I have read the current resolution, and it seems to have good intentions, but carried out in a very, very, wrong way. It gives too much immunity to diplomats, allowing for such freedoms opens the door wide open to corruption fromw ithin, and the possibility of smuggling/drug rings operating out of such untouchable status by diplomats and the embassey staff. They dont allow diplomats to be arrested, even if their guilty or a prime suspect in a crime, they dont allow diplomatic items and mission bags to be searched or confiscated! In this new world of post 9/11, im sure many diplomats that represent countries outside the good graces of your nation would surely take advantage of this and smuggle anything in and out, without allowing anyone to be the wiser. Basically, this UN resolution restricts the freedom of a nation and takes away it's soverignty over its own laws. Political freedom is like a sheet of paper, when you fold it, taking away some surface area, or "rights" in the name of security, whats stopping them to fold a little mroe here, and a little more there, soon ur left with nothing but a crumpled piece of paper, thus crumpled rights . This kind of resolution is exactly not what the world needs, it'll cause chaos and corruption, and cannot be allowed to pass. It's a prime example of why the UN would be a bad thing, it infringes on basic national rights, the right to govern and enforce ones own laws. Im for globalization on many levels, but this is too far. I urge the region to vote against this resolution and, if it is so passed, then I shall propose a repeal, it's a step towards fascism, and we all know what happened then...

Woopsies, I clicked both boxes to see if it would allow me to vote for bothand it did so ignore the for vote. Someoen shoudl really look into why clicking both allwows you to vote twice in essence.

From the moment I saw this, I decided AGAINST. By taking away national rights of prosecution for diplomats, we are doing nothing but hurting our countries.

That and I've lost so many political freedoms lately, it would crush my country's democracy to lose more - despite my very best efforts to increase them.

I voted for. This resolution would give diplomats no more rights than they currenylt have in reality, and there have been no major untoward consequences.

yeah, but now those diplomats are internationally enforcing this, against the will of the soverign nation. So basically if say an Edessian diplomat was managing a coccaine ring due to his priviliages in your region, and you had all the proof, you couldnt do anything about, and your people would buy his drugs and your peoplke will die over them, as they naturally do in the criminal narcotics underworld, and you cant touch him, not a bit, you'd have to go through the UN, through the fights, the paper work, the defense of the other antion,a nd it would turn it from a quick local arrest into a big international, multinational conflict. Everytime.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Really? i didnt know that nick, thats really odd, thatnks for pointing that out, i'll see what can be done. so the score is 5 against to 1 for, not 2 for.

Well then, I'd have to trust you to have the good sense to employ diplomatic envoys sensible enough not to engage in criminal activities. In any case, the host nation retains the right to order them out of the country.

well sure, but you never know how people are tempted by such power.

You can always fire any diplomat who strays outside the bounds of acceptable conduct, though.

I suspect the current resolution has been copied word-for-word from a real-world official document that describes the privileges of the diplomats.

Before reading the resolution I did not know how broad the privileges of diplomats were in the real world. It just doesn't feel right to give them such privileges but those may be necessary for them to conduct their work without fear or interference from the host country.

well no matter, i under stand my regions concerns, and how they came out ind roves for this one, I also have strong feelings, and so i have already voted against the resolution, and will set up a repeal as i suspect this thing passes.

The resolution "Defining Diplomat Immunity" was defeated 7,998 votes to 7,353.

Awesome. Simply Awesome.