Scientific Justice Wiki

(Principles and Practices)

User Tools

Site Tools

Trace:
examples:crimes

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Next revision		Previous revision
examples:crimes [2026/10/10 18:18] – created adminexamples:crimes [2026/10/10 18:39] (current) – admin
Line 1: Line 1:
-Universal Crimes Against Humanity +**Universal Crimes Against Humanity**\\  
- (An Optopian Strategy Use Case) + (An Optopian Strategy Use Case)\\  
-First Draft: 20/05/2000 +First Draft: 20/05/2000\\  
-By: Anonymous+By: Anonymous\\ 
  
-Any violation of Universal Justice, constitutes a Universal Crime, whether or not a formal Law has been codified. The following categories are exemplary for such crimes (Erga Omnes) and apply to all of humanity. As with most crimes, the magnitude and nature of the harm determines the appropriate compensation. Universal Crimes can be high (fatality, torture) or lesser (serious harm, absent killing or torture). Malicious intent generally incurs greater penalties, but isn’t required. Any claim of Universal Jurisdiction is only legitimate so long as it fully complies with the principles of Universal Justice.+Any violation of the Universal Principles of Justice on a national or international scale, constitutes a Universal Crime Against Humanity, whether or not a formal Law has been codified. The following categories are exemplary for such crimes (Erga Omnes) and apply to all of humanity. As with most crimes, the magnitude and nature of the harm determines the appropriate compensation. Universal Crimes can be high (fatality, torture) or lesser (serious harm, absent killing or torture). Malicious intent generally incurs greater penalties, but isn’t always a required element. Any claim or prosecution of Universal Jurisdiction is only legitimate so long as it fully complies with the Universal Principles of Justice.
  
-Category I.  Coercion (fatality, torture)+**Category I.  Coercion (fatality, torture)**
  
 Warfare is the result of a quest to maintain or acquire Social Power through collective Coercion (covert or overt). As civilization has evolved, the full spectrum of social Coercion has become the defining theater of operations for Warfare. Violations in the Wealth and Beliefs domains are often considered to be “unconventional” or “cold” war (hybrid warfare). This is a false distinction, mostly perpetrated by those who commit such offenses (and their Accessories), in an attempt to frame these offenses as “non-criminal” and therefore avoiding prosecution. Illegitimate gains in the Wealth or Beliefs domains (hijacking, blockades, sanctions, theft, propaganda, etc.), universally qualify as criminal offenses. Warfare is the result of a quest to maintain or acquire Social Power through collective Coercion (covert or overt). As civilization has evolved, the full spectrum of social Coercion has become the defining theater of operations for Warfare. Violations in the Wealth and Beliefs domains are often considered to be “unconventional” or “cold” war (hybrid warfare). This is a false distinction, mostly perpetrated by those who commit such offenses (and their Accessories), in an attempt to frame these offenses as “non-criminal” and therefore avoiding prosecution. Illegitimate gains in the Wealth or Beliefs domains (hijacking, blockades, sanctions, theft, propaganda, etc.), universally qualify as criminal offenses.
Line 14: Line 14:
 There is a significant risk of judicial bias and miscarriage of justice whenever a party to Warfare (or their Accessories) attempts to investigate or adjudicate such Crimes. Only Class A arbitrators and investigators are fully qualified to prosecute such cases (see Adjudication category), all others should recuse themselves (including the plaintiffs). For War Crimes, the leaders incur personal accountability, in proportion to their level of authority. If the aggregate compensation from the leaders is insufficient to fully compensate the victims, then the entire organization is accountable for the remainder. There is a significant risk of judicial bias and miscarriage of justice whenever a party to Warfare (or their Accessories) attempts to investigate or adjudicate such Crimes. Only Class A arbitrators and investigators are fully qualified to prosecute such cases (see Adjudication category), all others should recuse themselves (including the plaintiffs). For War Crimes, the leaders incur personal accountability, in proportion to their level of authority. If the aggregate compensation from the leaders is insufficient to fully compensate the victims, then the entire organization is accountable for the remainder.
  
