First Warfare Act of 2022

Kingdom of Reitzmag

[now redundant]

Inimicus

Debate starts NOW and ends 23rd March 12:15 GMT.

I thank the Premier Commissioner for presenting such an extensive and clearly effortful proposal to the Council. I hope this is indicative of the activity we can expect from his office and the zeal with which he takes his role.

I think everyone in this Council agrees making international provisions for the rules of war is a timely and necessary step. Fortunately, through the shrewd diplomacy of multiple national leaders recently (and, sadly, the less-than-shrewd diplomacy of others) the region has managed to avoid armed conflict between nations for several years now. We can only hope the Premier's act remains unnecessary.

Nevertheless, I see several glaring issues with this draft as it stands, and unfortunately I cannot support it unless it is thoroughly and completely amended. First of all, the Act is unnecessarily wordy which leads to vagueness and possible difficulties in interpreting what is covered and what is not. Take, for instance, Article 6. Section 1 prescribes a decent principle where medical transports must be protected. The following sections then proceed to list reasons in what cases it might be acceptable for a medical transport not to be classed as a medical transport and what powers must respect these transports and who does not. Would it not be much simpler and more straightforward to prescribe that medical transports, in whatever capcity, must not be harmed by any Party to any conflict or any outside Party? Roughly the same objection applies to Articles 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 7 -- ah, actually, to the whole act.

I also do not see the need for the distinction between Protecting Power, Detaining Power, Party, or the other terms for actors in conflicts which are sadly left undefined. These may further be used by states only quasi-involved in conflicts to claim special status under EU law, and devoid them of certain responsibilities which may only apply to Detaining or Protecting powers but not to Parties, or something along those lines. I'm confusing myself just thinking about it.

I am sad to say that the majority of the Premier's act is superfluous at best, and could be wrongly exploited at worst. I take Article 4.13--4.22 as an example. Personnel captured by an enemy power should be treated according to the rules governing prisoners of war, fine. But the Act then goes on to suggest these personnel may be put to work by the capturing power (just imagine the ramifications of this!) should circumstances necessitate, and then to specify to the minutest detail the processes by which personnel must be treated and returned to their home state. Only to then claim that this should be dependent on prior agreement between warring parties at the start of any conflict. This is entirely unrealistic and opens up avenues for limitless litigation and accusations by warring nations against one another.

As it stands, this act is wholly unacceptable to the Empire of Inimicus, despite its noble intentions and the good faith of the Premier Commissioner. I have chosen not to submit Amendments to the present version of the act, as, to make this act passable in my eyes, roughly 80% of it would need scrapping and generalising. I urge Councillors to oppose its passing, and am happy to hear colleagues' opinions.

Nicholas Benfield
Deputy Speaker

Istkalen

A legislative summary is being prepared, but will take some time due to the length of this act. Rest assured it will be made eventually. Debate will also be extended to 30 March 2022 at 12:15 GMT, again due to the length of this act.

I will propose amendments when I have looked more carefully through this act. There are a number of things I find bizarre, particularly:

the act's fixation with the Red Cross, which is far from universally existent in our Union
the act's requirement that the sick aboard hospital ships be surrendered to enemy warships if demanded, without any provision made for observation by even impartial forces
the act's brief description of POW labor camps, and omission of observation again
the act's reference to various services and organizations which are not in existence and whose organization is not described within the act, which the summary, when completed, will provide a list of

I will seek to propose amendments to rectify these issues once, again, I am able to read the act more thoroughly.

Iras Tilkanas
Council Speaker and Councillor for the Republic of Istkalen

Kingdom of Reitzmag

I thank the Honourable Deputy Speaker and Councilor for Inimicus, and the Honourable Speaker and Councilor for Istkalen on the scrutiny for my proposal. I'd like it put on the record that, in fact, I did intend to submit this proposal at this state. And that these are to primarily allow the members of this body to input their thoughts and furnish this as my office works on the Second and Third Warfare Acts and the necessary work to be done on other acts relevant such as an enhanced Hospital Ship Classification Act. This is primarily to allow for productivity and make it possible for all our agenda to be finished within the term as soon as it may be. In addition, I also believe that this chamber is a collegial body and to which all the members have a contribution to any bill proposed here. For this reason, I entrust and ask that the members put forward whatever amendment they see fit for this law to be fully furnished and passed to my desk. I cannot simply do this on my own, and I believe that this body will help me fulfill our initiatives for the protection of the European peoples. That is all I can say for now, thank you.

