Post

I decided to vote against the proposed WA resolution, simply because article 3 states, quote:
"In regards to Article 2, an exception shall be provided for receiving states that enter into a lawful, written contract that assures the extraditing state that the persons in question shall not receive the death penalty."
This sounds like a great thing, however, consider this. You're running a nation and you really want to kill someone, so you strike a deal with some seedy nation that likes killing people - one who's not in the WA - which will gladly take your money or, even better, pay you (realistically the latter's pretty outstanding) to write a contract that declares that they will not kill the person you send over to said nation, and then proceed to kill that person. Now, sure. They technically broke the written contract. But as long as your nation doesn't complain, and given it's not a contract signed by the World Assembly itself, and especially given there's no clause regarding the plausible extension to such a contract which states that the deporting nation can't disregard the contract. After all, section 3 only states that the receiving end assures the deporting state no death penalty; it does not necessarily grant the individual airtight protection, but the deporting state, which might at a later time wish to dissolve said contract after the deportation process has been completed.

In other words, it's basically a giant loophole to a ban on capital punishment. (Admittedly I have no idea if this is a thing or not but either way I thought we already had legislation regarding extradition which I thought was why I didn't work on my own resolution regarding extradition but whatever.)