-Category II. Arrest (illegitimate, unlawful)+**Category II. Arrest (illegitimate, unlawful)**
  
 Among the acts of illegitimate Arrest are all direct or indirect violations of Individual Freedom. A framework for understanding these Freedoms is codified in the “Individual Freedoms” section. Overt and covert violations of Individual Freedoms constitute unlawful Arrest (often in concert with other offenses). Such offenses include a wide range of well established and understood crimes (slavery, disparity, censorship, propaganda, detainment, kidnapping, indentured servitude, etc.). Among the acts of illegitimate Arrest are all direct or indirect violations of Individual Freedom. A framework for understanding these Freedoms is codified in the “Individual Freedoms” section. Overt and covert violations of Individual Freedoms constitute unlawful Arrest (often in concert with other offenses). Such offenses include a wide range of well established and understood crimes (slavery, disparity, censorship, propaganda, detainment, kidnapping, indentured servitude, etc.).
  
-Category III.  Killing+**Category III.  Killing**
  
 Killing is the act of terminating an independent life without legitimate consent. Such acts (and attempts) constitute the most serious offenses (high crimes) and therefore justify the highest penalties. Killing is the act of terminating an independent life without legitimate consent. Such acts (and attempts) constitute the most serious offenses (high crimes) and therefore justify the highest penalties.
Line 27: Line 27:
 In the case of unintentional acts of Killing, the victim must have been taking reasonable precautions to ensure their own survival at the time of the offense. Otherwise, they may share a portion of the accountability with the perpetrator. In the case of unintentional acts of Killing, the victim must have been taking reasonable precautions to ensure their own survival at the time of the offense. Otherwise, they may share a portion of the accountability with the perpetrator.
  
-Category IV.  Terrorism+**Category IV.  Terrorism**
  
-Terror is generally defined as being an emotional state of panic or extreme fear. Therefore, Terror-ism is an ideology of terror, and as such, is not a crime in and of itself. A Terrorist Act when an actual base crime induces a public state of terror among the majority of civilians (non-combatants), whether intended or not. Such a consequence aggravates (exacerbates) the gravity of the actual base crime, and the corresponding penalties. The absence of a proven base crime nullifies any accusation of a Terrorist Act. In all cases, a perpetrator who doesn’t offer an opportunity to surrender (or stand aside), to State or civilian actors, is committing an Act of Terrorism.+Terror is generally defined as "an emotional state of panic or extreme fear". Therefore, Terror-ism is an ideology of terror, and as such, is not a crime in and of itself. A "Terrorist Act" occurs when an actual base crime induces a public state of terror among the majority of civilians (non-combatants), whether intended or not. Such a consequence aggravates (exacerbates) the gravity of the actual base crime, and the corresponding penalties. The absence of a proven base crime nullifies any accusation of a Terrorist Act. In all cases, a perpetrator who doesn’t offer an opportunity to surrender (or stand aside), to State actors and civilian actors, is committing an Act of Terrorism.
  
 Perpetrators of Terrorist Acts may be State, Corporate, or Civilian actors. In this context, “Civilian” includes all non-combatant individuals and their social groups. The “State” includes all elected and appointed government officials, government bureaucrats, and government contractors (primaries) that provide material support for crimes of a State. Corporations are formal or informal organizations. Harms inflicted on State combatants or military/police infrastructure do not constitute a Terrorist Act unless they induce public terror among the relevant civilians. Similar offenses that are committed by domestic civilians (without external support), may constitute a legitimate political Rebellion (freedom fighting, insurgency, guerrilla warfare, etc.) against the State. So long as it doesn’t induce wide spread terror in the general public, it doesn’t constitute a Terrorist Act. Perpetrators of Terrorist Acts may be State, Corporate, or Civilian actors. In this context, “Civilian” includes all non-combatant individuals and their social groups. The “State” includes all elected and appointed government officials, government bureaucrats, and government contractors (primaries) that provide material support for crimes of a State. Corporations are formal or informal organizations. Harms inflicted on State combatants or military/police infrastructure do not constitute a Terrorist Act unless they induce public terror among the relevant civilians. Similar offenses that are committed by domestic civilians (without external support), may constitute a legitimate political Rebellion (freedom fighting, insurgency, guerrilla warfare, etc.) against the State. So long as it doesn’t induce wide spread terror in the general public, it doesn’t constitute a Terrorist Act.
Line 37: Line 37:
 It’s important to keep in mind that harm solely inflicted upon any attacker for purely defensive purposes is not a Terrorist Act, unless non-combatants are harmed. It’s explicitly an act of self-defense (within appropriate spectrum of force), so long as an offensive harm has actually taken place previously (or been attempted). Any form of “preemptive” harm (to external parties) constitutes a criminal offense, without exception. Such actions cause tangible harm rather than imagined harm (direct escalation). It’s important to keep in mind that harm solely inflicted upon any attacker for purely defensive purposes is not a Terrorist Act, unless non-combatants are harmed. It’s explicitly an act of self-defense (within appropriate spectrum of force), so long as an offensive harm has actually taken place previously (or been attempted). Any form of “preemptive” harm (to external parties) constitutes a criminal offense, without exception. Such actions cause tangible harm rather than imagined harm (direct escalation).
  
