(P(I)) Terraforming and Colonization Regulation Resolution of 2015

• Section 1: The Esamir Terraforming Authority is hereby established as a branch of the Esamir Government.
  
• Section 2: The Esamir Terraforming Authority, heretofore known as the ETA, is the sole regulatory authority for terraforming activities.
  
• Section 3: All nations must obey laws set forth herein and enacted by the ETA, which shall be comprised by nations that maintain a space program.
  
• Section 4: Actions undertaken by the ETA shall be within the bounds of the Esamir Charter and all other laws that regulate its authority.
  
• Section 5: The ETA shall be made up of five members, of whom a chief administrator shall be elected to oversee the implementation of regulations.
  
• Section 6: An Earth-like atmosphere is hereby designated as an atmosphere that provides 14.7 lbs/in² (1033.51 g/cm²) of pressure and an atmosphere made up predominantly of gaseous nitrogen and oxygen capable of supporting oxygen based lifeforms.
  
• Section 7: Life is defined as anything existing that is either unicellular or multi-celled, requires some sort of food to survive (even autotrophs produce food, just for themselves), and/or DNA, RNA, or a an equivalent for storing genetic information.
  

• Section 1: All terraforming must be approved by the Esamir Terraforming Authority.
  
• Section 2: The act of terraforming must have approval from the ETA and failure to have said approval will result in criminal prosecution.
  
• Section 3: The ETA reserves the right to prosecute the unlawful terraformation of a planet via the Court of Justice.
  
• Section 4: Terraforming itself may only take place if the planet is inhospitable for human life without it.
  
• Section 5: Should a planet be believed lifeless but life be discovered whilst terraforming is ongoing, all terraformation activities shall cease while scientific authorities authorized by the ETA or whomever has jurisdiction in the area attempts to confirm if the presence of an Earth-like atmosphere should prove harmful to said lifeform.
  
• Section 5a: Should it be found that an Earth-like atmosphere would be harmful to said organism, terraforming activities will be banned permanently on that planetary body unless revoked by the General Assembly in a 2/3 vote.
  
• Section 5b: Should it be found that an Earth-like atmosphere would not harm the life forms, terraforming may continue.
  

• Section 1: Nations are permitted to claim land on another planet for the purpose of the establishment of colonies and research for as long as they so choose.
  
• Section 2: The development of colonies shall not extend to another nation's territory.
  
• Section 3: Nations are strictly forbidden to engage in warfare against another nation's colonies unless in a defensive measure being that they have already been attacked. Nation's who undertake any offensive action will be subject to trial before the Court of Justice possible revocation of their ability to colonize.
  
• Section 4: Colonies that will no longer be utilized by the the constructing nation will either be sold to the Esamir Government for proper decommission or decommissioned themselves. Nation's may not leave colonies abandoned.
  

Europe and Asia wrote:Section 5: The ETA shall be made up of five members, of whom a chief administrator shall be elected to oversee the implementation of regulations.

Zackalantis wrote:The UKZ stands firmly opposed to this RESOLUTION!!!

The UKZ has never seen a more flawed or corrupted piece of legislation on the floor of this house.

There are several contradictions in this entire resolution and nothing has been done to keep space as a neutral realm.

This resolution, we can say as a developing nation is against the interests of all developing nations and an attempt to build a power club of nations in space.

UKZ is appaled at the ideas presented here in this resolution. But we believe that if we qork together with the author we can establish a better, and more fair resolution.

OOC: Why are we still calling it Acts it's now called resolutions. I get that using the UN format of resolutions may not be very comfortable as many of you are used to this format. But can we please call them resos instead.

Meigmaland wrote:Art. II, Sec. 5 - How is life being defined for this bill?

Art. III - Add this (or similar): "Section 5: No nation may claim more than <insert number here> percent of the land on planet." Without a size limit, the first nation to colonize could theoretically claim the entire planet, and based on the other laws in this bill, they could have exclusive access to the planet. I'm aware that the ETA would decide if a claim is too large or not, but putting it in the bill itself makes it easier for the ETA since they won't need to reject incredibly large claims.

Duresia wrote:

Europe and Asia wrote:Section 5: The ETA shall be made up of five members, of whom a chief administrator shall be elected to oversee the implementation of regulations.

Any reason for five members?

Zackalantis wrote:The UKZ stands firmly opposed to this RESOLUTION!!!

The UKZ has never seen a more flawed or corrupted piece of legislation on the floor of this house.

There are several contradictions in this entire resolution and nothing has been done to keep space as a neutral realm.

This resolution, we can say as a developing nation is against the interests of all developing nations and an attempt to build a power club of nations in space.

UKZ is appaled at the ideas presented here in this resolution. But we believe that if we qork together with the author we can establish a better, and more fair resolution.

OOC: Why are we still calling it Acts it's now called resolutions. I get that using the UN format of resolutions may not be very comfortable as many of you are used to this format. But can we please call them resos instead.

Europe and Asia wrote:

Duresia wrote:

Europe and Asia wrote:Section 5: The ETA shall be made up of five members, of whom a chief administrator shall be elected to oversee the implementation of regulations.

Any reason for five members?

So if there is a difficult issue the ETA can't split down the middle and not make a decision. Five members would mean there is always a majority.

Duresia wrote:

Europe and Asia wrote:

Duresia wrote:

Europe and Asia wrote:Section 5: The ETA shall be made up of five members, of whom a chief administrator shall be elected to oversee the implementation of regulations.

Any reason for five members?

So if there is a difficult issue the ETA can't split down the middle and not make a decision. Five members would mean there is always a majority.

