence of non-UN fishing boats,
DISBELIEVING the sweeping nature of "The Law of the Sea", in attempting to connect a number of entirely separate concerns, such as international security and ecology, to be a productive approach to internationally binding legislation,
FULLY CONDEMNING "The Law of the Sea" for attempting to assert UN jurisdiction over international territory:
1. REPEALS "The Law of the Sea";
2. IMPLORES the General Assembly to ensure speedy replacement of certain admittedly important aspects of "The Law of the Sea" concerning the sovereignty of territorial waters, and its well-intentioned but ineffectively and dangerously executed attempts to combat piracy.
____________________
Quite frankly, I agree with this repeal. I believe the UN's main purpose is to ensure justice and stability in the NS world through the written establishment of human rights and a forum to settle international disputes. UN Resolution #74 undermines those values in that although the intent was good, it leaves open the possibility of "legal" piracy, devaluation of national sovereignty, overstepping the bounds of UN jurisdiction, as well as a host of logistical problems in terms of UN enforcement and subjection of non-UN nation sea vessels to UN laws.