-Category V.  Community Subversion+**Category V.  Community Subversion**
  
 Community Subversion is the result of any interference in the natural dynamic of Free Association (assembly/disassembly). This interference is generally defined by specific, non-fatal actions (often surreptitious). This can take many forms (predatory incursion, non-consensual migration, over-breeding, genetic suicide, etc.). Malicious intent is not a necessary condition for this offense. Community Subversion is the result of any interference in the natural dynamic of Free Association (assembly/disassembly). This interference is generally defined by specific, non-fatal actions (often surreptitious). This can take many forms (predatory incursion, non-consensual migration, over-breeding, genetic suicide, etc.). Malicious intent is not a necessary condition for this offense.
Line 53: Line 53:
  7. Common Family Orientation [natural unit]  7. Common Family Orientation [natural unit]
   
-A population in which any of these political affinities is not intact, is not a fully functional political community. The modern concept of an independent, technological “Nation”, refers to any political community that has a population of 200,000 or more families (natural). The following are summaries of the primary classes of non-fatal Community Subversion.+A population in which any of these political affinities is not intact, is not a fully functional political community. The modern concept of an independent, technological “Nation”, refers to any political community that has a population of 200,000 or more natural families (approx. 800,000 people). The following are summaries of the primary classes of non-fatal Community Subversion.
  
 1. Offenses within the context of “communications” (Communications Subversion) generally take the form of language coercion. This can be done through censoring of an existing language, or by allowing more than one official language in the public domain. 1. Offenses within the context of “communications” (Communications Subversion) generally take the form of language coercion. This can be done through censoring of an existing language, or by allowing more than one official language in the public domain.
Line 63: Line 63:
 4. Offenses within the context of “kinship” (Demographic Subversion) are multidimensional and therefore often obscure. The ideal case for a Host Nation is to maintain the most homogeneous genetic lineage (avoiding incest and cloning) that’s practical. A common enabler for this type of offense is toxic empathy amongst a Host demographic. The following table details the classes, base on perpetrator, victim, means (migration, reproduction), limits, and demographic consequences. 4. Offenses within the context of “kinship” (Demographic Subversion) are multidimensional and therefore often obscure. The ideal case for a Host Nation is to maintain the most homogeneous genetic lineage (avoiding incest and cloning) that’s practical. A common enabler for this type of offense is toxic empathy amongst a Host demographic. The following table details the classes, base on perpetrator, victim, means (migration, reproduction), limits, and demographic consequences.
  
-Community Subversion+{{ :examples:subversion.png?direct |}}
  
-Perpetrator 
-(change agent) 
-Migration 
-(Host share < 80%) 
-Reproduction (r/K) 
-(Host share < 80%) 
-Victim 
  
-Host 
-Host 
-Intentional 
-(malicious) 
-Host 
-Treachery 
-Abandonment 
- 
-Others 
-Invasion 
-Replacement 
-Unintentional 
-(negligence) 
-Host 
-Dereliction 
-Incompetence 
- 
-Others 
-Infiltration 
-Displacement 
  
 Even Host communities with intact political affinities don’t seem able to tolerate more than a 20% proportion of Guests (non-nationals) within their society without risking Diversity Eugenics, social conflict or dissolution. A demographic reorganization will nearly always be an element of full compensation for such offenses, in order to secure a peaceful transition to a more sustainable arrangement for all parties involved. Even Host communities with intact political affinities don’t seem able to tolerate more than a 20% proportion of Guests (non-nationals) within their society without risking Diversity Eugenics, social conflict or dissolution. A demographic reorganization will nearly always be an element of full compensation for such offenses, in order to secure a peaceful transition to a more sustainable arrangement for all parties involved.
Line 102: Line 75:
 7. Setting healthy, normal families as a collective priority enables the survival of the community, otherwise an abnormal extinction (or die-off) can occur (Family Subversion). 7. Setting healthy, normal families as a collective priority enables the survival of the community, otherwise an abnormal extinction (or die-off) can occur (Family Subversion).
  
