VICTORIA SCHOOL

Genenal Debate
 

After a session of opening speeches, in which the different councils stated their stands, the council then proceeded on to General debates. Various interesting points were brought up and debated, regarding the use of mass surveilence.

 

The delegate of DPRK stated that govermnet surveilence should be used everyday, to keep the people in order, and prevent acts that can possibly harm the Government and others. Similarly the delegate of Russia stated that government surveillance should be used everyday. The delegate also pointed out that this government surveillance is mainly done on foriegn visitors. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Other delegates were not completely in favour of government surveillance. The delegate of United Kingdom pointed out that government surveillance should not be stopped completely, as it is essential for security, but it should be greatly reduced, as it compromises the building blocks of the society.  Countries also pointed out that government surveillance goes against the concept of democracy, as it limits the freedom of the people. The delegate of United Kingdom then proposed a moderated caucus, on whether government surveillance should be used as a prevention or a cure.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Moderated Caucus

 

To summarise, most countries believed that government surveillance should be used as a deterrent to terrorism, and as such, mass surveillence of all citizens should be conducted. However, countries such as France, Vietnam and South Korea believed that this infringes the Human Rights of the citizens and as such be only used as a cure, by spying on suspected terrorists. There all also different viewpoints on how Government surveillance should be used as a surveillance. Countries such as New Zealand believe that the citizens should know about the surveillance as it then evokes fear in them, which acts as a deterrent. However, Russia believes that it should be kept a secret so that terrorists are weeded out and are caught. 

 

Resolution Debates

In the start of the 2nd day, a resolution was submitted by the delegate of United Kingdom and France. In this resolution, the act of heavy surveillance was condemned, and punishments for those countries who do not comply with the regulations stated. The set-up of an international body was also sugested through which the use of surveillance by countries could be monitored.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Unfriendly Amendment

An unfriendly ammendment was then submitted by the delegate of DPRK, in which it was proposed that clause 1a should be changed, and "light surveillance" should be changed to "periodical heavy surveillance". This was supported by many delegates such as the delegate of USA, who believed that light surveillance may not be enough to detect terrorist activities within the country. This stand was also supported by the delegate of New Zealand, who also felt that using "periodical heavy surveillance" would be more effective.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

However, the delegate of United Kingdom did not give in, and asserted that light surveillance on random people would be just as effective as periodic heavy surveillance, and would be sufficient.A similar stand was taken by the delegate of Australia, who strongly believed that using heavy surveillance woud be against the concept of democracy.