Governor General's Reports and Information

Event: Pearl-MUN 2006

Students:

Sara Fakral-Deen, Mays Abdulaziz,
Saoud Al-Sabah, and Abdullah Al-Mdaires

 

Links to other sites on the Web:

Back to the 2005-2006 Team page
Back to the 2006 Pearl-MUN page
Back to the Briefing Book Library
Back to Teams
Back to Fruit Home

 

The Arab League



A. Task list of the AL**

1. Choose the Issues
2. Assign countries.
3. Make your requirements clear.
4. Make a background on the Issues debated.
5. Ask for admin. staff.
6. Create a handbook for the AL.
7. Put the handbook in the day of the event on the tables.
8. Prepare Placards and stationary.
9. Train Chairs.
10. Have practices to debate certain issues.
11. Have a back up delegate in case KSA doesn’t show up.
12. Ask committee officers to help with food and beverages.
13. Have to come one day before the event to prepare a committee room.
14. Follow the timetable for the SC, but different procedure.
15. Have Ibrahim have a microphone ready in the red room.
16. If not reserved for the event reserves the red room.
17. Have a successful AL
Total tasks=17
Bold tasks indicate completion of the task.
Tasks completed= 17 Tasks left=0

 

B. Background on the issues of the Arab league


1. The Question of reforming the Arab League

a. Background

The Arab League is one of the main organizations today, yet it is one of the weakest. All of the Arab countries are part of the Arab League. The league of Arab nations (AL) was formed March 22 1945, with many different states as founders. The League's charter states that the League shall co-ordinate economic affairs, including commercial relations; communications; cultural affairs; nationality, passports, and visas; social affairs; and health affairs. The Charter of the Arab League also forbids member states from resorting to force against each other.

If the charter states this then why is reforming the league is essential? The problem is that in the last 50 years or so countries used force and all other types of military actions against each other. Examples are Kuwait and Iraq/ Mauritania and Morocco/ KSA and Yemen and many other conflicts. People wonder that maybe the Arab League was done to create conflicts.

The Arab League faced many bad situations, including the Palestinian conflict and the withdrawal of some countries from it and returning. Libya was always a cause of trouble for the Middle East, because it withdrew from the AL sometimes. Also, it made the US anti-Libyan which hurt it a lot. The other major problem and the biggest problem is the Israeli occupation of Palestine, and this greatly affects the AL.

 

b. The problem

The violations of the charter have reached its limits, thus a big problem had occurred in this Arab League. One of the major problems is the Arabs not having a combined army that is strong enough to face other strong armies like Israel. Another problem is that the Arab League’s goal is to have economic reforms, but did that happen instead poverty had increased in some countries. However, the biggest and huge problem is the foreign influence on the Arab League; basically the USA controls many of the countries. These countries include the GCC country, and some African countries like Sudan and Egypt.

The strongest nations of the Arab League are also weak, and this causes the world not to respect the Arab League. These countries are weak for many different reasons. The main Reason is the US influence on these country’s domestic and foreign policies. For example, Egypt at once never wanted to communicate with Israel but instead now it’s the strongest ally for Israel within the Middle Eastern countries. Libya was once strong, but now what happened is that it was weakened slowly by the US with the help some of its Arab servants.

"The Arabs has agreed not to agree" that is what we hear in the mouth and tongues of Arab citizens after each summit. On many occasions they have been marred by public disputes which showcase Arab disunity rather than its intended opposite. The Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi stormed out of the opening session criticizing almost everyone else attending. The year before he exchanged insults with the de facto ruler of Saudi Arabia, Crown Prince Abdullah. That was during the Sharm al-Sheikh summit held about two weeks before the American invasion of Iraq. It was another divided meeting, which failed to come up with anything beyond a feeble expression of support for Baghdad. The US had already arranged to launch its military campaign from the territories of Iraq's Arab neighbors. The war on Iraq underlines how the Arabs don’t stick with their policy, first they were against the war on Saddam Hussein then they support it.

Much criticism towards the Arab League from different Arab and Foreign Leaders have happened in the last few years, but what did they do about it. Like the Saudi columnist Abdul Rahman al-Rashed. "The Arab League has become used to treating the patient's wounds only after his death," he wrote. Continuing "This elderly institution has been deaf to every big event because that is the best way of escaping responsibility. But it can also be said that the art of avoidance has killed the Arab League." This is one of the much known critics of the Arab League.

In the counter some people believe that the League is weak but is at its maximum capacity. Those who imagined that the League would resolve the Palestinian problem or achieve Arab unity have been placing the bar too high," said Abdul Moneim Said, the director of al-Ahram Centre for Political and Strategic Studies. Continuing that "The Arab League has succeeded in creating a forum for Arab countries to come together and express their views to the world. But it is an organization of sovereign states, each of which only represents it. There is little doubt, however, that the League's effectiveness as a regional organization has been hampered by divisions between members." This is one of the least Arabs who believe that the Arab League is good.

Last but not least, the Arabs want reform, but they are either unable to do so or are not willing to do so. On many occasions, Arab governments have decided that their national interests were better served by having strong relations with the US even if it angered other Arab countries. Divisions over the US invasion of Iraq in 1991 was one example. Another which also caused deep rifts within the Arab League was Egypt's decision in 1978 to seek peace with Israel and closer ties with the US. Arab governments are aware of the need to strengthen the organization. So far, however, they do not appear to have agreed on any substantial steps.

Finally, the laughable proposal in Algiers proposed by some Arab countries. One reform under discussion in Algiers has been the establishment of an appointed Arab parliament attached to the organization. The measure was adopted in the final summit communiqué, but analysts have dismissed the proposal as laughable. They say without first introducing democracy within member states, it will be futile to establish what will be become just another pointless talking shop.

 

c. Conclusion:-

The Arab League has been weak, and is getting weakened economically and politically. Three main reasons undermine the weakness of the Arab League. First, not having democracy in many of these countries and if so not correctly implemented. Second, all countries are not seeking the best for the Arab countries, but for themselves. This leads to not having a unified Arab League that doesn’t have unified stand on any issue. Last but not Least, the Arab League is not having the power

 

 

2. The Arab League and Iraq’s destabilization

a. Background:

The Iraq War that began in 2003 badly split the Arab League, the same lines that the Arab world divided during the Gulf War of 1990-91. The states of the Arabian Gulf supported or at least refused to publicly object to the U.S.-led military deployments ahead of the war. Several, including Syria and the Palestinian Authority, are deeply opposed. The League itself, as is often the case, thus is unable to coordinate Arab policy. 

In September 2003, five months after the fall of Saddam Hussein, the Arab League extended diplomatic recognition to the Iraqi government. Unfortunately, none of the Arab states have yet established a permanent diplomatic mission in Iraq, a sore point in relations with Baghdad. 

In 2005 the Arab League decided to empower its secretary-general, the former Egyptian foreign minister Amr Moussa, to organize a conference on national reconciliation in Iraq.  Sunnis in Iraq have publicly welcomed the initiative. But long-standing suspicions among Shiites and Kurds about the Sunni-dominated Arab League’s agenda may limit Moussa’s ability to affect the debate. One way or another, experts view the October 2005 initiative as something of a shift in the Arab world’s perspective on Iraq. Where previously the Arab League had been largely silent on post-Saddam Iraq, Moussa’s trip is seen as an indication that the Arab world is beginning to grapple with the implications of a democratic Iraq run by Shiites, a prospect viewed with concern by some of the Arab world’s governments. 

 

b. Problem:

The problem stands today between the Arab League and Iraq. The lack of aid coming from the Arab League has caused the increase of destabilization in Iraq. Iraq’s government has complained bitterly about the Arab League’s inaction since the fall of Saddam’s regime. A recent flare-up came on September 5, when Iraqi President Jalal Talabani complained that none of the Arab world’s leaders had expressed sympathy or offered aid in the wake of a stampede of religious pilgrims in Baghdad that left nearly 1,000 dead. Talabani’s remarks underscored ethnic and religious suspicions that Iraqi Kurds and Shiites feel toward the Arab League, most of whose twenty-two member states are ruled by Sunni Arabs. Talabani, a Kurd, told reporters in September that Arab League statements demanding that Iraq’s constitution declare itself an Islamic and Arab country demonstrated a bias.  

