Global certification of Justice Agents as volunteers or professionals, paid on demand by Judicial Fund-Insurance (J-Judges, J-Defenders and J-Policeman) by 3% of recovered damages
(J-Prosecutors, J-Investigators and J-Informants). +2% fixed costs.
J-Informant and/or J-policeman record via the Internet (audio, video and/or text) their testimony or belief in the occurrence of damaging act with circumstantial, testimonial and/or material evidence. J-Investigators and/or J-Prosecutors evaluate information and identify causers and receivers of the damage. No legislative process or legislation is necessary.
The right to free speech includes the right to free accusation and free defense based on the belief in the occurrence of a damage that needs to be stopped, repaired and prevented. The causer of the damage instead of exercising his rights of defense and rebut the facts of the accusation can try to censor, threaten, blackmail and accuse of damage the informant, witnesses or justice agents, for not having conclusive evidence to accuse. The accused would have to prove that the accuser does not believe that the accusation is true intending and causing damage.
A J-informant can accuse freely based only on the belief in damage, although ideally they should develop the ability to express conceptually the accusation detailing facts, circumstantial, physical and testimonial evidence. This can be done by the J-policeman and J-investigator that investigates a suspect based at least on reasonable facts and circumstantial evidence, requiring no conclusive evidence. The J-prosecutor makes the accusation of damage from the existence of conclusive evidence, which may be challenged by J-defender and should be confirmed or denied by J-judge.
1) author (direct causer of damage or indirect causer by giving orders to third parties)
2) co-author (more than one author with similar responsability)
3) participant (follower of orders that causes damage and receiver of advantage in return)
4) accomplice (knows of damage, helps indirectly and receives an indirect advantage)
5) omissive (knows about damage but does nothing)
6) negligent (claims not to know or not want to know about damage)
J-policeman, J-investigator and/or J-prosecutor try a voluntary conciliatory compromise to cease, repair and prevent damages.
J-judge tries to mediate a voluntary solution to cease, repair and prevent damage.
J-judge examines prosecution/defense, decides on the existence of damage and solution to cease, repair and prevent damage. If there is damage, evaluates premeditation and danger of the causer of damage to determine fine and home productive-educational restriction of freedom. Causer can appeal for free to two other judges with greater knowledge and experience. Already serving the determination of the three J-judges and paying the cost of the appeal, can appeal unlimitedly with new arguments, evidence and proof. If the causer accepts the decision the process is concluded, if not accepted the process proceeds to the use of additional processes of justice.
The adult social circle (above 18 years) close to the causer of the damage is identified: professional or love partners, father, mother, brothers, first uncles/cousins and other friends/relatives with whom they have a daily or weekly relationship. Recorded accusation and defense are submitted to them. In case there isn't a defense registered/approved by the accused, they are stimulated to directly hear from the accused his version of facts/defense, make their own conclusions and act on verbal, emotional, financial, psychological, moral persuasion so that the damage is stopped, repaired, prevented and restitution/fine/home freedom restrictions are fulfilled .
Organizations where the causer of the damage acts professionally or socially can be identified and initiated administrative proceedings so that external or internal damage to the organization are analyzed by presenting accusation/defense and investigating if other internal correlated damages occurred. Verbal persuasion and administrative sanctions can be administered in cooperation with the leadership or disciplinary commissions, including seizure of income to repair damage, temporary or final termination from the organization. If the representatives of the organization refuse to act, they can be investigated and accused of negligence, omission, complicity, co-authorship, authorship of damage or other damage investigated correlated to the initial accusation to the member of the organization.
If administration controlling leadership and/or ownership of an organization maintain damaging behavior, refuses to repair damages and/or refuses to remove individuals that caused the damage, the economic agents (consumers, investors/creditors, suppliers and workers), that support such organization, shall be massively informed of the accusation, defense and judgment. They will be prompted to support judgment by eliminating economic relations with the organization until the damaging behavior is stopped, repaired, individuals responsible are removed from organization and have all/part of reparation/fine paid by organization regressed against them.
When the causer of the damage is a candidate or occupant of an elected position of an organization, or subordinated to the occupant of an elected position that is at least negligent or omissive, the accusation and the defense can be taken to voters for judgment, with multimedia communication, so that they can possibly deny future vote and/or remove the accused from current position.
Broadcasting of the accusation and defense by all multimedia communication means in text, audio and/or video for judgment of citizens and voters. The freedom of expression rights include the information about damaging acts, of the agents causing the damage and of the right of defense, so that at least future damages can be prevented.
Use in last case of the traditional common state justice, if it still exists, to try to obtain restitution and monetary fine if there is premeditation of damage. The state justice in general is inefficient and not independent with the judiciary typically subordinated to the executive and legislative, for purposes of appointment, promotion and compensation. The objective is to extinguish the state legislative and justice and replace it for the global direct judicial system with open certification of justice agents with the function of proving damage, premeditation and danger, to obtain restitution, fine and home freedom restriction.
Use in last case of traditional common state justice, if it still exists, to try to obtain restriction of freedom, if possible at home with adequate security, because of evidence of danger of the causer of damage who will probably repeat the damage. The state justice in general is inefficient and not independent with the judiciary typically subordinated to the executive and legislative, for purposes of appointment, promotion and compensation. The objective is to extinguish the state legislative and justice and replace it for the global direct judicial system with open certification of justice agents with the function of proving damage, premeditation and danger, to obtain restitution, fine and home freedom restriction.
Contacting foreign embassies with more efficient traditional state justices than the national local justice for legal assistance in the local justice, international justice and the justice of the country represented by the embassy, for violation of United Nation statutory universal human rights and international money laundering of damaging enrichment.
Direct activation of other more efficient national judicial systems and multilateral organizations such as the Organization of American States, United Nations and Global Ocean Aerospace Federation (www.globocean.org), for violation of universal human rights and international money laundering of damaging enrichment. Globocean Jusistem Orders can be executed in conjunction with local/national justice or independently if nation is a systematic violator of human rights and national justice is very inefficient (there is no national sovereignty rights to systematic violation of human rights). Home arrest and asset seizure orders that are not fulfilled nationally by state representatives that are not elected democratically and are systematic violators of human rights, can lead to additional orders of home arrest and seizure of assets from these representatives. These orders can be fulfilled in Globocean international territory in under/over aquatic home arrest residential units (Sandaeroblocks) with individual aero capture (Sandaerocopter/Sandaeroship) and deactivation or towing of physical assets to Globocean international territory (www.sandaero.com).
Last resort self-defense action to protect asset, psychological and physical integrity of the receiver of damage, their relatives, friends, colleagues and of the justice agents. J-judge may sign a home arrest order of the causer of recurrent systemic damage, preferably in addition to arrest orders issued by other international and national justice systems. The repair of damages, fines and restrictions of freedom must be fulfilled in territory exterior to the national justice system in delinquency with the statutory universal human rights of the United Nations, of which all nations are signatories and for which all humans have the right to protection. There is no right for no intervention or of national sovereignty in case of systematic violation of human rights, inefficiency and lack of independence of the national judicial system in question.
PROCESS OF JUSTICE