Foreword

Dear Delegate!

As the Secretariat of Poznań Model United Nations 2023 we are pleased with
the fact that you plan to start your MUN journey by attending POZMUN
2023. Although entering the MUN world might not always be easy, our role
is to make it the most pleasurable and unforgettable experience for you.
Should you have any questions, the whole POZMUN team will always be
ready to resolve your doubts, however we suggest that you start with
contacting your Chairboard.

In this document, you will find a detailed description of MUNs as a whole.

We hope that we will manage to answer all your questions, such as: “How to
prepare for a MUN?”, “How to speak in the committee?”, “What makes a
good delegate?” or “How to grasp all the complicated rules?”. This guide
will often cover matters that are described in a more formal and specific way
in the Rules of Procedure. Although we will do everything to make the two
documents consistent, in case of inconsistency, the Rules of Procedure is
the only official source of information regarding committee proceedings.
We therefore strongly recommend you familiarising yourself with the Rules
of Procedure, since they contain many important matters not described in
this document. Organisational matters are described in chapters I - III and
chapter IX, matters regarding conduct of the debates are described in
chapters IV - VIII of the ROP.

We wish you a pleasant experience during POZMUN 2023,

POZMUN 2023 Secretariat
Preparations
If you are reading this document, you have probably just received your
assignment. If you are lucky, it might be your country of choice.
Unfortunately, very often it is not. This part will help you prepare most
efficiently for any country and topic that you could possibly have.

Research

The most common mistake that many first-timers make is focusing your
research ONLY on your own country. Although such research might be
useful while answering POIs (Points of Information), if you are not one of
the most important countries in the committee, much of the debate will be
about the matters that do not concern you directly. However, this does not
mean that your country does not have anything to say about them.

Study Guide

We recommend that you start your research by reading the Study Guide. It’s
a document prepared by your Chairs that will introduce you to the topic of
the committee. Remember, that it is NOT POSSIBLE to base your whole MUN
performance on the Study Guide only. In fact, it’s often only a minor part of
the research. Keep in mind that everything that’s in the study guide is
accessible for every delegate. For example, you will probably be asked
during the debates about any unfavourable facts presented about you in the
Study Guide’s case studies.
Research strategy

After reading the Study Guide, you should proceed to finding some
information on the Internet. We recommend that you start with a bit of
general research about the topic. Is there anything that you didn’t
understand in the study guide? Or maybe, there is something that was
omitted, but you think it's a part of the topic? Generally, what are the
controversies regarding the topic? Where do the major world powers stand?

Then, you can proceed to reading about your own country. Is the problem
more intense in your state? Why? Maybe it has been resolved? How? Or
maybe it never existed? Why? And maybe, it’s your government that creates
the “problem”, and it’s in your interest to sustain it? Read about how your
country engages with the problem on the international arena. Read about
your local policies and characteristics regarding the topic. Particularly, read
about everything that’s unusual about your country. Remember to prepare
yourself for the POIs that other delegates may ask. Look for all controversies
and be able to explain yourself from your scandals (we’ll talk about asking
and answering POIs later). This is the best time to start writing your
Position Paper (see how to do this in the section below).

You can now proceed to the next part of the research. Read the Position
Papers of all the other countries in the committee. There you’ll find
information about the topic from the perspective of the country and the
solutions that the country proposes. Remember, that such documents are
not objective, on the contrary, they often contain country’s propaganda.
That’s why you should look for some information about the countries in
other sources.
You may want to find alike: general information about the country
regarding the topic, things that you have in common (it will be easier to
convince a country that you should collaborate) and some scandals /
controversies regarding that country in the context of the topic (you can use
them to ask POIs).

Sources

We strongly recommend you to diversify and fact-check your sources. If you

provide the committee with some factual information (eg. statistics) you
might be asked to cite the source via the Motion to Cite The Source. There
are several sources that you will be using. Official government sites are good
for checking the laws, discovering the country’s stance on some topics or
finding statistics that are in line with your country’s policy. UN sites and
scientific reports are usually considered the most truthful and valid during
the debates. International organisations and newspapers often contain
case-studies that might be useful to weaken the position of other countries.
However, some newspapers are considered biassed by some countries.
Using different sources will help you to understand both the perspective of
your country and the perspective of the countries that will criticise you
during the debates.

Position Paper

The Position Paper is a document in which you present the position of your
country. Every delegate has to write one Position Paper. First and foremost,
it has to speak in favour of your country and be in your country's policy. For
example, you should never admit that your country did something wrong,
unless your country openly admits that.
Don’t be afraid to use propaganda and manipulate the data, if it is in your
country’s policy. You should also remember that every delegate in the
committee probably knows the topic they are going to discuss. Therefore, it
is completely pointless to start with a general introduction of the topic.