The Arab League is not doing its job. The sectarian violence and destabilized Iraq are currently being stopped by the US and not the Arab League. The Arab League’s inefficiency towards solving the issue is quite obvious. First after the US led War on Iraq, the Arab league delayed its meeting to about two months after the conflict had occurred, and even when it did occur the meeting only had 14 of the Arab League states why the rest bowed out for various reasons. Several conferences have taken place by the Arab league but have proven to be ineffective. 

Sectarian violence is still raging in Iraq and even Amr Moussa’s visit to Iraq has proven to be ineffective. Even the Shiite who is taking control are somewhat allying with Iran, which has caused Iraq to move away from the Arab League and closer to its Muslim Neighbor Iran. 

 

c. Conclusion:

The Arab League’s policy towards the Iraqi conflict is ineffective, as we see today. The lack of support from every member state has allowed the insurgency in Iraq to increase and effect many other neighboring Arab states. This is a call to all Arab States, as the time to empower the league of Arabs, and join forces is now, in order to face the and stop the conflicts in Iraq. 

 

 

3. Responses towards alleviating the suffering of the Palestinian people.

a. Background: -

The main conflict in the world today is the Palestinian Zionist conflict. This conflict may unite the Arabs in one point which they believe there must a Palestinian state, and the eradication of the Israeli State. Many of the Arab nations have representatives of Israel in their country, and this means they believe in an Israeli state. For example, Qatar and Jordan have Israeli representatives in their country, which means they support it. This conflict isn’t only the Arabs vs. Israel; no it is about the Arabs vs. the westerners who support it.

Why not leave the issue to the UNSC since it is peaceful. The problem is that Israel has a strong backbone that never breaks which is the USA. Thus Israel is not afraid of any country today. That is why a solution is needed from the AL, because there is no USA in it. However, there is a strong influence on some countries including Kuwait and Egypt.

The Israeli Palestinian conflict doesn’t only include a war but it also includes a problem of refugees. The refugees in Palestine are located all over the Arab world, and especially in the area of Levant. Through the UN GA these citizens were granted the right to return and get compensations for their losses, but many didn’t because Israel didn’t allow them. And nobody did anything for them not allowing Palestinians to return to their countries.

The Arab League in many occasions declared that it is with Palestine, but no actions have taken place since Jamal Abdulnaser. The Arabs only give money to Palestine and should be willing to increase that money since the US promised to cut its support the new Palestinian government. A war between Hamas and all other non-Islamic wings in the country is about to happen, since many see that Hamas will kill the hope in Palestine.

 

b. Problem:-

The problem today in Palestine could be simplified in one statement; the Arabs are letting Palestine faint on its own. And that is happening because of the weakness of the Arabs in front of USA and Israel. The cut of aid from USA to Palestine how will it be compensated, from who will it come no public statement of any Arab country has been made. Last but not. Least, many countries are unable to act alone even if they wanted since most of the leaders lack courage.

The other part is that the USA has put a two-state solution to the problem, and many countries support it including Arab nations. The solution is called a road map, it is a problem, because some of the major Arab nations oppose and some support it. The main countries that oppose are Syria, Libya, the Palestinian new authority itself Hamas. However, all other countries support it since they believe no way to end the situation after Israel gas been built completely. Also since the US pressured these countries to support this plan that divides Palestine into an Israeli and Palestinian state.

The other problem that causes more bad conditions in Israel is how to put measures to stop the people from dying in Palestine. Many statements s to this problem from different countries should come, but we should underline one solution which is aid to Palestine. Which will be cut, and the other thing could be having military support. However, there is no military support from any Arab country allowed in the region.

 

c. Conclusion:-

The Suffering of the Palestinian people will be increasing, especially after Hamas took power in Iraq. The goal of the committee is finding a way to decrease the sufferings of the Palestinian people. All countries are with increasing the aid to Palestine, but there could be some different approaches. For example, some could declare war against Israel, and this would include countries that believe the AL needs reform.

 

 

4. The Arab League and Nuclear Iran Issue

a. Background:

Once one of America’s most reliable allies, Iran has more recently been characterized by President George Bush (II) as part of the "axis of evil." The pro-western leader, Shah Muhammad Reza Pahlavi, was deposed in 1979 during the Iranian Revolution and the Ayatollah Khomeini returned from exile to become the national religious leader of the new Islamic republic, based on fundamentalist Islamic principles. After Islamist militants seized the US embassy, 52 Americans were held hostage for 444 days. Iran became the first modern state ruled by the Islamic principles of Sharia and precipitated the emergence of a growing fundamentalist, or Islamist movement. The Islamist movement has become the prime driver behind international religious terrorism. (It should be noted that Iranians are predominately Persian and Shiite Muslims, as contrasted with other Middle East states that are predominately Arab and Sunni Muslims.).

Currently, Iran has several small nuclear research reactors, in addition to a large-scale nuclear power plant under construction at the southern town of Bushehr. Iran claims that its nuclear power is for peaceful purposes and that it will help free up oil and natural gas resources for export, thus generating additional hard-currency revenues. The country has stated its aim of having 7,000 MW of nuclear power online by 2020, accounting for 10% of the country's power generation capacity at that point.  

In September 2003, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) gave Iran until October 31 to provide guarantees that its nuclear program was for peaceful purposes and to open the country to snap inspections by the IAEA. On October 6, Iran's envoy to the IAEA, Ali Akbar Salehi, said that Iran would withdraw from the nuclear non-proliferation treaty if Western pressure continued. The IAEA Board of Governors is scheduled to meet on November 20 to discuss Iran's nuclear program. On November 14, Iran's Foreign Minister, Kamal Kharazzi, said that his country was committed to "complete transparency," and added that the IAEA report made clear that Iran's nuclear program was for peaceful purposes.  

In December 2002, Iran and Russia signed a protocol for peaceful cooperation in nuclear power. Russia has been assisting Iran on the Bushehr nuclear power facility, work on which first began in 1974 by West Germany, but was halted (80% complete) following the 1978/1979 revolution. Significant amounts of money, possibly billions of dollars, had been spent on Bushehr to that point. Following the Iran-Iraq War (1980-1988), during which time Bushehr was bombed six times and seriously damaged, progress on the plant resumed when Russia signed an $800 million contract in 1995. The contract with Russia called for completion of a 1,000-MW, pressurized-light-water reactor, as well as the possible supply of two modern VVER-440 units. Since then, work has proceeded slowly, although reports in early March 2003 indicated that Bushehr was 70% complete, and was expected to come online as early as March 2004. Subsequently, it is  now scheduled to come online in 2005. In November 2003, Russia proposed that it build a "totally new" second nuclear unit at Bushehr, instead of completing the one started in the late 1970s. 

The Arab currently has been working on solving the conflict. Most of the resolutions in the Arab League were about the Iranian issue.  Many nations including the middle eastern Arab Nations have proposed a WMD free zone, which was supported by many Arab state, and the Arab states agreed that preferentially to some states over others is completely threatening the security of the Arab states in the region. 

