Novasolum Treaty

The Novasolum Treaty regarding safety and liberty within an area of freedom, security and justice is an international agreement signed was by five micronations, which shared a same continent, named Novasolum, on the MCS map. Those nations were the Empire of Alexandrians, the Republic of Anthelia, the Kingdom of Gotzborg, the Empire of Natopia (then a Republic) and the former Confederate State of Rio Grande, which merged with Alexandria following the Treaty of Loredo.

The objective of the Treaty was to develop common action in the fields of police and judicial cooperation, to prevent war and agression amongst and against the signatory micronations, to guarantee the free movement for the citizens of the signatory micronations on the entire continent and to uphold fundamental human rights for all persons on the continent. The ultimate purpose was to create an area of freedom, security and justice, defined in terms of safety and liberty for all persons on the Novasolan continent.

History

It was Koen Nevens, the current president of the Republic of Anthelia and then the minister of foreign affairs of that nation, who called for a convention amongst the Novasolan micronations, in the hope to sign several treaties. A convention, held in Anthelia, did indeed follow and was centered around two topics: closer political cooperation and the setting of geographic standards for the continent.

The diplomatic approach followed was that of "closed discussions" and "limited participants". It was only when John Darcy, then president of Anthelia, made a public announcement on the MNN forums that the wider micronational community took notice of the convention, albeit with little interest, disregarding Bill Dusch's interventions. While debates on the issue of political cooperation did indeed lead to the signing of the Novasolum Treaty, the discussions on the second issue were disturbed by late interventions from Bill Dusch, making attempts to safeguard the history and culture of former micronations having occupied the Novasolan continent. It was for that reason that the Anthelian Executive Council threatened to issue a restriction order against Bill Dusch, which would have prevented him from entering the Anthelian forum where the convention was held. The threat was, however, never executed.

While John Darcy, then president of the Republic of Anthelia, did submit a detailed map of the continent and some names were suggested for several geographic locations, the only thing that really came out of these talks on geography, was a general acceptance of the continent's name, Novasolum.

The text of the Novasolum Treaty was almost singlehandedly drafted by Koen Nevens. Some input came from Christopher Harris-Till, then Royal Chancellor of the Kingdom of Gotzborg. The Treaty was largely inspired on macronational European Community treaties, the United Nations General Assembly Resolution 3314 (XXIX), and, as for the provisions relating to the entry into force, on the conventions of the International Labour Organisation.

Text of the Treaty

NOVASOLUM TREATY REGARDING SAFETY AND LIBERTY WITHIN AN AREA OF FREEDOM, SECURITY AND JUSTICE

PREAMBLE

The Empire of Alexandria, the Republic of Anthelia, the Kingdom of Gotzborg, the Sovereign Imperial Republic of Natopia and the Confederate States of Rio Grande

ACKNOWLEDGING that their respective territories are in whole or partially situated on a same continent, which they shall henceforth call Novasolum and that such geographical bond naturally leads to the forging of a common destiny

DRAWING INSPIRATION from the the universal values of the inviolable and inalienable rights of the human person, freedom, democracy, equality and justice under the rule of law, which they all share

BELIEVING that the nations of Novasolum must continue along the path of civilisation, progress and prosperity, hence that they must strive for safety and liberty within an area of freedom, security and justice

Therefore, the Empire of Alexandria, the Republic of Anthelia, the Kingdom of Gotzborg, the Confederate States of Rio Grande and the Sovereign Imperial Republic of Natopia, hereafter referred to as the High Contracting Parties, agree as follows:

Objective

1. The objective of the High Contracting Parties shall be to provide the citizens and the residents of their micronation with a high level of safety and liberty within an area of freedom, security and justice by:

• developing common action in the fields of police and judicial cooperation;
• preventing war and agression amongst one another;
• supporting eachother against acts of agression by a third micronation;
• guaranteeing the free movement for eachother’s citizens within one another’s territories;
• upholding fundamental human rights for their citizens and residents.

Police and Judicial Co-Operation

2. The High Contracting Parties shall prevent and combat crime, organised or otherwise, in particular (cyber)terrorism, through:

• closer cooperation between police forces, customs authorities and other competent authorities in the High Contracting Parties;
• closer cooperation between judicial and other competent authorities of the High Contracting Parties;

approximation, where necessary, of rules on criminal matters in the High Contracting Parties.

3. This title shall not affect the exercise of the responsibilities incumbent upon High Contracting Parties with regard to the maintenance of law and order and the safeguarding of internal security.

Non-Aggression

4. Notwithstanding every sovereign nation’s right to self-defence, the High Contracting Parties shall refrain from all acts of aggression and other uses of force against eachother. No consideration of whatever nature, whether political, economic, military or otherwise, except for every sovereign nation’s right to self-defence, may serve as a justification for aggression and no territorial acquisition or special advantage resulting from aggression is or shall be recognized as lawful.

5. Any time a third nation commits an act of aggression against one of the High Contracting Parties or threatens to do so, the High Contracting Parties shall inform and consult one another in order to ensure that their influence is exerted as effectively as possible by means of concerted and convergent action. For this purpose they may adopt common positions. Common positions shall define the approach of the High Contracting Parties to a particular situation. The High Contracting Parties shall ensure that their national policies conform to the common positions. No consideration of whatever nature, whether political, economic, military or otherwise, except for every sovereign nation’s right to self-defence, shall be accepted as a justification for aggression and no territorial acquisition or special advantage resulting from aggression is or shall be recognized as lawful.