Position Paper writing strategy

Position Papers are often problem-solution oriented. However, each

country can identify a different problem. For example, for China, “western
propaganda that causes unrest among the citizens” would be the problem
that results in using “limiting media freedom in order to protect the
national security” as a solution. By the USA, the Chinese solution would be
called censorship, and would be considered a problem in their Position
Paper. There are several strategies for writing a Position Paper. The most
common is to divide it into three parts.

In the first part you should describe the problem (or the lack of it) in your
country. Write about the way it affects your citizens, highlight the causes of
the problem. Remember, that if you are the cause of the problem, you can
blame it on someone (or something) else.

In the second part you should describe the solutions that you have already
adopted to resolve the problem (or to prevent it from arising). Show why
such solutions are necessary, and should be accepted regardless of the
controversies. You can also talk about the solutions that you are planning to
implement.
 - Sometimes, if the problem is more complicated (affects different
groups, has different causes), you can divide the document differently
and mix the two parts: write separately about each aspect of the
problem, together with the actions taken by your country to resolve
this particular aspect.

In the last paragraph, you should briefly state what you expect from the
committee. Write about the actions on the international level that you would
like to take, and the decisions that you would like to accomplish during the
debates.

In several cases, the aforementioned strategy will not be appropriate for

your country (for example, in a committee that discusses a situation in a
country that is on a different continent, thus making it completely
irrelevant for you). In such cases, you can always contact your Chairs, who
will surely be ready to help you.

Example:

We would like to show you an example of a Position Paper that uses the
aforementioned writing strategy. The document below has around 400
words. 400 - 500 words is a perfect length for a Position Paper that is
informative, yet still easy to read. Do not create very long Position Papers,
unless you know that you’re an important country in a committee. The
exemplary Position Paper was written by Hanna Skoworotko.
––
Country: The Republic of Belarus
Committee: Human Rights Council
Topic: Tackling the issue of unlawful police actions during protests.
Ever since the establishment of the Republic of Belarus, the Universal Declaration
of Human Rights has been affirmed, including the right of peaceful assembly,
guaranteed and protected by the state. However, Belarus recognises that
allegations of human rights violation have become a political weapon, used to
interfere in internal affairs of the countries.

When allegedly peaceful protests turn into violent riots, the use of force is
necessary for preventing civil disorder. Having dealt with illegal attempts of
overthrowing the current legal government, which occurred after the last year’s
presidential election, Belarus feels obliged to emphasise the need for
distinguishing unlawful police actions taking place during the peaceful
demonstrations, from the law enforcement adequate in certain situations.

- Introducing the “problem” of unlawful police actions during protests

in Belarus, which according to its government is nonexistent.

Often, during the protests, illicit actions take place, such as the property damage
or assault, seen during the Black Lives Matter civil unrest in the United States of
America from last year. It is estimated that the property damage during
aforementioned riots resulted in over $1 billion of losses. Police assistance during
the protests is required to prevent such crimes. However, there exist examples of
police brutality while performing their duty. That is why law enforcement abuse
of power should be monitored. Nevertheless, this issue can not be an excuse to
intervene in domestic affairs of the sovereign states.

- Justifying Belarus’ actions, using a case study of a country that will

probably criticise Belarus during the debates.
Belarus aims to maintain the national integrity and thus, firmly rejects imposing
interventionist policies, to preserve the independence of every state. Belarus
strongly opposes the politics of power, which allows major economies to
undermine the development of undesirable states.

The council should decide whether specific causes are the factual human right
violation, or if they are merely political manoeuvring used to destabilise certain
states, and take the follow-up actions. As the representatives of democratic
countries, it is our duty to reaffirm the right of peaceful assembly, one of the
fundamental human rights. Finding implementable solutions requires a
comprehensive approach. That is why Belarus is open to international diplomatic
cooperation, hoping to reach a consensus during the upcoming debates.

- Describing Belarus’ goals in the committee.

Conference

Things that you have to remember:

Never use the first person

Always refer to yourself as “the delegate”, “we” or by using the name of

your country. You should also refrain from using the second person while
referring to other countries. For example:

Incorrect:
“I believe that you should invest in crypto-currencies”,

Correct:
The delegate believes that Nigeria should invest in crypto-currencies.
We believe that the delegate of Nigeria should invest in crypto-currencies.
Uganda believes that the delegate should invest in crypto-currencies.