 

b. Problem:

The problem stands today is the neglecting of unthreatened nations such as those not in the Middle Eastern region, to Iran’s issue. Even after so, the empowering of the Arab League Secretary General has proven to contradict many of the middle eastern preferences, as Amr Moussa Stated "to enter into the nuclear club and make use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes," 

Arab states are contradicting each other which has caused a broad line between those in favor of nuclear Iran and those that don’t. Moussa, on a number of occasions, has publicly supported Tehran, saying that the West was employing a double standard by pressuring Iran while turning a blind eye to Israel. (Israel, which has not signed the NPT, is believed to possess nuclear weapons but has never officially confirmed this.). Arab countries further away from the Gulf, such as Moussa's native Egypt, tend to support Iran and are using the dispute to focus attention and international pressure on Israel. But Arab states near Iran are leery of its nuclear activities and worried about safety issues as well as regional instability that could result from the dispute if it remains. The differences within the Arab world emerged starkly during a GCC summit in the UAE last December, when GCC Secretary-General Abdul Rahman Al-Attiya urged Iran to join the Gulf group in its pledge to keep the region free of nuclear weapons. Moussa sent a message urging the Gulf leaders to focus on Israel, drawing a retort from UAE foreign minister Abdullah Al-Nuaimi. 

 

c. Conclusion:

The Arab states are not united in this issue. Will the majority choose safety of Arab states or the chance of threatening Israel? The Arab league must come up with a solution to the conflict. Iran and the world community are waiting upon the Arab league’s decision.

 

 

 

B. Speeches of the Arab League


Ladies and gentleman, Alsalam oo alaikom,

Welcome to Pearl MUN 2006, I am Abdullah Al-Mdaires the Secretary general of the Arab League. In every year we have a special committee and this year we choose the Arab League, because as we see that the Arab League is very essential in the world today. We will be discussing many important issues that our world faces today; these issues include Nuclear Iran, Iraq, and reforming the Arab League.

Yes we might not have vetoes in the Arab League, but we must know that the Arab League is a symbol of unity. Which it failed to achieve since it was created.

Delegates we must not forget Mohammed Al-Durra just like that, we mustn’t forget the men and women dying in Iraq daily. Also, we must not forget our most important position in the world today, which is the Issue of Iran. Now it’s our time to act, we must say we are the most important people, and not be influenced by foreign nations.

Ladies and Gentleman we are the Arab world we are a strong unity, we share the same values and culture, so let’s join views and hope to get the best from this session. Let this be the First step towards establishing the strongest Arabs ever, and remember what we used to do to westerners.

As the Secretary General I wish that we have one of the most productive committees ever today, and hope that all delegates in the league and the event accomplish what they came to do today.

 

 

 

Clauses passed during the Arab League


A. This is for both the crisis and Iran Issue.

Submitted by: KSA/ Kuwait/ Egypt/ Syria

1. Demands the league to:
A. Formation of a legitimate and sufficient news-broadcasting program, which will be formed by Arab, states,
B. Condemn the attacks,
C. Take away the nuclear capabilities from Israel and Iran,
D. Having Arab inspectors monitor Iran and Israel’s disarmament;
E. Allow the formation of the Arab nuclear watchdog committee,
F. Send Arab health and aid inspectors to control the radiation and stabilize the region around the power plant.

2. Calls for the creation of a body the Arab Nuclear Watchdog Council (ANWC), under the Arab League (AL), using elements of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), which will consist of a:
A. Research body that will:
i. Congregate information on nuclear developments of all countries part of the AL as well as their neighboring countries,
ii. Present a quarter report on nuclear technological advances to the ANWC,
iii. Set a technological standard, based on the current standard set by the IAEA, in which a country would be able to acquire nuclear energy programs,
iv. Identify environmental hazards, which can affect AL nations by existing nuclear projects,
v. Present the other bodies of ANWC with all information acquired upon,
B. Council body that will:
i. Consist of all member nations of the Arab league,
ii. Meet every quarter (three months),
iii. Negotiate with countries that are developing nuclear programs on the presentation of a monthly development update,
iv. Negotiate with countries that are developing nuclear programs the entrance of an inspector body that will report back to the council,
v. Condemn countries that are not complying, or are posing threat to any Arab league member country,
vi. Have an emergency session in case of any nation not complying with the international standards and is posing a threat that will:
1. Start negotiations to try to diplomatically overcome the dispute
2. Impose sanctions and then economical setbacks so as to coerce the nations in question to comply
3. Impose a schedule by which the nations in question should comply with the standards
vii. Refer to the international community if cases A, B and C are not satisfied
C. Inspector body that will:
i. Enter sites with the approval of the council body,
ii. Examine technological support for the nuclear program facilities available,

 

 

B. This is the clause for the Palestinian issue

Submitted by: Palestine

1. Resolves the Arab League to lend its full financial support to the occupied Iraq and Palestine, standing by its Arab brothers during this difficult time and preventing the accidental extinction of either Palestine or Iraq during the development crisis;

 

 

 

Statement of the Chairs


Zaid (CO-Secretary General of AL):

The Arab League was not like I expected I really expected the delegates to be more skillful and enthusiastic. Nonetheless I really enjoyed the event. In the beginning the delegates were somewhat late to the event, but we started on time without them. The majority unfortunately on the first day left early leaving behind just a few delegates. With these few delegates the agenda changed and the session was in Arabic to the overwhelming majority in favor of this change. The next day we went back to English. This time most of the delegates were there, especially the serious ones. Finally I really enjoyed this event especially the Arab league.

 

 

 

II. The General Assembly



General Assembly Officers:
Mays Abdulaziz, Secretary General
Abdulaziz Al Mutawa, Chair
Othman Al Othman, Chair



A. Issues of the General Assembly


1. The Question of detention without trial in the war on terrorism.

Since 9/11 many alleged terrorist attack have taken place all over the world. By nature any crime committed will initiate an investigation. It has been proven that any crime has several suspects. In the United States the patriot act has been passed, which is basically gives the right that any police officer, military person, DOD staff, or any authoritative figure can detain any person without having a reason and reply by simply saying he/she is suspected in terrorism. This case can be exemplified in Guantanmo Bay, where hundreds of alleged terrorists are held against their will for years without trial. Many other cases have been dealt with by transferring the detained into Syria and other nations that have fewer restrictions on preserving rights. Many nations are doing this activity and argue that it is part of the war on terrorism while others see it as a gross violation of traditional concepts of civil rights for the accused.

 

2. Improving the living conditions of Africa.

Africa is considered to be the poorest continent in the world. Throughout its almost 55 countries only very few are able to feed their own people, which rarely happens. HIV, war, corruption, deception, and illegal trade are just some of the issues facing Africa. In order to improve the living conditions in Africa something must be done to stop all of this one by one. Even as the HIV/Aids virus is killing thousands each month, African countries and individuals squander money on the illegal arms trade. Civil war, and corrupt government officials control some nations making any plan of help difficult. Africa's Crisis must be resolved as soon as possible. While nearly every country agrees something must be done, the approaches and ideologies to do this vary widely.

 

3. The control and guidance of the media

Looking at the general view of media, it is the means of mass communication, such as newspapers, magazines, radio, or television. It is one of the main tools used for releasing news to the whole world. Certain opinions are being published and announced throughout the world by all types of media, and the main issue is when those opinions start to be BIAS towards other nations and societies. The media is controlled variously in a nation itself, and throughout the world. In some countries the media is allowed to publish certain things in some places that are totally unacceptable in the world as a whole. The emergence of certain media, such as the Internet and satellite broadcasts, made controls at the national level ineffective. Controlling the media is a controversial subject that may emerge in a universal consensus or one to leave this as a national concern.

 

4. Towards eliminating conventional arms proliferation

Arms proliferation is related to all arms multiplying and increasing throughout the whole wide world. Some nations are inventing, and using arms in a wrong way. Also, terrorists continue to benefit from arm proliferation by purchasing more weapons and training their bases. It is an issue that continues to be discussed in UN over and over again. The issue is complex in that the nations who produce the most weapons, the P5, also sell the most weapons and, oddly enough, spend the most money trying to halt the illegal spread. The fact that non-state actors, sellers and resellers, of the weapons do the actual placing of weapons into the hands of the druglords, gangsters, thugs, and dictators makes the issue more complex as does the fact that many nations believe that sales to their ideological allies "freedom fighters" is not a crime. While most countries agree there need to be fewer weapons in the world, the more difficult questions concern (a) assigning blame and (b) providing effective mechanism.