-Category VI.  Obstruction of Justice+**Category VI.  Obstruction of Justice**
  
 Obstruction of Justice refers to the impeding (or attempted) of the procedural tasks of qualified investigators or prosecutors, in the pursuit of justice. In general, most societies have domestic laws concerning Obstruction of Justice, and they can easily be adapted for the international environment. It’s therefore simple to prosecute global players for such offenses, but the international environment does present several unique challenges. This is because sovereign states are narcissistic entities, by design. Obstruction of Justice refers to the impeding (or attempted) of the procedural tasks of qualified investigators or prosecutors, in the pursuit of justice. In general, most societies have domestic laws concerning Obstruction of Justice, and they can easily be adapted for the international environment. It’s therefore simple to prosecute global players for such offenses, but the international environment does present several unique challenges. This is because sovereign states are narcissistic entities, by design.
Line 110: Line 83:
 For all Players, including States, it’s easy to profess a commitment to Justice when there is no personal cost. In actual practice, the most powerful players will be tempted to claim, or enact, some form of immunity by cherry picking attempts at prosecution (accountability). Without an enforceable, international treaty on Universal Justice that the most powerful players will uphold under all circumstances, Obstruction of Justice will continue to be a major offense that’s difficult to prosecute, preventing attempts at long lasting global peace. All sovereign States are narcissistic entities (by definition). For all Players, including States, it’s easy to profess a commitment to Justice when there is no personal cost. In actual practice, the most powerful players will be tempted to claim, or enact, some form of immunity by cherry picking attempts at prosecution (accountability). Without an enforceable, international treaty on Universal Justice that the most powerful players will uphold under all circumstances, Obstruction of Justice will continue to be a major offense that’s difficult to prosecute, preventing attempts at long lasting global peace. All sovereign States are narcissistic entities (by definition).
  
-Category VII.  Accessories (before or after the fact)+**Category VII.  Accessories/Accomplices (before or after the fact)**
  
 There are often “perpetrators” of Universal Crimes that attempt to evade individual accountability by not participating in direct commitment of the crime. Instead, they enlist Accessories to do the work. Accessories are those entities who provide material support for a perpetrator’s crimes, and are therefore accountable to the extent of their contribution. Even though Accessories may be less powerful than the perpetrator, they may still be useful for providing some form of support (consensus, weapons, training, intelligence, decision support, money, etc.) to the perpetrator. Provision of such support renders the provider a direct party to the offense. There are often “perpetrators” of Universal Crimes that attempt to evade individual accountability by not participating in direct commitment of the crime. Instead, they enlist Accessories to do the work. Accessories are those entities who provide material support for a perpetrator’s crimes, and are therefore accountable to the extent of their contribution. Even though Accessories may be less powerful than the perpetrator, they may still be useful for providing some form of support (consensus, weapons, training, intelligence, decision support, money, etc.) to the perpetrator. Provision of such support renders the provider a direct party to the offense.
Line 116: Line 89:
 In the case of international offenses, such actors are direct collaborators (allies, proxies, vassals, sycophants, parasites, provocateurs, etc.) of the perpetrator, and must be identified and included in any prosecution. A major challenge arises when there is a large number of State perpetrators or Accessories involved, especially when this includes the most powerful States. Such cases are strong evidence that the entire system may be corrupt in its existing form, and not capable of upholding Universal Justice. This can be remedied only if enough of the must powerful players consent to uphold Justice, no matter the personal cost, and then do so through their voluntary actions (Mutualist strategy). In the case of international offenses, such actors are direct collaborators (allies, proxies, vassals, sycophants, parasites, provocateurs, etc.) of the perpetrator, and must be identified and included in any prosecution. A major challenge arises when there is a large number of State perpetrators or Accessories involved, especially when this includes the most powerful States. Such cases are strong evidence that the entire system may be corrupt in its existing form, and not capable of upholding Universal Justice. This can be remedied only if enough of the must powerful players consent to uphold Justice, no matter the personal cost, and then do so through their voluntary actions (Mutualist strategy).
  
