(Passed) WA Moon Commission Act

New Tarajan wrote:1) Section 1 states that it's environment prevented from being altered. We ask to the author to clarify exactly this provision, since, we believe, alterations of the lunar environment could be consequences of any kind of activity.

2) Section 2, regarding the WA Moon Commission, states that which shall be de facto headed by the Secretary General from Eurussia, based in the City of Saint Petersburg, Eurussia.
We believe this to be unnecessary: indeed, in the World Alliance there are countries much more advanced in lunar operations (such as Antanares) or simply in the space (such as New Tarajan itself). Thus, to have by law that the WA Commission shall be headed by Eurussia is unuseful and unnecessary, while we believe the WA Commission shall be headed by the country with much more expertise in the field, eventually elected by the Parliament or the Council, thus having also its headquarters in the said country.
Also, we wish to see this concern addressed in order not to see our Secretary General too burdened, due to the importance of such a role.

Thanks. Eurussia adopted this provision from the real life Moon Treaty in which in our belief would prevent any kind of possible explosion or experimentation on the surface of the moon, which in a sense is alteration of its environment. On the regards, the provision doesn't want any unintended consequences of any activities on the surface of the Moon.

Eurussia believes that it is much more unncesary to choose a location just because that country is advanced on this field or not, that is very discriminatory to other non-space nations. Besides, the Moon Commission is not a large organization, it is just a registry body which could simply share with the headquarters of the WA Space Defense Agency, which works on space matters too. It is also for practicality reasons and neutrality of the location that suits Saint Petersburg, particularly the building of the WA Space Defense Agency itself.

On the issue of having Eurussia as the Secretary General, is a de facto in nature, as all organizations here in the WA are lead by those who proposed them. We see no problem with that as how Eurussia has neutrally welcomed and engaged nations on international matters. Besides, the Moon Commission is simply acting as a registry of activities on the Moon, which is simply based on the proposed law itself. So we don't see any burden at all.

New Tarajan wrote:
I know the real Moon Treaty, and I can say it's highly unprecise. For this reason, I asked for this particular clarification, which could be useful for any country which hopes to extend its own activities on the Moon.

We understand the clarifications of Eurussia. But, in this case, we would propose to give the presidency of the Commission to the Secretary General of the World Alliance Space Defense Agency, due the fact that Eurussia itself admitted the strong link between the two bodies.
This does not mean to be a discriminatory move: at the contrary, we wish to see this particular concern addressed since we wish to ensure the maximum neutrality of the Commission.

New Tarajan wrote:We do not see addressed our concerns on the powers the WA Moon Commission shall have: indeed, the text of the draft left intended that the Commission has powers over everything which concerns the law itself. We wish to see a clear explanation, inside the text, of its powers and duties.
Thank you.

Kaevi wrote:

The voting period has expired and the final count is a follows:

Agree: 13
Abstain: 1
Against: 0

The World Alliance Moon Commission Act has been passed, the Speaker thanks the Third Parliament for its cooperation.

The Speaker asks the Secretary General to mark this proposal as "Passed".