 

5. The integration of women in development

In some nations, women tend to be given less attention and care. Many believe that women had suffered and were disrespected by men. It is true that women are able to offer helpful work and ideas to the society exactly like men, but in some nations they were not given enough chance to express that chance. The main issue is that obtaining equality between all human beings in all nations is still not completed. As in some of the previous issues, ideological considers may lead to nations arguing as to (1) how much of a role women should play and (2) in what fashion. However, most agree that developing nations have a vast resource, women, which might lead to the development and improvement of such nations.

 

 

B. Pearl Model United Nations (PearlMUN): Parliamentary Procedures


1. Point of Order - During the discussion of any matter, a delegate may raise a point of order with regard to the conduct of business.  A point of order may NOT interrupt a speaker.  There is no debate on a point of order, so the Chair should immediately issue a ruling pertaining to the point of order according to the rules.
2. Point of Parliamentary Inquiry - A delegate may raise a point of information to make inquiries to or request clarification from the Chair concerning parliamentary procedure or any other relevant questions pertaining to the business of the committee.  A point of information cannot interrupt a speaker.
3. Point of Personal Privilege - A delegate may raise a point of personal privilege concerning a personal matter or the conduct of another delegate.  The Chair should respond appropriately to the matter.  A point of personal privilege cannot interrupt a speaker.
4. Point of Information - During debate on a resolution or amendment, a delegate may raise a point of information.  The point of information must be directed through the Chair and may be made only after the speaker has finished speaking, but before the speaker has yielded the floor.  A point of information cannot interrupt a speaker.
5. Motion to Recess - A delegate may offer a motion to temporarily suspend the meeting in order to go into recess.  A motion to recess requires a second, and cannot interrupt a speaker.  A motion to recess should indicate the time at which the meeting will reconvene.  A motion to recess is not debatable, it is up to the chair to allow or refuse the motion. When the meeting has reconvened following a recess, the business shall continue from the point at which the meeting was suspended.  The Chair may declare a suspension of a meeting at any time.
6. Motion to Set the Order of Agenda Items - Following the convening of a committee of the General Assembly, a delegate may offer a motion concerning the order of consideration of agenda items.  The motion should specify the precise order of consideration of agenda items.  The motion requires a second, and cannot interrupt a speaker.  The Chair should recognize one speaker in favor of the motion and one speaker in opposition to the motion.  Following the speeches, the Chair should call for a vote on the motion.  The motion is approved is a majority of the delegates vote in favor of the motion (abstentions are considered "no" votes).
7. Motion to Table the Agenda Item - A delegate may offer a motion to table (i.e. to lay aside for an indefinite or definite period of time) the pending agenda item.  The motion requires a second, and cannot interrupt a speaker.  The Chair should recognize one speaker in favor of the motion and one speaker in opposition to the motion.  Following the speeches, the Chair should call for a vote on the motion.  The motion is approved if a majority of the delegates vote in favor of the motion (abstentions are considered "no" votes).  If an agenda item has been tabled indefinitely, it does not need to be considered prior to completion of committee or council business.
8. Motion to Table the Resolution - A delegate may offer a motion to table (i.e. to lay aside for an indefinite or definite period of time) the pending resolution.  The motion requires a second, and cannot interrupt a speaker.  The Chair should recognize one speaker in favor of the motion and one speaker in opposition to the motion.  Following the speeches, the Chair should call for a vote on the motion.  The motion is approved if a majority of the delegates vote in favor of the motion (abstentions are considered "no" votes).  If a resolution has been tabled indefinitely, it does not need to be considered prior to completion of committee and council business.
9. Motion to Table the Amendment - A delegate may offer a motion to table (i.e. to lay aside for an indefinite or definite period of time) the pending amendment.  The motion requires a second, and cannot interrupt a speaker.  The Chair should recognize one speaker in favor of the motion and one speaker in opposition to the motion.  Following the speeches, the Chair should call for a vote on the motion.  The motion is approved if a majority of the delegates vote in favor of the motion (abstentions are considered "no" votes).  If an amendment has been tabled indefinitely, it does not need to be considered prior to completion of committee and council business.
10. Motion to Close Debate on an Amendment - During debate on an amendment, a delegate may offer a motion to immediately end discussion of the amendment.  The motion requires a second, and cannot interrupt a speaker.  The Chair should recognize two speakers in opposition to the motion.  Following the speeches, the Chair should call for a vote on the motion.  The motion is approved if a majority of the delegates vote in favor of the motion (abstentions are considered "no" votes).  If the motion is approved, the Chair should immediately call for a vote on the amendment.
11. Motion to Close Debate on a Resolution - During debate on a resolution, a delegate may offer a motion to immediately end discussion of the resolution.  The motion requires a second, and cannot interrupt a speaker.  The Chair should recognize two speakers in opposition to the motion.  Following the speeches, the Chair should call for a vote on the motion.  The motion is approved if a majority of the delegates vote in favor of the motion (abstentions are considered "no" votes).  If the motion is approved, the Chair should immediately call for a vote on the resolution.
12. Motion to Divide the House- A motion to divide the house can be used by the main submitter of a resolution for votes on resolutions, if they want that every member of the forum decides. Abstentions will therefore be out of order. It passes by decision of the chair.
13. Motion to Extend the Time Limit - During debate on an agenda item, resolution or amendment, a delegate may offer a motion to extend the time limit for speeches by a specified time period. The motion requires a second, and cannot interrupt a speaker. The Chair should recognize one speaker in favor of the motion and one speaker in opposition to the motion.  Following the speeches, the Chair shall call for a vote on the motion. The motion is approved if a majority of the delegates vote in favor of the motion (abstentions are considered "no" votes).
14. A request for a follow-up will be granted if the speaker has been given an unclear or even nonsensical answer to a point of information. The delegate who rose for the Point of information may, in this case, ask for a follow-up, which might be granted by the chair.

 

 

 

B. The GA Secretary-General's Vision

Isabelle Allende once said, "How can one not speak about war, poverty, and inequality when people who suffer from these afflictions don't have a voice to speak?" Today, we are going to be the missing voice. That is exactly why we are here today, to be the voice of all the oppressed under the misery of tyranny, hunger, war, and inequality. We are not here just to talk. We are all the leaders of tomorrow, as the future lies between our hands. We are gathered here to know better about our heart-wrenching, yet promising, world. Only when we know better, can we do better.

The moment we speak a child dies of hunger in Africa, a father is slaughtered in civil instabilities, a mother is looking for her child under the remains of the destroyed house, an innocent man lies in Guantanamo Bay yearning to go home to his wife and children, and brothers in humanity are fighting each other. Every moment that passes without doing anything is another lost life and another lost chance of a better tomorrow. Only when we put all our differences aside can we reach a compromise.

No matter how weak the UN seemed, it is still only as good or bad as its members, we are the ones that can either enable it to reach up high, or burn it into ashes. It is all between our hands, it is our decision whether to make this work or not. The desire for a better tomorrow will drive us all towards making this conference a success. I stand here today having great faith in the UN, the working body, and most importantly the delegates and nations that make it up.

The path of solving of world issues can be long and hard. Yet, the best achievements in history are the fruits of hard work and devotion. It is the effort that we put into this conference that determines its success. Remember, "Snowflakes, leaves, humans, plants, raindrops, stars, molecules, microscopic entities all come in communities. The singular cannot in reality exist" (Paula Gunn Allen). We ALL have to co-exist for the sake of the ones coming after us. For the sake of our only home, our world, and for the sake of the white pigeon waiting for the clear sky to fly through.

Thank you

 

 

C. The GA Technical Speech

 

MISS. Secretary General, helpful partner, Honorable delegates, Most Worthy Audience:

I am Abdulaziz AL Mutawa and I will be the Chair for the General assembly for Pearl MUN 2006 at al Bayan Bilingual School.