6. Aggression is the use of armed force by a micronation against the sovereignty, territorial integrity or political independence of another micronation. Any of the following acts, regardless of a declaration of war, shall qualify as an act of aggression:

(a) The invasion or attack by the armed forces of a micronation of the territory of another micronation, or any military occupation, however temporary, resulting from such invasion or attack, or any annexation by the use of force of the territory of another Micronation or part thereof;

(b) Bombardment by the armed forces of a Micronation against the territory of another Micronation or the use of any weapons by a Micronation against the territory of another Micronation;

(c) The blockade of the ports or coasts of a Micronation by the armed forces of another Micronation;

(d) An attack by the armed forces of a Micronation on the land, sea or air forces, or marine and air fleets of another Micronation;

(e) The use of armed forces of one Micronation which are within the territory of another Micronation with the agreement of the receiving Micronation, in contravention of the conditions provided for in the agreement or any extension of their presence in such territory beyond the termination of the agreement;

(f) The action of a Micronation in allowing its territory, which it has placed at the disposal of another Micronation, to be used by that other Micronation for perpetrating an act of aggression against a third Micronation;

(g) The sending by or on behalf of a Micronation of armed bands, groups, irregulars or mercenaries, which carry out acts of armed force against another Micronation of such gravity as to amount to the acts listed above, or its substantial involvement therein;

(h) The unauthorized access by a Micronation or a person or group acting on behalf of that Micronation to the website, forum or other virtual infrastructure of another Micronation;

(i) The alteration or destruction by a Micronation or a person or group acting on behalf of that Micronation from the website, forum or other virtual infrastructure of another Micronation, or the content thereof.

(j) The use by a Micronation or a person or group acting on behalf of that Micronation of malicious online behaviour, forum busting weapons or spamming as means to destabilize a Micronation or overthrow its government.

The acts enumerated above are not exhaustive and the High Contracting Parties may in common consent determine that other acts constitute aggression under the provisions of this treaty.

Free Movement of Citizens

7. The right of free movement for citizens shall entail the right, subject to limitations justified on grounds of public policy, public security or public health, to move freely within and between the territory of high contracting parties and to remain on those territories. It shall also entail the abolition of any discrimination based on nationality between citizens of the High Contracting Parties. This provision shall be directly applicable before any of the courts of the High Contracting Parties.

Fundamental Human Rights and Freedoms

8. The High Contracting Parties shall secure to everyone within their jurisdiction the following rights and freedoms, which shall be directly applicable before any of the courts of the High Contracting Parties: (a) The right to life and physical integrity. No person may be condemned to death nor be executed, nor be tortured, nor subjected to inhumane treatment. (b) Freedom from slavery, servitude and forced labour, all of which are prohibited. (c) The right to family life, privacy and property. Personally identifiable information, personal communications, assets and the domicile shall be respected. (d) Freedom of religious belief and association, assembly, including the right to protest and for workers, the right to strike. (e) Freedom of speech including written expression. (f) The right to work and to engage in commerce, including the right to equitable working conditions (g) For persons without resources, the right to a minimum wage. (h) Equality before the law, and due process in adjudication under the law. Due process of justice includes a prompt and fair hearing before a competent court, the right to advocacy, the right to request a jury and the right to an effective remedy.

9. No restrictions shall be placed on the exercise of the rights and freedoms recognized by article 8 other than such as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.

10. Insofar as this Chapter recognises fundamental rights as they result from the constitutional traditions common to the High Contracting Parties, those rights shall be interpreted in harmony with those traditions. Nothing in this Chapter shall be interpreted as restricting or adversely affecting human rights and fundamental freedoms as recognised by the constitutions of the High Contracting Parties.

Ratifying and Denouncing the Treaty

11. The formal ratifications of this Treaty shall be communicated to the Executive Council of the Republic of Anthelia for registration. This Treaty shall be binding only upon those High Contracting Parties whose ratifications have been registered

12. The Treaty shall come into force one month after the date on which the ratifications of three High Contracting Parties have been registered.

13. A High Contracting Party which has ratified this Treaty may denounce it after the expiration of one year from the date on which the Treaty first comes into force, by an act communicated to the Executive Council of the Republic of Anthelia. Such denunciation shall not take effect until one month after the date on which it is registered.

14. Each High Contracting Party which has ratified the Treaty and which does not, within one month following the expiration of the period of one year mentioned in the preceding article, exercise the right of denunciation provided for in this Article, will be bound for another period of one year and, thereafter, may denounce this Convention at the expiration of each period of ten years under the terms provided for in this Article.

15. The Executive Council of the Republic of Anthelia shall notify all High Contracting Parties of the registration of all ratifications and acts of denunciation communicated by any of the High Contracting Parties.

Signatories

The Treaty was signed:

• by the Republics of Anthelia and Natopia (now an Empire), on 7 July 2005;
• by the Kingdom of Gotzborg, on 14 July 2005;
• by the former Confederate State of Rio Grande and the Empire of Alexandrians, on 15 July 2005.

The Treaty was ratified:

• by the Kingdom of Gotzborg and the Republic of Anthelia, on 18 July 2005;
• by the Republic of Natopia (now an Empire), on 20 July 2005;
• by the former Confederate State of Rio Grande, on 25 July 2005;
• by the Empire of the Alexandrians in August 2005.

According to article 12 of the Treaty, the Treaty came into force on 20 August 2005.

The Republic of Lavalon, also situated on the Novasolan continent, refused to sign the treaty during its participation to the so-called 'Geneva Convention', organised by Alexandria and held amongst the Novasolan micronations. The reasons for this refusal still remain unclear.