That we understood, it's just that 5 seems like a very small number for something as big as space. As for the rest of the bill, if the ammendment by Megimaland is adden then we are ready to vote yes.

Also, how does one become a member of ETA? Elections? And are the seats permanent?

Europe and Asia wrote:

Duresia wrote:

Europe and Asia wrote:

Duresia wrote:

Europe and Asia wrote:Section 5: The ETA shall be made up of five members, of whom a chief administrator shall be elected to oversee the implementation of regulations.

Any reason for five members?

So if there is a difficult issue the ETA can't split down the middle and not make a decision. Five members would mean there is always a majority.

That we understood, it's just that 5 seems like a very small number for something as big as space. As for the rest of the bill, if the ammendment by Megimaland is adden then we are ready to vote yes.

Also, how does one become a member of ETA? Elections? And are the seats permanent?

I was planning to have the GE vote on whomever wants to be on the council and then the seats would be up for reelection every time we do an SC election.

New Tarajan wrote:The delegate of New Tarajan wishes to make some points about this proposal.

First, a formal one: this is not an ACT, but a RESOLUTION. Please, change the name accordingly (OOC: I know, it could seem stupid..but we are trying to establish a new kind of legislative process through the UN-like system so...also names matter).

Secondly: we don't understand what is the point of this Resolution, when it talks about terraformation.
Isn't it impossible?

And we don't agree with its composition, as mandated by the Resolution: we believe a more comprehensive system should be adopted.

New Tarajan wrote:The delegate of New Tarajan wishes to make some points about this proposal.

First, a formal one: this is not an ACT, but a RESOLUTION. Please, change the name accordingly (OOC: I know, it could seem stupid..but we are trying to establish a new kind of legislative process through the UN-like system so...also names matter).

Secondly: we don't understand what is the point of this Resolution, when it talks about terraformation.
Isn't it impossible?

And we don't agree with its composition, as mandated by the Resolution: we believe a more comprehensive system should be adopted.

New Tarajan wrote:Our idea is that the ETA should be composed, at least, by all thouse countries which are actively engaged in space activities.

Europe and Asia wrote:The five member council (or however many, we are open to suggestions) merely allows the council to be more efficacious and fluid in its operation. The more people present, the longer decisions will take.

Federation of Antanares wrote:

Europe and Asia wrote:The five member council (or however many, we are open to suggestions) merely allows the council to be more efficacious and fluid in its operation. The more people present, the longer decisions will take.

In a case like this, and I'm talking about the entire question of space research and exploration, I think is better have a larger council, but slower, than one smaller and faster.

Zackalantis wrote:1. The UKZ stands firmly opposed to Terraformation as we do not have enough information about it. We do not know how the geology of any celestial body would react to such a drastic change or we do not know if this this new earth like atmosphere will take on a deatructive[sic] role or contort[sic] into something horrific.
We do not know if by establishing earth like conditions new life will begin to evolve- the moral and scientific effects of the same could be well beyond our capacity to comprehend.

Zackalantis wrote:2. If terraformation is legalized by the international community by some folly, it needs effecient, strict and fair regulation.

Zackalantis wrote:Art.I-3: why allow only those nations into the committee that have space programmes what abput those nations that are trying to establish a space programme?
It wouldn't be fair to them

Zackalantis wrote:e is simply to always have a majority and prevent deadlock. We are open to increasing it to perhaps nine, but that is the extent how large it will get.

[quote="Zackalantis"]Art II- 5a: Behold yet another attempt by regional superpowers to continue their attempts of dominance. Why do we need a GA vote? If life is found, that's it terraformation must STOP.

Zackalantis wrote:Art II- 5b: No matter how much our nations have advanced in science and technology, there is no way we may ever know if an alien organism can or cannot be harmed by the environment. Also it should be noted that these organisms would have developed in non-earth like conditions, by continuing terraformation we change the ecology of the planet. We alter the course of that organisms evolution.
That's smilar[sic] to clearing out an entire rainforest[sic] and expecting those animals whose habitat you have changed to survive. IT IS ILLOGICAL and UNETHICAL.

Zackalantis wrote:Art III- 1: the UKZ wishes to see space as a neutral territory and claiming land ruins that. However if it is the wish of the international community then the UKZ shall not push forward the idea of a neutral and peaceful space.

Zackalantis wrote:Art III- 2: let us define ‘development'. Does terraformation come under ‘development'?

Zackalantis wrote:Cause[sic] if it does we have a serious problem on our hands. Different nations are going to establish different colonies at different times and are going to begin terraformation at different times. The chaos that will ensue will be disastrous.

Zackalantis wrote:A. We cannot terraform only a small piece of land. How will thise[sic] new atmosphere react with the atmosphere of the rest of the planet?
B. What if two colonies at very different stages in terraformation have their atmospheres react?

Zackalantis wrote:We don't know what the repercussions will be. But it is not a chance that we should be willing to take.

Zackalantis wrote:Art III-3: The best way we can avoid war in space is if we prevent weapons in space. BAN THE WEAPONISATION[sic] OF SPACE.
On Earth weapons are used as a deterrent. We dont[sic] need such in space. Let's keep it peaceful.

Zackalantis wrote:Art III-4: Sold? Who and who will the price be determined? I think it's better if we leave this to the responsibility of the Founding nations of those colonies. They built the colony, they should dismantle it.

Europe and Asia wrote:For the purposes of the bill, we would define life as anything existing that is either unicellular or multi-celled, requires some sort of food to survive (even autotrophs produce food, just for themselves), and/or DNA, RNA, or a an equivalent for storing genetic information.

Europe and Asia wrote:We agree completely with your point. What percentage did you think would be best?