Hello, Hola, Bonjur, Salute, Konnichiwa, al salam alikum, these are the beautiful languages that color penetrate our world, There are many more, but I feel they that should be portrayed by their delegates.

Jimmy Carter once said, "A strong nation, like a strong person, can afford to be gentle, firm, thoughtful, and restrained. It can afford to extend a helping hand to others. It's a weak nation, like a weak person, that must behave with bluster and boasting and rashness and other signs of insecurity."

In Model United Nations delegates try their best in portraying the Real United Nations therefore the delegates must be aware of what I like to call the " MUN language. Before we continue, I'd like to explain a little about this language of ours.

Point of order: During the discussion of any matter, a delegation may rise to a point of order, and the point of order shall immediately be decided by the chair.

The chair may refuse a point of order if the delegation has not shown proper restraint and order in the sessions.

Point of Personal Privilege: During the discussion of any matter, a delegation may rise to a point of personal Privilege, and the point of personal Privilege shall immediately be addressed to the chair. A point of personal Privilege can be used to interrupt a speaker, but must refer to personal comfort and not personal insult.

Point of Parliamentary Inquiry: If there is no discussion on the floor, a delegation may rise to a point of Point of Parliamentary Inquiry. A Point of Parliamentary Inquiry is a request of the present procedural status of a meeting. All other information must be submitted in writing to the Chair.

Limitation of Speaking Time: Upon recommendation of the chair the delegate must end his/her speech when the chair asks them to the chair will ask that they come to their closing remarks and after that the speaker will be interrupted and ask to yield the floor to the chair.

Right of Reply: The chair may allow a right of reply only in instances of a grave proposal insult. Requests of Rights of reply will be stated after every 5 opening speeches.

Those were the points that may be said. Moving on to the Motions that are allowed I this year's Pearl MUN:

Note: all motions require a second, and all may be objected too. However the chair has the final decision.

Motion to extend time for or time against: This motion can be said by any delegate in the house, wishing to extend time for or Time against a resolution or an amendment or even to extend points of information. Another delegate is required to second it immediately.

Motion to move into. This motion can be said by any delegate in the house wishing to end the current session and move on to the next session. Also another delegate is required to second that.

Motion to table an amendment or a resolution. When the delegates see that the situation of the current resolution is hopeless the delegates may motion to table the resolution which asks the chair to stop debating the resolution at hand and move to the end of the list of resolutions.

Wishing to enrich your little minds with something other than 'MUN LANGUAGE' I would like to share with you a quote I find very inspiring by William Shakespeare

"Be not afraid of greatness: some are born great, some achieve greatness and some have greatness thrust upon them".

With that I leave you to ponder with your peers and I hope that you all have a successful event and enjoy your time.

 

 

 

The International Court of Justice Case



A. Case background.

1972-1977- Charles Taylor spent his time studying in the United States of America. Taylor attended Bentley College, and majored in economics.
1980s- Charles Taylor participated in Samuel Doe's government.
1983- Taylor was removed from the Liberian government being accused of stealing 1 million US dollars. Taylor then fled to the United States of America.
1991- A civil war started in Sierra Leone.
1991- Sankoh began a revolutionary campaign in Sierra Leone near the Liberian border as the leader of the Revolutionary United Front (RUF). Among that initial group of about 100 revolutionaries were Sierra Leonean dissidents, mercenaries from Burkina Faso, and fighters loyal to Taylor.
1991- Once the Sierra Leone Civil War began, Sankoh relied heavily on ties with both Qaddafi and Taylor, with whom he traded diamonds for guns.
1992- Sam Bockarie rose to the position of Battle Group Commander in the RUF, Taylor reached out to the young man, whom he may have met during Bockarie's youth. Taylor advised Bockarie off and on for the next five years.
1996- Charles Taylor became the President of Liberia. Taylor won the elections by a majority of 75%.
1997- Sankoh fled to Nigeria in 1997, due to the fact that he lost some military control. He was put under house arrest, and then imprisoned
1997- Bockarie took control of the RUF and was influenced by Charles Taylor.
2001- The violence in Sierra Leone came to end. The results of the civil war were massive. The devastation ranged from genocide to crimes against humanity.
2003- The Special Court for Sierra Leone (SCSL) accused Taylor, charging him with crimes against humanity.
2003- Taylor resigns as President of Liberia. He was exiled to Nigeria.
2006- The Nigerians claimed the Charles Taylor has disappeared.
2006- A day after his disappearance, Taylor was again captured.
2006- Sierra Leone complained the issue the United Nations.
2006- On April 5th 2006, the UN Security Council held an emergency session regarding this issue. The Council decided to refer the trial of Taylor to the Office of Prosecution in the International Criminal Court.
2006- On May 17th and 18th , the Taylor trial will take place TRYING him for war crimes in Sierra Leone.

 

 

 

B. Stipulations: the trial of Charles Taylor Background

1. Charles Ghankay Taylor aka Dankpannah Charles Ghankay Taylor aka Dankpannah Charles Macarthur Taylor was born on 27 or 28 January 1948 at Arthington in the Republic of Liberia
2. In the late 1980’s, the accused received military training in Libya from representatives of the government of Mu’ammar Al-Qadhafi.
3. From the late 1980’s the Accused was the leader or head of the National Patriotic Front of Liberia (NPFL), an organized armed group. From August 2 1997 to about 11 August 2003, the Accused was President of the Republic of Liberia.
4. The organized armed group that became known as the Revolutionary United Front (RUF), led by FODAY SAYBANA SANKOH aka POPAY aka PAPA aka PA, was founded about 1988 or 1989 in Libya.
5. The RUF, under the leadership of FODAY SAYBANA SANKOH, and with the assistance of Liberian fighters, began organized-armed operations in Sierra Leone in March 1991. During the ensuing armed conflict, the RUF forces were also referred to as "RUF", "rebels" and "People’s Army". Initially the RUF fought against the Republic of Sierra Leone Military Forces, commonly known as the Sierra Leone Army of SLA.
6. Sam Bockarie, third in command of the RUF was killed in 2003.
7. In June 2003, United Nations issued a warrant for Taylor’s arrest charging him with war crimes committed in the Sierra Leone Civil War.
8. On August 11, the Accused resigned leaving, Moses Blah in power.
9. On 17 March 2006, the newly elected President of Liberia requested that the Accused be extradited from Nigeria so that he could stand trial for his actions in the Special Court for Sierra Leone.
10. Nigeria agreed only to release the Accused.
11. On March 28, 2006 the Nigerian Government released a statement expressing that the Accused had disappeared from his villa.
12. On March 29, the Accused attempted to cross the Nigerian - Cameroonian border but was arrested by security forces in the town of Gamboru. The Accused was swiftly transferred to Sierra Leone.
13.The Accused was indicted on March 7, 2006 for counts of war crimes, crimes against humanity, and other serious violations of international humanitarian law.
14. Foday Sankoh died on July 29th, 2003 from stroke while awaiting trial.