It’s “deleg@”, not “deleg8”

The above are phonetical records of the word delegate. The correct
pronunciation of the noun delegate is “deleg@”. “Deleg8” is the
pronunciation of the verb delegate, therefore making it incorrect in the
context you’ll most probably use it.
Opening Ceremony and the first General Assembly

During the opening ceremony you will have the chance to get to know the
organisers and hear amazingly interesting lectures by our guests.

Then, we will proceed to the General Assembly. That’s the first debate in
which you’ll participate. During the General Assembly every country of the
MUN is present and the topic discussed is usually the topic of the Security
Council. Each Security Council delegate will deliver a speech (called Opening
Speech) in which the delegates will welcome all present countries and
present their stance on the SC topic. You do not have to deliver such a
speech, unless you are in the security council. In such a case, we suggest
that you contact your Chairs. After each speech, every delegate can ask
questions (called Point of Information). They should be asked in a manner
identical to the one described later in the section about committee
proceedings. It is important to note that Points of Information during the
GA can refer not only to the topic of the Security Council, but to any general
topic that is relevant to the country speaking.

In a committee

Ice-breakers

The committee sessions will most probably start with the ice-breakers
designed by your Chairs. You’ll have the chance to get to know the people
you’re going to debate with, and hopefully, you’ll feel more comfortable
while speaking. If there are many first-timers in your committee, there will
also probably be a mock debate with some fun topic.
We recommend you to speak up, since it will make things much easier for
you later. We can assure you that no one will judge you if you do anything
wrong.

Attendance

After that, the official debate will start. During Roll Call (described in detail
in the Rules of Procedure), you will be asked whether you are present or
present and voting. The only difference is that countries that are present and
voting cannot abstain until the next break. You can choose to be present and
voting if your country has a strong position on the topic. Major world powers
are usually present and voting (with some exceptions). Other countries
much more frequently choose to be only present.

General Speakers’ List: Policy Statements and Points of

Information

Policy Statements

In this part of the debate, each delegate will have to present their stance on
the topic. You will have 2 minutes for a speech called Policy Statement. Its
content is very similar to the content of your Position Paper. That’s why
some delegates choose to simply read their Position Paper. Such an
approach is allowed, however not recommended. It’s much better to prepare
a separate document, that will be much shorter, so that you can read it more
slowly and distinctly.
You can also try to focus more on the things that you want to achieve in the
committee. If you want your Policy Statement to be more interesting, try
using some rhetorical devices and don’t be afraid to openly attack / criticise
other countries, provided that it’s in your policy. Remember that a good
Policy Statement is not the one with the biggest amount of content in the
shortest time. It’s really hard to focus on statistics (and their sources),
country’s internal laws or scientific data, especially when they are read so
rapidly that it’s hard to identify particular words.

You should start the speech with Honourable Chairs, Distinguished Delegates
or other polite starting phrases. At the end of the speech you have to yield
the floor back to the Chairs and state whether you are open or closed to
points of information. Although it’s the end of your speech, you’ll have to
remain standing and wait for the points of information.

Example:

…
Chairs: Since the limit of Points of Information to the Delegate of Cambodia has
been exhausted, we will now proceed to the next speech. Delegate of Colombia,
you may have the floor.

Delegate of Colombia: *stands up* Honourable Chairs, distinguished

delegates… (content of the Policy Statement) …the delegate is open to Points of
Information and yields the floor back to the Chairs.

Chairs: Thank you for the floor delegate, are there any points of information?
…
Points of Information

After each speech, the whole committee can ask questions (Points of
Information) regarding the topic of the debates. The procedure is described
in detail in the ROP. In a brief summary: POI is always a question, after you
ask one, you have to yield the floor back to the Chair. Then, if the questioned
delegate wishes to answer, they are given the floor by the Chairs and reply
to your POI. After the floor has been yielded back again, you can raise a
Motion for a Follow-up, and comment on the answer. Each time you’ve
been given the floor during the General Speaker’s List, you have to
remember to yield it back to the Chairs. You should also remember, that as a
questioned delegate you should remain standing until all POIs to you are
exhausted. As a delegate asking a POI, you can sit down only after you hear
the answer and state whether you want to follow up.

Example:

Delegate of China: (content of the Policy Statement) … the delegate is open to

points of information. Thank You.

Chairs: Delegate, do you yield the floor?

Delegate of China: Yes, the delegate yields.

Chairs: Thank you for the floor, are there any points of information to the
delegate of the People’s Republic of China?
Delegates: *raise their placards*

Chairs: Delegate of the USA.

Delegate of USA: Few weeks ago an american research agency found out that
China has murdered several European journalists because of their articles
regarding the Tiannament Square Massacre. Is that your interpretation of
“ensuring media freedom to all citizens”, that you talk about so proudly? The
delegate yields the floor back to the Chairs.

