Resolution 2014/01 - Reform of the MUN

Watch
Poll: Should this reform come into effect?
Aye (10)
100%
No (0)
0%
Abstain (0)
0%
This discussion is closed.
RoryS
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 7 years ago
#1
A discussion period of 5 days will now take place, followed by 3 days of voting.

A reminder, as stated under Section 9 of the MUN Charter:

Reforms should be debated out of character and voted upon in private.

Resolution 2014/01 - Reform of the MUN

Resolution 2014/01 – Reform of the MUN


Date: 1st January 2014

Committee: General Assembly
Submitter: Republic of Serbia


Aims to consolidate and reform the organisation of the MUN.

Concerning the MUN Charter

1) Part 2, Section 5:

5) Messages of condolence from one country to another are accepted providing they are posted in the Condolences Thread.
Shall be deleted.

2) Part 3, Section 4:

4) Up to 7 days of discussion is allowed for resolutions. Voting itself must last for a maximum of 3 days.
Shall be replaced with:

4) Resolutions in the General Assembly shall pass if more states vote Aye than No. Up to 7 days of discussion is allowed for resolutions. Voting itself must last for a maximum of 3 days.
3) Part 6, Section 4:

4) Once the resolution has been posted to the Security Council subforum, a discussion lasting a maximum of 7 days will be held, followed by a 3 day vote. Voting should be ‘public’.
Shall be replaced with:

4) Resolutions in the Security Council shall pass if more states vote Aye than No, providing no Permanent members voted No, enacting their Veto. A discussion lasting a maximum of 7 days will be held, followed by a 3 day vote. Voting should be ‘public’.
4) Resolutions that concern the administration of the MUN shall be considered Constitutional Resolutions, and must be highlighted as such in the MUN Resolutions list. (Such resolutions include, but are not limited to, changes to the MUN Charter, rules regarding use of Weapons in hypes, resolutions reforming MUN bodies.)


NotesThis amendment deals with the Charter, which hasn't been overhauled in a while. References to the defunct condolences thread are removed, and clauses on how many votes resolutions need to pass are added. At times it seems clauses are replaced with completely unrelated ones, but I did that just to save deleting some clauses only to add new ones in their place. Keeps all the numbering in order that way.

Finally I thought it would be a good idea to highlight all the constitutional resolutions in the resolutions list to help make it clear which ones govern how we run the place. They could just be highlighted in a colour for example.

In short, these reforms are designed to make running the place a whole lot easier for the SG.

Affected Documents:
Resolution 2013/05
MUN Charter
0
RoryS
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#2
Report Thread starter 7 years ago
#2
(Original post by Republic1)
QFA
Sorry for the delay in posting this.
0
Cheese_Monster
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#3
Report 7 years ago
#3
Nice one, I support this.
0
Republic1
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#4
Report 7 years ago
#4
(Original post by RoryS)
Sorry for the delay in posting this.
No problem, it get's to be the first resolution of 2014 now. Quite apt considering it's tidying up the place
0
Blue Meltwater
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#5
Report 7 years ago
#5
I don't understand the rationale behind removing a timetable for resolutions - is it to make things more fluid?
0
Henry_Tudor
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#6
Report 7 years ago
#6
Sounds good to me
0
Republic1
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#7
Report 7 years ago
#7
(Original post by Blue Meltwater)
I don't understand the rationale behind removing a timetable for resolutions - is it to make things more fluid?
I wrote this a while ago, so I'm having to think back. I believe the rationale behind it was that all elections would be timetabled by the new amendment to the Guidance Document that CM introduced. However, looking now, I see that the guidance document only timetables for the election of representatives, not voting on resolutions.

This is a mistake on my part.

If I'm allowed then I'll send in an amendment to this to put the timetable back in.
0
Birchington
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#8
Report 7 years ago
#8
Seems fair enough. It's important the Charter is kept fresh and useful.
0
Skyelight
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#9
Report 7 years ago
#9
In addition to Blue Meltwater's point concerning the timetable statement; perhaps, instead of replacing Part 3, section 4, the suggested replacement sentence could be added to what already exists. Thereby, the existing statement would be clarified, with reference to the amendments in the Guidance Document.
Otherwise, sounds good to me.
0
meenu89
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#10
Report 7 years ago
#10
Fine by me.
0
Will95206
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#11
Report 7 years ago
#11
Ill support this
0
Kiss
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#12
Report 7 years ago
#12
Messages of condolences will be deleted?
0
Republic1
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#13
Report 7 years ago
#13
(Original post by Kiss)
Messages of condolences will be deleted?
The thread doesn't exist anymore, or at least no one posts in it. There was talk by Rory I believe when he was elected of removing it from the Charter
0
Kiss
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#14
Report 7 years ago
#14
(Original post by Republic1)
The thread doesn't exist anymore, or at least no one posts in it. There was talk by Rory I believe when he was elected of removing it from the Charter
I think it's a good thread to keep
0
RoryS
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#15
Report Thread starter 7 years ago
#15
AMENDMENT TO ORIGINAL RESOLUTION (2014/01)
2ND JANUARY 2013


Following a request from Republic1, the submitter of Resolution No. 2014/01, I've made the changes he requested to the original resolution first posted yesterday. The changes are highlighted below.

This clause of the resolution has been changed from:

(Original post by Resolution 2014/01)
Resolutions in the Security Council shall pass if more states vote Aye than No, providing no Permanent members voted No, enacting their Veto. A discussion lasting a maximum of 7 days will be held, followed by a 3 day vote. Voting should be ‘public’
to:

Resolutions in the General Assembly shall pass if more states vote Aye than No. Up to 7 days of discussion is allowed for resolutions. Voting itself must last for a maximum of 3 days.
And in the Security Council resolutions section, this has been changed from:

(Original post by Resolution 2014/01)
Resolutions in the Security Council shall pass if more states vote Aye than No, providing no Permanent members voted No, enacting their Veto. Voting should be ‘public’.
to:

Resolutions in the Security Council shall pass if more states vote Aye than No, providing no Permanent members voted No, enacting their Veto. A discussion lasting a maximum of 7 days will be held, followed by a 3 day vote. Voting should be ‘public’.
0
Republic1
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#16
Report 7 years ago
#16
That update has put the voting timetable back in guys.

(Original post by Skyelight)
QFA
(Original post by Blue Meltwater)
QFA
0
ThisIsn'tSpam
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#17
Report 7 years ago
#17
Supported.
0
Kittiara
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#18
Report 7 years ago
#18
I have no problem with this .
0
Moist Penguin
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#19
Report 7 years ago
#19
I see no problem with this
0
Krollo
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#20
Report 7 years ago
#20
Looks OK.

Posted from TSR Mobile
0
X
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Do you think receiving Teacher Assessed Grades will impact your future?

I'm worried it will negatively impact me getting into university/college (97)
39.43%
I'm worried that I’m not academically prepared for the next stage in my educational journey (27)
10.98%
I'm worried it will impact my future career (18)
7.32%
I'm worried that my grades will be seen as ‘lesser’ because I didn’t take exams (57)
23.17%
I don’t think that receiving these grades will impact my future (30)
12.2%
I think that receiving these grades will affect me in another way (let us know in the discussion!) (17)
6.91%

Watched Threads

View All