 

C. Moving Side Memoriam:


1. Statement of facts

1. Charles Ghankay Taylor aka Dankpannah Charles Ghankay Taylor aka Dankpannah Charles Macarthur Taylor was born on 27 or 28 January 1948 at Arthington in the Republic of Liberia
2. In the late 1980’s, the accused received military training in Libya from representatives of the government of Mu’ammar Al-Qadhafi.
3. From the late 1980’s the Accused was the leader or head of the National Patriotic Front of Liberia (NPFL), an organized armed group. From August 2 1997 to about 11 August 2003, the Accused was President of the Republic of Liberia.
4. The organized armed group that became known as the Revolutionary United Front (RUF), led by FODAY SAYBANA SANKOH aka POPAY aka PAPA aka PA, was founded about 1988 or 1989 in Libya.
5. The RUF, under the leadership of FODAY SAYBANA SANKOH, and with the assistance of Liberian fighters, began organized-armed operations in Sierra Leone in March 1991. During the ensuing armed conflict, the RUF forces were also referred to as "RUF", "rebels" and "People’s Army". Initially the RUF fought against the Republic of Sierra Leone Military Forces, commonly known as the Sierra Leone Army of SLA.
6. Sam Bockarie, third in command of the RUF was killed in 2003.
7. In June 2003, United Nations issued a warrant for Taylor’s arrest charging him with war crimes committed in the Sierra Leone Civil War.
8. On August 11, the Accused resigned leaving, Moses Blah in power.
9. On 17 March 2006, the newly elected President of Liberia requested that the Accused be extradited from Nigeria so that he could stand trial for his actions in the Special Court for Sierra Leone.
10. Nigeria agreed only to release the Accused.
11. On March 28, 2006 the Nigerian Government released a statement expressing that the Accused had disappeared from his villa.
12. On March 29, the Accused attempted to cross the Nigerian - Cameroonian border but was arrested by security forces in the town of Gamboru. The Accused was swiftly transferred to Sierra Leone.
13. The Accused was indicted on March 7, 2006 for counts of war crimes, crimes against humanity, and other serious violations of international humanitarian law.
14. Foday Sankoh died on July 29th, 2003 from stroke while awaiting trial.


2. Legal Claims:

COUNT 1: Acts of Terrorism, a violation of Article 3 common to the Geneva Conventions and of Additional Protocol II, punishable under Article 8 of the Rome Statute
COUNT 2: Murder, a CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY, punishable under Article 7 of the Rome Statute
COUNT 3: Violence to life, health and physical or mental well-being of persons, in particular murder, a VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 3 COMMON TO THE GEVENA CONVENTIOSN AND OF ADDITIONAL PROTOCOL II, punishable under Article 8 of the Rome Statute
COUNT 4: Rape a CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY, punishable under Article 7 of the Rome Statute On all counts, the prosecution will aim to establish INDIVIDUAL CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY

3. Judgment Requested:
1. Life imprisonment

 

 

D. Defense Counter Memoriam:


1. Statement of Facts:

1. Charles Ghankay Taylor (born January 28, 1948) is a Liberian leader who served as President of Liberia from 1997 to 2003.
2. Charles Taylor was briefly arrested in 1972 in the US (New York)
3. On May 24, 1984 2 US Deputy Marshals in Somerville, Massachusetts arrested Taylor.
4. Taylor’s wife was, Enid Taylor, was held without bail on September 231984.
5. Foday Sankoh who began the war in Sierra Leone through the RUF relied on Taylor and traded diamonds for guns.
6. Sam Bokarie the next RUF leader was advised bay Charles Taylor on and of for five years beginning in 1997.
7. During his absence for peace talks in Ghana on June, 4,2003 the US urged Taylor’s Vice President Moses Blah to seize power.
8. US President George Bush Twice said Taylor " Must Leave Liberia" in July 2003
9. The Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), under the leadership of Nigeria, sent troops to Liberia with the assistance of $10 million from the US.
10. On August 6, a 32-member U.S. military assessment team was deployed as a liaison with the ECOWAS troops
11. On August Eleven the US brought 3 warships with 2,300 warships to oversee Taylor’s exile from Liberia.
12. In November 2003, the United States Congress passed a bill that included a reward offer of two million dollars for Taylor's capture.

 

2. Legal Claims:

1. Charles Taylor is not a murder due to the following definitions of genocide:
Genocide is defined by the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (CPPCG) article 2 as any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group, as such: "Killing members of the group; Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; and forcibly transferring children of the group to another group."
a. the International Criminal Court (ICC). The Convention (in article 2) defines genocide as "any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: "Killing members of the group; Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group. Definition of rape: "unlawful sexual activity and usually sexual intercourse carried out forcibly or under threat of injury against the will" Current international laws that touch on rape are mainly contained in four documents:
i. The 1949 Geneva Conventions
Article 27 of the Fourth Geneva Convention states that "women shall be especially protected against any attack on their honor, in particular against rape, enforced prostitution, or any form of indecent assault. " Countries are required to punish "grave breaches" of the Geneva Conventions and Protocols in their own national courts. Article 147 of the Fourth Geneva Convention includes, as grave breaches, any actions willfully committed that cause great suffering or serious injury to body or health. Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions prohibits "violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture " as well as "outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment."
ii. The 1977 Supplementary Protocols of the Geneva Conventions
Protocol II Additional to the Geneva Conventions murder as well as cruel treatment such as torture, mutilation and outrages upon personal dignity -- in particular humiliating and degrading treatment, rape, enforced prostitution and any form of indecent assault, as well as slavery and the slave trade in all their forms.
iii. The body of law from the Nuremberg Tribunal held at the close of World War II
Rape was listed in Article 6 of the Nuremberg Charter as a "Crime Against Humanity."
iv. The Military Tribunal of the Far East. 12
At the International Criminal Tribunal of Rwanda, the rape of Tutsi women was found to constitute torture when it was "by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or others person acting in an official capacity.
2. Charles Taylor is not considered a terrorist according to the following definition of terrorism: While the United Nations has not yet accepted a definition of terrorism [1], the UN's "academic consensus definition," written by terrorism expert A.P. Schmid and widely used by social scientists, runs:
Terrorism is an anxiety-inspiring method of repeated violent action, employed by (semi-) clandestine individual, group or state actors, for idiosyncratic, criminal or political reasons, whereby - in contrast to assassination - the direct targets of violence are not the main targets. The immediate human victims of violence are generally chosen randomly (targets of opportunity) or selectively (representative or symbolic targets) from a target population, and serve as message generators. Threat- and violence-based communication processes between terrorist (organization), (imperiled) victims, and main targets are used to manipulate the main target (audience(s)), turning it into a target of terror, a target of demands, or a target of attention, depending on whether intimidation, coercion, or propaganda is primarily sought," (Schmid, 1988). [2]
UN short legal definition also proposed by AP Schmid: an act of terrorism is the "peacetime equivalent of a war crime."
3. Taylor did NOT commit rape according to the following generally accepted definitions of rape: "unlawful sexual activity and usually sexual intercourse carried out forcibly or under threat of injury against the will "Current international laws that touch on rape are mainly contained in four documents:
1. The 1949 Geneva Conventions
2. The 1977 Supplementary Protocols of the Geneva Conventions
3. The body of law from the Nuremberg Tribunal held at the close of World War II
4. The Military Tribunal of the Far East. 12
Article 27 of the Fourth Geneva Convention states that "women shall be especially protected against any attack on their honor, in particular against rape, enforced prostitution, or any form of indecent assault." Countries are required to punish "grave breaches" of the Geneva Conventions and Protocols in their own national courts. Article 147 of the Fourth Geneva Convention includes, as grave breaches, any actions willfully committed that cause great suffering or serious injury to body or health.

 

3. Redress Wanted:

1. That Charles Taylor is acquitted of all charges against him.
2. An official apology from the nation of Sierra Leone.
3. 1.5 Million Dollars in compensation for mental trauma suffered by Charles Taylor.
4. 1. Million Dollars in compensation for jail time Charles Taylor faced in Sierra Leon

 

 

E. ICC Handbook:

1. Introduction

The International Criminal Court is the first court of its kind that tries war criminals WORLDWIDE. The basic purpose of the International Criminal Court (ICC) is to make sure that the most barbaric international crimes do not go unpunished. The ICC basically tries criminals for war crimes and crimes against humanity committed in countries.