Sir Joseph William Amberton Biden Sr. GCVO
Premier Commissioner, The European Commission

Inimicus

Honouring the Premier Commissioner's new tradition of verbosity, I propose the following Amendments:

Amendment 1

DEFINITIONS

~~1. “Medical aircraft” shall refer to aircraft exclusively employed for the removal of wounded and sick and for the transport of medical personnel and equipment~~
1. "Conflict" shall refer to armed clashes between at least two States, sub-state actors, or other groups, involving the use of weapons of warfare.
2. "Parties to a conflict" shall refer to any belligerent or co-belligerent State, sub-state actor, or other group involved to any extent with any conflict, or supplying or providing by any means and to any extent, any belligerents or co-belligerents with means, materials, manpower, or other resources.
2. 3. “Shipwrecked” shall refer to anyone who is adrift for any reason, including those forced to land at sea or to parachute from damaged aircraft.
3 4. "Wounded" and "Sick" shall refer to military or civilian persons in need of medical care and who are unable or refrain from any act of hostility.
5. "Medical Services" shall refer to persons, organisations, or authorities engaged in the science or practice of the diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of disease or injury.

Amendment 2

Remove Article 1

Amendment 3

Renumber Article 2 as Article 1

Article 2 (Article 1 in amended numbering):

Section 1: Members of the armed forces and other persons mentioned in the following Article ~~who are at sea and~~ who are wounded, sick or shipwrecked, shall be respected and protected in all circumstances.

Section 2: Such persons shall be treated humanely and cared for by ~~the~~ any Parties to ~~the~~ any conflict. in whose power they may be, without any adverse distinction founded on sex, race, nationality, religion, political opinions, or any other similar criteria. Any attempts upon their lives, or violence to their persons, shall be strictly prohibited; in particular, they shall not be murdered or exterminated, subjected to torture or to biological experiments; they shall not wilfully be left without medical assistance and care, nor shall conditions exposing them to contagion or infection be created.

Remove Sections, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 12, 13, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, and 27.

Section 7 3: ~~Subject to the provisions of Section 1 to 3 of this Article, t~~ The wounded, sick and shipwrecked of a belligerent who fall into enemy hands shall be considered prisoners of war, and ~~the~~ any provisions of national or international law concerning prisoners of war shall apply to them. The captor may decide, according to circumstances, whether it is expedient to hold them, or to convey them to a port in the captor’s own country, to a neutral port or even to a port in enemy territory. In the last case, prisoners of war thus returned to their home country may not serve for the duration of the war.

Section 11 4: After each engagement, any Part~~ies~~y to ~~the~~ any conflict shall, without delay, take all possible measures to search for and collect the shipwrecked, wounded and sick, to protect them against pillage and ill-treatment, to ensure their adequate care, and to search for the dead and prevent their being despoiled.

Section 12 6: Whenever circumstances permit, ~~the~~ Parties to ~~the~~ a conflict shall conclude ~~local~~ arrangements for the removal of the wounded and sick ~~by sea~~ from a besieged or encircled area and for the passage of medical ~~and religious~~ personnel and equipment on their way to that area.

Section 14 5: ~~The~~ Any Parties to ~~the~~ any conflict shall record as soon as possible, in respect of each shipwrecked, wounded, sick or dead person of ~~the~~ an adverse Party falling into their hands, any particulars which may assist in ~~his~~ their identification. These records should if possible include:
a. designation of the Power on which he depends;
b. service branch, regimental, personal or serial number;
c. surname;
d. first name or names;
e. date of birth;
f. any other particulars shown on his identity card or disc;
g. date and place of capture or death;
h. particulars concerning wounds or illness, or cause of death.

