By Moe Hay
In UNODC, delegates debated on the resolution of violence against children.
First up, the delegate of Saudi Arabia spoke in favor of the resolution. Her reasons on why the clause is effective included: how legal documents should be signed to prevent trafficking, how organizations (Save the Children and WHO) can connect to these children, and how self-reporting could help the children express their struggles. She then added her own statement by saying organizations have the right to rescue the children from necessary countries to take them to safer homes. When questioned on Saudi Arabia’s conditions for children, she revealed their case has been harsh and that they’re working with organizations to create strategies to help these children. An example included Inspire, an education program to help children.
Next, the delegate of Cambodia also made a statement in favor of the resolution and how well-rounded it was. She provided statistics on the correlation between mental health and gun violence against children, including how NGOs in rural areas are attempting to prevent this issue. In addition, she played the devil’s advocate by clarifying that some parts of the resolution may sound vague. When listening to the delegate of South Africa’s opposing statements on how raising awareness with simulation games would squander time and resources, she refuted this by suggesting that the game does not need to be a technological game. It could be a board game or another simple game to assist the public, including the illiterate, step into the victims’ shoes.
Lastly, the delegate of Russia made a statement that opposed the validity of the resolution. He argued that there are already solutions being enforced to prevent the issue of child violence. Thus, this makes the resolution redundant and unable to be debated upon. He believed that there wasn’t any specified evidence of programs nor steps to further prevent this issue. If mental health is being tracked without any actual data, it would be a waste of governmental resources. False evidence of child abuse would also damage the justice system. Overall, there was a numerous amount of risk involved in attempting to comply with this resolution.
As the debate drew to a close, it was time to decide. The majority voted in favor of the resolution. This was quite a peaceful decision, as the hours of debate before were intense compared to this. On a light-hearted note, most of the delegates looked rather satisfied when the time came for superlatives.
In UNODC, delegates debated on the resolution of violence against children.
First up, the delegate of Saudi Arabia spoke in favor of the resolution. Her reasons on why the clause is effective included: how legal documents should be signed to prevent trafficking, how organizations (Save the Children and WHO) can connect to these children, and how self-reporting could help the children express their struggles. She then added her own statement by saying organizations have the right to rescue the children from necessary countries to take them to safer homes. When questioned on Saudi Arabia’s conditions for children, she revealed their case has been harsh and that they’re working with organizations to create strategies to help these children. An example included Inspire, an education program to help children.
Next, the delegate of Cambodia also made a statement in favor of the resolution and how well-rounded it was. She provided statistics on the correlation between mental health and gun violence against children, including how NGOs in rural areas are attempting to prevent this issue. In addition, she played the devil’s advocate by clarifying that some parts of the resolution may sound vague. When listening to the delegate of South Africa’s opposing statements on how raising awareness with simulation games would squander time and resources, she refuted this by suggesting that the game does not need to be a technological game. It could be a board game or another simple game to assist the public, including the illiterate, step into the victims’ shoes.
Lastly, the delegate of Russia made a statement that opposed the validity of the resolution. He argued that there are already solutions being enforced to prevent the issue of child violence. Thus, this makes the resolution redundant and unable to be debated upon. He believed that there wasn’t any specified evidence of programs nor steps to further prevent this issue. If mental health is being tracked without any actual data, it would be a waste of governmental resources. False evidence of child abuse would also damage the justice system. Overall, there was a numerous amount of risk involved in attempting to comply with this resolution.
As the debate drew to a close, it was time to decide. The majority voted in favor of the resolution. This was quite a peaceful decision, as the hours of debate before were intense compared to this. On a light-hearted note, most of the delegates looked rather satisfied when the time came for superlatives.