2. Some words used in the ICC that could be helpful:

Applicant: Plaintiff, Affirmative; Pro-Side: This side tries to PROVE the other side violated the legal agreement. 
Chief Justice: The one in charge of running the case. Typically he/she leads the questioning of the lawyers and witnesses during the phase of the trial that involves this. 
Counter-Memorial: The respondent's memorial that answers the moving side’s memorial
Deputy Chief Justice: Any Other Judges 
Equipoise: In the case of a tie, the respondent party wins. In other words, the moving side must only prove that their version of the events is more likely true (50%), NOT beyond a "shadow of a doubt." 
Judge: One of those charged with making the decision.  
Memorial: A written statement by one side. It lists the facts, the "legal claims" made by the party, and the judgment requested 
Moving Party: Plantiff's Side, Affirmative, and the side, which wants to prove the other side violated the agreement 
Preponderance of Evidence: Burden of Proof: The applicant side MUST prove, but not "beyond a shadow of doubt" that their side is correct. A "tie" goes to the responding side. 
Respondent: Defendant; Negative; Against Side: This side tries to prove that, in fact, they did not violate the agreement under question 
Statement of Facts: The key facts in the case in the view of one side or another. 
Stipulations: Agreed Upon Facts: facts agreed upon by BOTH sides prior to the Oral Presentation of the Case.

 

3. How a case does come into the ICC?

A case comes to the International Criminal Court in the following reasons. First of all, one of the two parties attending the case must, and I emphasize must has violated or committed crimes against humanity, or has committed war crimes in a specific region. Moreover, the country that has raised the issue must have been a victim of that crime or crimes that have been committed.

A case could also be sent to the International Criminal Court via the UN Security Council. If the UN Security Council sees that an incident has violated the rights of humanity, then it could refer the case to the office of prosecution of the International Criminal Court. Then the office of prosecution will take charge of investigating and prosecuting the case.

 

4: Case Presentation.

a. Presentation of moving side (attacking).

i. Opening Speech (20 minutes):

The opening speech of the side will contain a brief explanation of their case, and I mean really brief explanation of the case. Moreover, they will indicate to the judge(s) what will they prove in the case. However, they would not show how they would prove it.

ii. Case presentation itself (120 minutes):

In this part of the trial, the moving side will show how they will prove their point on the case by the following techniques:
a. Debating skills (speaking skills play a vital role in these cases).
b. While proving their point they will have to provide the evidence to the judge(s), or refer to the evidence provided to the judge(s).
c. Presenting deposition. (Which are documents written by people who witness an incident but could not be present at the case).
d. Calling up witnesses. The side may call up any witness at their wish in order to prove a point during cross examination.
e. Can call up countries to testify.

iii. Rebuttals (30 minutes):

Usually in the rebuttals, the side refutes most of the arguments done by the opposing side, and proving the other side's argument was false, invalid, or could not be taken into credit.

iv. Closing statements (15 minutes):

In the closing statement, the side does not present any new arguments, nor presents new evidence to the case. (Only if asked by the judges.) However, the side must effectively explain to the judge(s) why their side must win the case, and why the opposing side must lose the case.

 

b. Presentation of the defense:

i. Opening Speech (20 minutes):

The opening speech of the side will contain a brief explanation of their case, and I mean really brief explanation of the case. Moreover, they will indicate to the judge(s) what will they prove in the case. However, they would not show how they would prove it.

ii. Defendant defense (10 minutes) (optional) :

The defendant can briefly explain to the judges of his innocence at the issue at hand. Moreover, no questions will be asked to the defendant because this is not a testimony.

iii. Case presentation itself (120 minutes):

In this part of the trial, defense will show how they will prove their point on the case by the following techniques:
a.-Debating skills (speaking skills play a vital role in these cases).
b.-While proving their point they will have to provide the evidence to the judge(s), or refer to the evidence provided to the judge(s).
c.-Presenting deposition. (Which are documents written by people who witness an incident but could not be present at the case).
d.-Calling up witnesses. The side may call up any witness at their wish in order to prove a point during cross-examination.
-Can call up countries to testify.

iv. Rebuttals (30 minutes):

Usually in the rebuttals, the side refutes most of the arguments done by the opposing side, and proving the other side's argument was false, invalid, or could not be taken into credit.

v. Closing statements (15 minutes):

In the closing statement, the side does not present any new arguments, nor presents new evidence to the case. (Only if asked by the judges.) However, the side must effectively explain to the judge(s) why their side must win the case, and why the opposing side must lose the case.

 

 

c: The written part:

i. The moving side:

The moving side will present a memorial to present their case. The memorial consists of statement of facts (which are a list of facts that the side believes that it had occurred.), legal claims (Are legal claims or treaties that the opposing side that the opposing side has violated), and the judgments requested. Moreover, the side will provide the judges with written work, which obviously is the evidence that matches their case presentation.

ii. The Defense:

The defense will present a counter-memorial, which basically will go against what has been presented by the moving side. Moreover, the side will provide the judges with written work, which obviously is the evidence that matches their case presentation.

 

 

 

E. Speeches:

 

1. Secretary General welcoming speech:

Honorable judges, respectable advocates, and guests,

It is indeed a huge honor for myself to open this International Criminal Court case at Pearl MUN06. Once, an unharmful flower blossomed high headed in the patches of the garden. Well one day, the other roses found that this flower's beautiful petals were crushed to the ground, and the flower was burning with agony. The roses started pointing guilty gestures at each other. Each rose started accusing the other as being the perpetrator for that crime. Unfortunately, until this very day neither a single sole nor rose knew who the perpetrator was. For this reason, the ICC has been established. The ICC has been established to know if the person who is ACCUSED of being the perpetrator is guilty or innocent. Today, we will be witnessing the trial of Charles Taylor, who is alleged of being responsible of war crimes in Sierra Leone. Today, the hand of justice will guide us into the correct path.

Thank you

 

2. Chief Justice speech:

The International Criminal Court is a criminal court established to offer trails to those who have perform alleged atrocities and crimes to countries. After many years and struggles, this criminal court was created with the jurisdiction to try cases of crimes against humanity, war crimes and genocide. It is the first treaty based criminal court to be permanently established to make sure crimes do not go unpunished. The guidelines and functioning of the ICC is governed by the Rome Statute, which was enforced into action on July 1, 2002.

Cases may be referred to the ICC by one of four methods:
1. A country member of the Assembly of States Parties (ratified the Court's Statute) sends the case;
2. A country that has chosen to accept the ICC's jurisdiction sends the case;
3. The Security Council sends the case (subject to veto from the permanent five members); or
4. The three-judge panel authorizes a case initiated by the ICC Prosecutor. This case was sent by a country that has chosen to accept the ICC’s jurisdiction. This country is Sierra Leone. The case of Charles Taylor was reviewed and decided to be of worthy stature to be presented in the International Court of Justice.

Charles Taylor has been accused of the following:
1. Rape
2. Terrorism
3. Murder/ Genocide
4. Violence to life, health and physical or mental well-being of persons

All of which are punishable according to the Rome Statute in the International Criminal Court if proven.

Procedure:

In our version of the ICC there will be only the court. In this courtroom, the moving side (the honorable advocates Mohammed and Joe) will 1st present court with an opening speech. They then will present their case with supporting evidence and facts. Included in their presentations are witnesses. During the examination of the witnesses the defending side (the honorable defense Ahmad Shimmiri and Slehman) will cross-examine the witness. After the judges examination the witness there will be a short period of time for the advocates to repute.

Same goes for the Defending side; You will present a counter memorial on stating why the accused party is innocent of the accusations. After both cases are presented we will have rebuttals (closing statements) by both sides followed by a period of deliberations. After the closing speeches the Judges and I will determine the fate of the case in our deliberations. Considering that fact that this is not a trail between countries, there will be no official or unofficial bias judges and so both sides are to be heard and treated equally. The representatives of both sides will be judged solely on their presentations and evidence. The integrity of the court and its judges are will not be questionable.

Today and tomorrow we will be hearing both sides of the case in an effort to determine the outcome of the case. The judges and I wish you the best of luck and thank you for your efforts and time. We realize how hard you must have worked on these cases. I assure your efforts will not be in vain with the judges.

 

 

F. Verdict:

1. Taylor is guilty by an unanimous decision
2. Taylor will be in prison for a time period of 15 years.
3. After the time of prison, Taylor will be under house arrest in Nigeria.