Section 28 6: The provisions of the present Article do not relieve the occupying Power of its obligation to give ~~both~~ physical ~~and moral~~ care to the wounded and sick.

Amendment 4

Renumber Article 3 as Article 2

Article 3 (Article 2 in amended numbering)

Section 1. Fixed establishments and mobile medical units of ~~the~~ any Medical Services may in no circumstances be attacked, but shall at all times be respected and protected by the Parties to the conflict.

Section 3. The provisions of the Hospital Ship Classification and Protection Act of 2020 shall ~~not~~ be superseded by the provisions of this act ~~in case of conflicting ideas~~.

Remove Sections 4, 5, 6, 7, 8

Amendment 5

Remove Article 4

Amendment 6

Renumber Article 5 to Article 3

Article 5 (Article 3 in amended numbering)

Remove Sections 2, 4, 5

Renumber Section 3 as Section 2

Amendment 7

Remove Articles 6 and 7

Amendment 8

*Renumber Article 8 as Article 4

Now, I am aware that this leaves virtually nothing of the Commissioner's hard work. Sadly, this bare bones structure of what he proposes is quite literally all the Empire of Inimicus finds acceptable. His proposal's extensive focus on defining the Red Cross emblem was hugely problematic for such a diverse region as ours, and has therefore been scrapped. I also want to point out that nowhere in his proposals is there mention of the right of prisoners of war, even though this is a cornerstone of the Commissioner's intentions. This would be a good starting point.

As a side note, however, although I wholly appreciate what a nasty business the wrting of legislation is, I find it slightly odd for Commissioner Biden to draft up a pile of nitty-gritty rules, dump them on the Council's table, and tell us to work out for ourselves what to keep and what not to. That is not the way business is done in Europolis and it never has been. Commissioners come to the table with detailed, specific proposals with a clear purpose behind them, and then work with the Council, co-operatively, to achieve their goal. They should not refuse to engage with critical comments from Councillors and expect us to save a bill we do not see fit for purpose. There is no better way to achieve nothing.

Nicholas Benfield
Empire of Inimicus

Kingdom of Reitzmag

I'd like to thank the Premier Commissioner for his extensive work on this bill.

Although I do find this act filled with some unnecessary provisions, I oppose the proposal to remove the article detailing rules on the distinctive emblems. I must say that, I think it is important that medical personnel be easily identifiable for their protection against attack from any side of a conflict. I also, highly oppose the complete removal of Article 6 for it states specific rules for medical transport and how they must be treated. Otherwise, I believe that this act would barely have any soul or purpose at all. But looking at the entire act, I think it would be more appropriate to amend each article instead of remove the articles as a whole. There are various sections that are necessary which will be removed if this wanton article removal will be done. An example of which is Article 1 Section 5, which states a brief summary of the minimum provisions that must be undertaken by parties in case of conflict. Without provisions like this, the primary purpose of this act will be gone. But at worst, nations may find loopholes to circumvent the provisions of this act and commit war crimes without being prosecuted. It is expected that we will be proposing our amendments later once the AEC has finished voted on the amendments proposed by our members, that is all I can say for now thank you.

Dame Yuridiana Yahontov GCC
Councilor, Kingdom of Reitzmag

Istkalen

Debate will be extended until 12 April 2022 at 22:00 GMT.

Iras Tilkanas
Council Speaker and Councillor for the Republic of Istkalen

BrumBrum

I'll be honest I like the concept of this act but it is simply too complicated for what it needs to be and filled with too much jargon. I don't know how to fix it to be honest. This should be withdrawn and rewritten much more concisely to have the same meaning but have it much more clear and concise.
James Mizrachi-Roscoe , Councillor for United Duchies

Istkalen

Debate will be extended to 23:59 GMT on 25 April 2022.

Iras Tilkanas
Council Speaker and Councillor for the Republic of Istkalen

Istkalen

Debate is over. There are 8 amendments for vote, proposed by Cllr. Benfield. Voting begins NOW and will continue until 12:00 GMT on 2 May 2022.