Chairs: Delegate of China, do you wish to answer?

Delegate of China: Yes, the delegate wishes to answer.

Chairs: You may now have the floor.

Delegate of China: The Delegate of China is simply disgusted by the outrageous

and factless allegations of the United States. They are the perfect example of
Western Propaganda, that simply wants to discredit a democratic country that
cares about its citizens, only because of some political and economical
differences. Thank you, the delegate yields.

Chairs: Is there a motion for a follow up?

Delegate of USA: Yes, there is.

Chairs: The floor is yours.

Delegate of USA: It’s strange, that a country that is famous for its media
censorship dares to say that the United States of America, a capital of freedom,
spreads any form of propaganda. Hopefully, if China is so much in favour of
media freedom, they will have nothing against international regulations that
will ensure it around the world. The delegate yields the floor.

Chairs: Thank you delegates, you may be seated. Are there any other points of
information?
…

Strategy for Answering POIs

For many first timers, answering Points of Information is the most stressful
part of the debate. That’s why they sometimes choose to be closed to POIs.
We strongly discourage this, since POIs make the whole debate more
interesting and build your position in the committee. Luckily, we can assure
you that it’s always possible to answer even the most difficult POIs. Very
often, after researching your country properly, you will simply know a
detailed answer that refers directly to the questioned situation. However, if
not, the following strategies will help you manage with every POI.

As an autocratic (or controversial) country:

We can distinguish two types of autocratic countries. First type, is a country

that claims to be democratic, although in reality they break all possible
human rights. The second type is a country that also breaks all possible
human rights, but they openly admit that they do that and claim that it’s
right.
If you are the first type of country, the most common approach is to simply
state that what you are accused of didn’t really happen. You can say that it’s
an example of propaganda, or that the data or statistics are biassed.
Sometimes, the proper solution is to say that other countries misinterpret
the whole situation, and the action taken is not in breach of human rights
(or wrongful in any other way), but is necessary for the security or
well-being of all citizens.

As a second type of country, the whole floor is yours! You can openly admit
that you killed a journalist, and say that it was good because they broke
sharia law. Or agree that women have no rights in your country, and say that
all the other countries should also take away their rights. The excuse with
security or well being of the society is also appropriate here. Of course, you
should always check to what extent it is in your policy to admit to your
“wrong-doing”.

As a country perceived as democratic (or non-controversial)

Surprisingly, the situation here is much more difficult. When it comes to

most topics, there are only several countries that did “nothing wrong”.
They can be considered safe during POIs, and use this position to ask
troubling questions to other countries. Most of the countries, however, have
something to hide or something that other countries would disapprove of.
In most cases, if such a situation is brought up, you will have to explain on
common grounds, why what you did was good. Sometimes, saying that what
you did is simply better for your citizens, or that your international position
requires you to take some precautionary measures will be enough. If it’s in
your policy (which is not likely to happen), you can agree that the action you
took was wrong and say that you’re working on it.
If neither of these works and a question was asked by a controversial
country, you can simply ignore the point of the POI and respond by
highlighting the hypocrisy of the country.

Strategy for Asking POIs

First and foremost, it is very important that you do that. POIs are a part that
is easy to prepare before the conference, thus asking them is much less
stressful for a first-timer than participating in the rest of the debate. There
are several strategies for asking POIs. Some people ask each country in the
committee, so that they can check how others are prepared. However, the
most common approach is to ask POIs only to countries that you disagree
with. Generally, you should not ask positive POIs like would you be willing to
cooperate?. You rarely should also try to actually get some new information,
because you can find anything you need on the internet. The only exception
from the above rule, is when you want to find out how a country will react to
your theoretical action or the proposal of support. Most often, you will try to
point out the wrong-doing of the country, expose their scandals or
propaganda. You may also try to convince the country that you disagree
with, by operating on the case-study of their situation.

Caucuses and the Resolution

The majority of the debate is conducted during Caucuses, which are

described in detail in the Rules of Procedure. We will not elaborate further
on that topic, except for some advice on how to prepare for them. Thus,
please familiarise yourself with that part of the ROP.
Moderated Caucus

During Moderated Caucus delegates raise their placards and speak only
after they are told to do so by the Chairs. Unlike in the General Speakers’
List, there is no yielding the floor to the Chairs in the Moderated Caucus.
The Moderated Caucus is a good place for discussing points that you would
like to see in the Resolution, as well as conducting vivid disputes with
countries that you strongly disagree with. Each moderated caucus has a
topic, set by a committee via an appropriate motion. If you are an important
country in the committee, it might be useful for you to prepare some topics
that you can then propose to the committee. The following topics are an
example of how they should be formulated.