-Category VIII. Investigation+**Category VIII. Investigation**
  
 All cases begin with evidence of a suspected crime, followed by an investigation, followed by prosecution and finally compensation. To ensure the legitimacy of this process, all participants must be qualified to act in their specified roles. This means that all suspects, perpetrators, or accessories identified by the plaintiff (victim) are unqualified to participate in the prosecution unless proven otherwise. This would create a system of “criminals prosecuting criminals”, informally known as “the pot calling the kettle black” paradox. The probability of realizing Justice under such circumstances is low. All cases begin with evidence of a suspected crime, followed by an investigation, followed by prosecution and finally compensation. To ensure the legitimacy of this process, all participants must be qualified to act in their specified roles. This means that all suspects, perpetrators, or accessories identified by the plaintiff (victim) are unqualified to participate in the prosecution unless proven otherwise. This would create a system of “criminals prosecuting criminals”, informally known as “the pot calling the kettle black” paradox. The probability of realizing Justice under such circumstances is low.
Line 122: Line 95:
 Once a legitimate case has been identified, a qualified investigation team must begin work as soon as possible. Otherwise, there is a high probability of “evidence tampering” offenses being committed in order to obscure the facts. Investigators must have unrestricted access to all relevant information regarding the case. Any party preventing or coercing others into preventing an investigation, or withholding information, is guilty of Obstructing Justice. Once a legitimate case has been identified, a qualified investigation team must begin work as soon as possible. Otherwise, there is a high probability of “evidence tampering” offenses being committed in order to obscure the facts. Investigators must have unrestricted access to all relevant information regarding the case. Any party preventing or coercing others into preventing an investigation, or withholding information, is guilty of Obstructing Justice.
  
-Category IX. Adjudication+**Category IX. Adjudication**
  
 If a Universal Crime is at issue, it requires specially qualified Arbiters (Judges, Referees, etc.) to hear the case and make just decisions. It can be a challenge to find qualified arbiters that are not significantly biased by revenge (conscious or unconscious) or personal (or associate’s) gain. This requires a careful selection of the individuals that will fill such roles. The skill criteria for selection includes not only good arbitration skills, but also a full understanding of the principles of Universal Justice. It’s nearly impossible to implement any form of legitimate Universal Jurisdiction without it, and such efforts can easily be corrupted. If a Universal Crime is at issue, it requires specially qualified Arbiters (Judges, Referees, etc.) to hear the case and make just decisions. It can be a challenge to find qualified arbiters that are not significantly biased by revenge (conscious or unconscious) or personal (or associate’s) gain. This requires a careful selection of the individuals that will fill such roles. The skill criteria for selection includes not only good arbitration skills, but also a full understanding of the principles of Universal Justice. It’s nearly impossible to implement any form of legitimate Universal Jurisdiction without it, and such efforts can easily be corrupted.
  
 Ideally, those who fill such roles must be assessed according to their systemic/issue relationship in order to identify which individuals (entities) have the highest qualifications to arbitrate. As can be seen in the following Arbitrator Legitimacy Spectrum, under no circumstances can a Participant in an Issue ever establish a legitimate standing to arbitrate that issue. In such cases, they should recuse themselves or else be barred from hearing the issue. Ideally, those who fill such roles must be assessed according to their systemic/issue relationship in order to identify which individuals (entities) have the highest qualifications to arbitrate. As can be seen in the following Arbitrator Legitimacy Spectrum, under no circumstances can a Participant in an Issue ever establish a legitimate standing to arbitrate that issue. In such cases, they should recuse themselves or else be barred from hearing the issue.
 +
 +{{ :examples:adjudication.png?direct |}}\\ 
  
 The “he who is without sin” principle provides simple guidance for selecting those who participate in prosecution of a Universal Crime. Any party that commits the same or similar offenses are unqualified to participate in the prosecution, whether they have previously been convicted or not. The “he who is without sin” principle provides simple guidance for selecting those who participate in prosecution of a Universal Crime. Any party that commits the same or similar offenses are unqualified to participate in the prosecution, whether they have previously been convicted or not.
- 
- 
  
 One of the greatest challenges for Justice occurs under conditions of systemic criminality (corruption) in which the most powerful players (and their Accessories) are also perpetrators. In such cases, it can be difficult to recruit an individual or group who is ready, willing, and able (sufficient Social Power) to uphold Justice in the case of powerful perpetrators. One of the greatest challenges for Justice occurs under conditions of systemic criminality (corruption) in which the most powerful players (and their Accessories) are also perpetrators. In such cases, it can be difficult to recruit an individual or group who is ready, willing, and able (sufficient Social Power) to uphold Justice in the case of powerful perpetrators.
  
examples/crimes.1791656282.txt.gz · Last modified: by admin