11 December 2012

Day 155: Constitutional Equality as the Rule of Law

Jury of One’s Peers?

A system of justice from the perspective of having to evaluate and assess what must happen when a person is in a mental disorder, and therefore disrupting society, through a Jury of One’s Peers, is not an effective procedure. The effectiveness of peer-review lies within the expertise and level of skill of those reviewing. A procedure through a Jury of One’s Peers based on a selection of citizens from a broad spectrum of backgrounds (race, nationality, gender, education) in no way whatsoever ensures the effective evaluation and assessment of a person’s disorder and decision of specific correctional facilitation. The only point such a jury of peers serves, is to provide a broad spectrum of bias through which a person’s behaviour resulting from mental disorder is assessed.

The assessment of a person’s behaviour ought to be based on a very simple pattern: is the pattern that one is living that which is Best for All Life or is it Not? As such, the legal system won’t be as much a system that is governing or regulating according to the laws that exist – as most of the laws will cease to exist in an Equal Money Justice System. The justice system will operate very simplistically. You will have your primary constitutional law and you will have your management regulations – which together form your guidelines according to how man co-exists in harmony.

At any time when behaviour deviates from the principles and guidelines to sustain harmony in society, one will go through a process of origin identification and correctional facilitation by experts.

The Less Laws, the Less Crime

“The more laws are written, the more criminals are produced” – Lao Tzu

The focus of Justice within an Equal Money System will not be that of criminalization, it will be a matter of harmony or disharmony. A harmonious society cannot create criminals, because crime as such does not exist, and can only be the result of the laws in place creating it. Laws dictate what is legal and what is illegal. In a society where regulations are formulated according to the principle of what is Best for All, there will be no reason to step ‘outside’ of the law. If ‘illegal’ behaviour does take place, it is not sufficient to merely label the behaviour as ‘criminal’ and attempt to ‘force’ the individual to comply with the law, or simply remove them from society. Instead, it requires to be re-assessed whether the regulations in place are indeed Best for All. If the disharmony is not a result of the existent regulations, the disharmony requires to be corrected on an individual level.

Therefore, there will be no criminals – criminals only exist as the result of a disharmonious society, where instead of looking at what is in the Best interest of All and assessing people’s behaviour within the principles of harmony or disharmony , laws are designed to protect certain interest groups and thus by implication excluding others

There will thus be only One Law, as the Rule of Law as the Constitution based on Equality and what is Best for All Life. All other guidelines will be in the form of policy and regulation, which will be required to be laid out within the utmost specificity. Within adhering to specificity and clarity to the utmost level, no space is left for the interpretation of law or policy. If at any stage it turns out that a door for interpretation was left open, this would indicate that the law or policy is not good enough and will have to be specified to close the gap. As such, there will no longer be a need for lawyers as ‘experts’ on law or courts for the purpose of interpreting the law. Education within the Equal Money System will provide everyone with the necessary reading skills to be able to effectively read and assess laws and policies for one self – at the level that it should be assessed, so all can be on an equal ground of understanding and clarity.


Enhanced by Zemanta


Post a Comment