The World Assembly (WA),

Noting that some WA states require the use of documents to identify individuals, in routine domestic transactions such as those with a government or with financial institutions (to decide on eligibility for payments, applying for bank accounts, cashing cheques, employment and other matters);

Concerned that such documents may require a fee for issuance, which disadvantages those least able to afford such fees, and impede their access to government payments and services that may require such documents;

1. Hereby defines:

   1. ”Inhabitant(s)” to mean anyone who is:

      1. physically in a WA state, and;

      2. who also meets at least one of the criteria below:

         1. a citizen of the WA state;

         2. a resident or long-term visitor of the WA state, permanently or temporarily, pursuant to the laws of that WA state;

         3. an applicant for asylum or refugee or protected status, or anyone holding such status;

         4. anyone who purports to be stateless; or

         5. anyone else entitled to IDs pursuant to that WA state’s laws;

   2. "IDs" to mean one or more documents stating an inhabitant’s identity such as, merely as examples, identity cards and household registrations, provided that:

      1. such IDs must contain such information routinely needed for an inhabitant to handle the domestic affairs of that WA state, such as, merely as examples, the following:

         1. the full legal name;

         2. date and place of birth;

         3. residency and/or citizenship status;

         4. full residential address;

         5. full likeness of the inhabitant;

      2. such IDs may be in physical, electronic or other forms depending on the technology levels of that WA state;

      3. the sole requirement for issuing such IDs is for anyone to meet the criteria of being an inhabitant of that WA state;

2. Hereby requires, subject to extant WA resolutions:

   1. A competent authority of a WA state is to provide IDs to all inhabitants of that WA state upon request by that inhabitant for free, as soon as reasonably practicable, and may not charge any fee(s) for:

      1. applying for;

      2. verifying;

      3. processing;

      4. issuing;

      5. replacing such IDs, including those lost, stolen or damaged; or

      6. delivery of such IDs;

   2. IDs may be issued by a competent authority at the national level of government of a WA state, or at sub-national levels, or delegated to any entit(ies) that the said WA state deems fit;

   3. IDs validly issued by a WA state must be deemed valid and sufficient for all domestic affairs of that WA state, where proof of identity is required, including (but not limited to) all governmental, financial or business affairs;

   4. A WA state may not deny issuing IDs to an inhabitant on the grounds that some information, such as, merely as examples, date of birth or place of birth, may not be verifiable due to circumstances beyond the reasonable control of that inhabitant;

   5. A WA state shall make it as convenient as reasonably practicable for an individual to obtain IDs, and without separately charging for such means, for individuals that may be disadvantaged for any reason, such as, merely as examples:

      1. lacking literacy and/or language skills;

      2. physical limitations;

      3. mental acuity and/or capacity, subject to clause 2(f);

   6. A legal parent and/or legal guardian may, voluntarily, apply for and receive IDs on behalf of an inhabitant below the age of majority or lacking the mental capacity and/or legal competence to make such an application;

   7. A WA state may not deny issuing IDs to an inhabitant of that WA state on the grounds of that inhabitant holding IDs from another WA state, or other similar instruments from a non-WA state;

   8. IDs validly issued by a WA state must be deemed valid and sufficient for identification purposes by all agencies and committees of the WA;

3. Hereby clarifies that this resolution does not interfere with a WA state's rights and qualifications, subject to extant WA resolutions, in:

   1. formulating its own citizenship and immigration policies;

   2. domestic affairs reserved as the prerogative of individual WA states;

   3. controlling its borders;

   4. issuing documents other than IDs, such as driving licenses;

   5. making it an offence for fraudulent applications and use of IDs (including fraudulent reporting of loss or stolen IDs), or imposing penalties for such offences if convicted.

The World Assembly (WA),

Noting that the right to a fair trial and due process have been long-standing concerns for the WA;

Recognizing that no regulations govern bail arrangements, especially excessive cash bail that discriminates against the poor;

1. Hereby defines:

   1. “Bail” to mean conditions imposed on the conduct of a suspect in return for releasing a suspect from custody prior to a hearing, such as, in order of severity:

      1. own recognizance;

      2. restrictions of conduct, such as, merely as examples, curfews or confinement to particular residence(s) or workplace(s);

      3. the pledge of cash or items of monetary value ("cash bail") which may be forfeited if a suspect fails to return to court;

   2. “Charges” to mean the offences for which a suspect has been duly charged with;

   3. “Court” to mean a competent judicial body adjudicating on criminal matters in the WA state ("that WA state") where the suspect is facing the charges;

   4. “Hearing” to mean a court hearing, including pre-trial proceedings, trials, and appeals;

   5. “Suspect” to mean any individual facing charges, or who has been convicted but has not exhausted all appeals, according to the judicial process of that WA state;