Gas in global energetic mix and energy geopolitics

Promotion and advertising of GMO
Private companies and their impact on media and spreading information
Social media and algorithms as a cause of public disorder
Measures of worker’s rights protection
Discussing the issue of Afghan economy under the Taliban

Unmoderated Caucus: writing the Resolution

During Unmoderated Caucuses, delegates can walk freely around the

committee and discuss issues together or in smaller groups. An Un-Mod is
usually used for writing the Resolution. The format and proceedings
regarding Resolution writing, together with a sample Resolution, are
described in the Rules of Procedure. A Resolution consists of sponsors,
signatories, preambulatory clauses and operative clauses.
 Preambulatory clauses are supposed to provide some background
information regarding the topic and acknowledge previous actions taken by
UN or UN members. Operative clauses are the most important part of the
Resolution, they contain all the solutions that the committee wishes to
implement. It is advised to prepare some ideas regarding what you would
like to see in the Resolution, before the conference. However, preparing
whole clauses before the start of the debates is considered non-inclusive,
and therefore not allowed. It is also useful to take notes during the
moderated caucuses, whenever there is an idea debated upon that can be
implemented in the Resolution. Such notes will help you to have a leading
role while writing the Resolution. A draft Resolution will be voted upon in
the committee. If the Resolution passes, it will be presented, debated and
voted upon during the second session of the General Assembly.

Speeches For and Against

Before voting upon each Resolution during the General Assembly or in the
committees, delegates can deliver speeches in favour and speeches against
the Resolution (described in detail in the ROP). There is only one speech per
type. After each speech, the rest of the countries can ask Points of
Information, regarding both the content of the speech and the Resolution.
The following are example of how such speeches should be written. The
exemplary speech against was created by Jadwiga Bochynek as Sweden in
HRC and the exemplary speech in favour was written by Emilia Jamrozy as
Germany in HRC on the same topic.
Honourable Secretariat, Esteemed Chairs, Distinguished Delegates,

There are several reasons why the delegate of Sweden believes this Resolution
should not pass. The Resolution is filled with vague statements that do not carry
any real change and leave much space for interpretation. Perfect example being
clause 3 subpoint e that states “the body should consist of experts from various
fields appointed by the governments”. How will the body appointed by the
government make any real change in the policy undertaken by this government?

Furthermore, clause 8 mentions introducing programmes increasing awareness

of critical thinking that would be “domestically-coordinated”. With no external
supervision acting with the respect for sovereignty of a given country, there is no
chance for real change. Countries with a questionable human rights record, to
put it mildly, will be more than pleased with this Resolution, especially points 3
and 4 which retain control over media to the national governments. Voting in
favour of this Resolution will be voting in favour of the status quo and effectively
act as appeasement of all those nations who manipulate media for their own
goals instead of enacting real, meaningful steps to improve the situation for the
better.

The delegate of Sweden calls upon all nations, not just the ones who respect
human rights, but those who are sick of bureaucratic and meaningless
international politics to vote against.

The delegate yields the floor and is open to points of information.

Esteemed Secretariat, Honourable Chairs, Distinguished Delegates,

The delegate of The Federal Republic of Germany is honoured to be speaking

today on behalf of the Human Rights Committee and presenting the arguments
in favour of the resolution created during the committee sessions. It's undeniable
that all of the member states want to act in the best interest of their citizens,
protecting them and providing with information through the media recognised
in the resolution.

Despite the variety of points of view concerning validity of introducing any

content restrictions, all the members of the committee agreed on the range of
content that should be restricted independently of the country's policy.

The delegate would like to underline that the agreement not only provides the
clear guidelines on how and who should judge whether the context is appropriate
to appear in media or not, but also protects freedom of speech and to great extent
discourages media censorship. The proposed resolution being signed by all
committee members with all kinds of policies — from the ones strongly
supporting censorship, to the ones gladly restraining from nearly all kinds of
content restrictions -- is a strong confirmation of the system being an universal
and possible to implement suggestion from the HRC side.

Therefore, the delegate of Germany encourages the other UN member states to

vote in favour of the resolution.

The delegate is open to points of information and yields the floor to the President
of the General Assembly
Matters not described in this document

Very often during the debates, you and other delegates will be raising
various motions. The full list of motions can be found in the Rules of
Procedure. It will be very hard for you to function during the debates
without knowing them. ROP also covers the procedures regarding voting
upon motions and Resolutions. Knowing them will also be very useful for
you. Therefore, we once again strongly recommend you reading the ROP