CoN 4: Resolution IV

Background
Holland had bribed Ethiopia for a more lenient sentence in the First Judiciary Committee of the Council of Nations. Even though Holland did not get what it wanted from the treaty, The Papal State still saw it as a dangerous precedent to allow such events to be possible.

Text of the Resolution
RESOLUTION IV

ON THE QUESTION OF BRIBERY IN THE JUDICIARY

Sponsored by: Holland

4 JUN 1525

Let it be defined; bribery is the monetary, political, or territorial incentive from a donor party to a receiving party, typically, but not necessarily, for political gain or voting power.

Let it be defined; blackmail is the act of threatening or persuading through force a receiving party from a typically stronger party to ensure political gain.

Whereas the Judiciary has been affirmed as a crucial part of the Council; Whereas the Judiciary is to be an unbiased resolution to nation-state conflict;

Hereforth the Papal State is requesting a ban on bribery and blackmail to members of the Jury.

Yea - When a Judiciary case is open, neither the plaintiff, nor the defendant, nor any member of the council, may engage in either bribery or blackmail towards any member of the Jury.

Nay - There is no limit to the use of bribery during a Judiciary hearing.

Abstain

Official Vote
The Official Vote of the Council was as follows;

Yea: 5

Nay: 2

Abstain: 1 Final Verdict: The Council votes in favor of outlawing bribery and blackmail in the Judiciary Committee.

Aftermath
Bribery and blackmail had been outlawed, but the treaty was seen as unenforceable. If a nation threatened to blackmail another nation, what could be done about it? If action were taken, the threatening nation would spill the beans. If a nation offered to bribe another nation, what stopped that nation from accepting the ducats and voting in their favor?