2. Hereby requires that a suspect may not be denied bail by a court unless:

   1. the suspect is found to have a prima facie case to answer or is duly indicted; and

   2. the suspect is charged with a "serious" criminal offence as defined by the laws of that WA state; and

   3. the suspect satisfies at least one of the conditions in the following sub-clauses:

      1. The suspect is deemed by the court to be:

         1. hostis humani generis;

         2. charged by that WA state with an offence pursuant to aut dedere aut judicare; or

         3. at extreme risk of:

            1. absconding;

            2. self-harm;

            3. endangering the safety or welfare of anyone else; or

      2. The suspect has a demonstrable track record of:

         1. repeatedly failing to meet all conditions of bail determined by a court; or

         2. attempt(s) to interfering with witnesses or otherwise obstructing the course of justice;

3. Hereby requires a court to consider imposing bail conditions other than cash bail only if less severe alternatives are deemed grossly inadequate for the purpose of bail and solely as an alternative to not granting bail altogether;

4. Hereby requires a court, if it decides to impose cash bail, to:

   1. Ensure that it is used only if the court deems the suspect to be extremely likely to abscond and has the means and incentives to do so; and

   2. Satisfy itself that the amount of cash bail should reflect the financial circumstances of the suspect; and

      1. likely for the suspect to raise such funds without facing financial ruin; and

      2. not exceeding the maximum penalty and/or restitution required if the suspect is convicted and all appeals exhausted;

   3. Inform the suspect of the cheapest means to raise such funds, such as (as an example) through charities, if that WA state permits cash bail and permits funds to be raised via commercial means;

   4. Inform the suspect, if the suspect is a citizen of another state, to potentially seek assistance from that other state to help fund the cash bail;

5. If a suspect that utilized commercial means to raise funds for bail is acquitted (or vacated) of the offence(s), the full commercial cost of the bail should be compensated for;

6. Hereby directs a court:

   1. To apply leniency in granting bail towards anyone charged for a first-time alleged offence, or for crimes that are not violent in nature;

   2. To not revoke bail unless due to extreme changes in circumstances, such as (merely as an example) if the suspect is duly convicted of another offence when out on bail;

7. Hereby deems it an offence for anyone:

   1. In a capacity as law enforcement officer or as a prosecutor to offer bail conditions as part of a plea-bargain;

   2. To coerce or entice a suspect into declining to apply for bail;

8. Hereby clarifies that this resolution does not:

   1. Prohibit a suspect from voluntarily declining to apply for bail for any reason;

   2. Prohibit a WA state from restricting or banning cash bail (or commercial forms of cash bail) altogether;

   3. Interfere with a court's decision not to grant bail altogether;

9. The judiciary of that WA state is responsible for interpretation of this resolution.

General Assembly Resolution #684 “Challenging Sexually Exploitative Recordings” (Category: Moral Decency; Strength: Mild) shall be struck out and rendered null and void.

Expressing its disgust in activities cited in the target resolution, namely the distribution of "revenge pornography", "upskirting" and "downblousing";

Acknowledging the purported intent of the target resolution to "challenge" such activities;

However, dismayed that the resolution contains significant loopholes that impede implementing this resolution, and, in some cases, potentially impeding anyone seeking redress for such activities;

In particular, aghast that operating clause two's very specifically wording requiring all WA states to "to outlaw... wilful distribution of, and threats to distribute [said] recordings" and the very narrow exception "where their distribution occurs in a judicial or policing context and is necessary to help convict a person of an offence defined in this Article" means that:

1. evidence drawn from such recordings cannot be used in other criminal cases (outside of those "defined in this Article"), even if the cases more serious in nature, such as, merely as examples, domestic abuse or murder;

2. the aforesaid evidence also cannot be used in settings such as administrative procedures, arbitration and mediation proceedings, and also cannot be used in civil proceedings in court (such as, merely as examples, civil cases for recovering damages for emotional distress and trauma), thus defeating much the purpose of this resolution;

Looking forward to a well-written resolution to address this topic in due course;

Hereby repeals the target resolution, "Challenging Sexually Exploitative Recordings".

General Assembly Resolution #683 “End Blood Sports” (Category: Moral Decency; Strength: Mild) shall be struck out and rendered null and void.

The World Assembly,

Believing that the definition of "blood sport" in the target resolution as a "competitive activity" excludes the morally questionable practice of inflicting violence on animals for entertainment without competitive aspect,

Concerned that the target resolution's continuation on the books precludes a cohesive replacement to fix that exclusion and of the sort that certain factions in the Assembly believe is desirable, and

Registering complaints for the record as to the largely unnecessary, duplicative, and dubious character of and surrounding recent legislation on this topic, hereby

Repeals GA 683 "End Blood Sports".