 

G. The Final Paragraph

Two words could only describe how the ICCf forum was "Well Organized". The ICC was efficiently ran by myself and the chief justice. At first, the judges were a bit quiet, but later on I threatned them to ask questions or I will discredit their judgements during delibration.That gave the judges an incentive to ask questions. The case was very close, the part of the presentation that won the moving side their case was the rebuttals. Overall, PEARLMUN06 was a great way to end my MUN career.

 

 

 

IV. The Security Council

A. Intro. Speech:

Honorable guests, Worthy Chair, and esteemed delegates,

Martin Luther King Junior once said: "Like an unchecked cancer, hate corrodes the personality and eats away its vital unity. Hate destroys a man's sense of values and his objectivity. It causes him to describe the beautiful as ugly and the ugly as beautiful, and to confuse the true with the false and the false with the true."

No matter how hard the task may be, one must thrive and continue down the road of perseverance for that is how a problem of such magnitude, hatred, is solved. That is how the UN is able to maintain international peace and security, and that is what we are aiming for this weekend. We must take the issues at hand, debate them, and take action to solve them. As John F. Kennedy exclaimed, "There are risks and costs to a program of action. But they are far less than the long-range risks and costs of comfortable inaction."

We must not be silent and watch our brothers and sisters killing each other. We must not stand behind and watch our brothers and sisters starve to death. We must not stand behind and watch our brothers and sisters suffer through wars and such catastrophic events. We must be aware that, as an intelligent man once said, "Our scientific power has outrun our spiritual power. We have guided missiles and misguided men." Let us guide humankind back down the right path.

We must prosper, we must speak up, we must help each other, and we must NOT ignore the crises in our world. As a wise man previously said, "Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter."

The SC, honorable delegates, is the branch in the UN that is in charge of making any decisions to determine whether or not there is a threat to international peace and security. It is also in charge of solving such disputes by proposing clauses that add up to resolutions. The SC plays quite an integral role in maintaining international peace and security amid all the manmade catastrophes and natural disasters. Therefore, esteemed delegates we hope we are able to simulate the UNSC and propose solutions to the international disputes we will discuss.

Honorable delegates, we must rise for we ARE the future. We must prove ourselves worthy of living. We must stop the never-ending wars, grudges, and disputes. We must be sure to preserve the earth for our children. As an intellectual person once said, "We have not inherited the earth from our ancestors, we have only borrowed it from our children." Let us give back what we borrowed, but let us ONLY give it back after making it BETTER.

Thank you.

 

 

B. SC Issues and Voting Records

1. The issue of appointing a permanent president for the SC

The UNSC has no permanent president, but it does have rotating presidents. The seat rotates amongst the 15 members in alphabetical order of their names. The rotating president has a one-month period in the seat. The UNSC members themselves adopted this method of having a president. However, seeing as it may cause some controversy sometimes, it may be better if there was a permanent president for the SC elected for a certain number of years at a time.
For: Brazil, China, Columbia, France, Germany, India, Japan, Russia, UK, and USA
Against: Zero
Abstaining: Denmark, the Dominican Republic, Ghana, Qatar, and the Ukraine

 

2. The issue of the Iranian nuclear program.

It has been all over the news for quite a while now, Iran's desire to obtain nuclear energy and possibly weapons. Recently, in the news, it was said that they were able to develop uranium and whatnot, which means that Iran truly is getting very close to the next step: 'nukes.' Shortly thereafter, newspapers and channels showed the Iranian Prime Minister stating that they are only two or three years away from obtaining 'nukes.' This statement or declaration was taken as kind of a threat by some including Israel and the USA.

Despite the fact that Iran has been constantly referred to the SC, it has not yet been there. Some suspect that Iran was stalling, but those are just allegations. Also, after it was confirmed that Iran had developed uranium, the SC told Iran that they must disregard their intentions and come to the SC for negotiations. There has yet to be a solution to this issue seeing as all presented solutions are opposed by a few countries either way. Some countries want to impose sanctions and take immediate action in fear of an attack while other countries refuse to impose any sanctions of any sort and believe that this conflict may be solved by negotiations without the use of any kind of force.
For sanctions: France, Ghana, India, Japan, Qatar, UK, and the Ukraine; all others against
Against sanctions, for negotiations Brazil, China, Columbia, Denmark, the Dominican Republic, Germany, and Russia

 

3. The issue of directing attentions in the Himalayan region.

This issue is very broad seeing as it involves a few conflicts. There is more than one conflict around the Himalayan region, at the moment. For starters, India and Pakistan are in a state of war over Kashmir. Also, there's the issue regarding Nepal. Unfortunately, this region has quite a few conflicts, which have yet to be solved. In either case, the parties involved are quite hard to please, and this is why it has not been easy to solve the problem. Some countries want to direct more attentions to this region to help solve the conflicts and also because of the threat to the environment from that region, while other countries declare that more attention might not do much if anything at all especially if the attention is directed towards lessening the pollution. This is because they believe that the conflicts that exist are far more significant than the pollution, and that if solved, then the pollution will decrease as a result.
For; Brazil, China, Columbia, Denmark, the Dominican Republic, France, Germany, Ghana, India, Japan, Qatar, Russia, Ukraine, UK, and the USA

 

4. The issue of the review of the conditions and status of Cuba.

The conditions in Cuba are not promising at all. A lot of the people are living under the poverty line, and that is truly not helping with increasing their economy and budget. The environment in Cuba is really not friendly for the people. It is very hard for them to live everyday with very little income for most of the people and whatnot. It's also the fact that many countries consider Cuba amongst the worst human right's offenders in the world. This is because there are allegedly SO many human rights’ offenses occurring. Not only that, but also the controversy over what happens in Guantanamo Bay is increasing. These issues are what make some countries want to review the conditions there to help increase the standard of living, and to make sure to lessen human rights violations.
For: Brazil, China, Columbia, Denmark, and the Dominican Republic
Against: UK/USA
Abstaining: Japan, Ukraine

 

 

C. Statement of the Secretary General

The Security Council during Pearl MUN 2006 flowed very smoothly from the opening speeches to the policy statements to the clauses, and finally to the crisis. The first day was quite less enthusiastic than the second. Nevertheless, there were a few delegates who were pumped up. This was due to the fact that the issue that was discussed was considered by some delegates to be insignificant; it was the issue of directing more attentions towards the Himalayan region. Nonetheless, some delegates were still very enthusiastic, which truly helped the other delegates participate. On the other hand, the second day was very much enthusiastic and exciting. Starting off with discussing the crisis, we ended up with several passed clauses on the crisis and the issue regarding Iran’s attainment of ‘nukes’. Furthermore, we were also able to successfully pass a clause regarding the issue of Cuba. Hence, all the delegates were excited about the crisis, which was closely related to the issue of Iran’s attainment of ‘nukes.’ They all wanted to debate and pass their respective clauses. Thanks to the controlled chaos of the exciting crisis, the enthusiasm during the second day never died out. As a result of this excess, but controlled, enthusiasm the delegates in the SC were able to unanimously pass a clause solving the crisis in less than one hour and fifteen minutes. Hence, there was much enthusiasm in the SC in this event, but it was nicely controlled; therefore, the SC flowed smoothly in every aspect except for a few mistakes.

The SC chairing was quite successful and the sessions were very much organized. The delegates might have tried to loose control; however, thanks to the strict rules set out by Fatima Abdulkareem (SC president) and I the delegates had no chance of doing anything. Not to mention the fact that our break times were very restricted and the delegates were never late. Moreover, our delegates were always aware of what was happening. If we were debating a certain clause, the clause was displayed on the screen using a projector and laptop. If we were reading policy statements, the delegates could see the issue on the screen in order to keep track. Last, but not least, we always provided food for our delegates whether it was breakfast, lunch, or dinner. Not only that, but there was always a bottle of water on their desk seeing as their enthusiasm kept them constantly speaking. In other words, the chairing went very well, the sessions were well organized, and the delegates were not kept hungry, which did, in deed, help keep the delegates alert, aware, and enthusiastic.