Constitution of Mankind

[Delanshar]

If the planet was going to unite into one massive country I wouldn't be writing any constitution, I'd revolt.

No, write a constitution with guaranteed right of revolution. Then legally rebel; when army comes to crack down on rebellion: sue the state.

hmm... I like the way you think

[Risottia]

What's wrong with ancient Egypt?

No aqueducts, no archways, and no public toilets.

[Risottia]

I'd require everything that's already in the UNDHR and the ECHR, plus a Constitution on the lines of the French or Italian one, within an institutional landscape similar to the Swiss one. Oh and civil law.

Confederacy... or centralised state? I know the French and the Swiss models, but I have no idea how Italy works.

Confederacy, like the Swiss.
But with a more rigid Constitution like the French or the Italian one.

[Moving Forward Inc]

I think this would probably be accepted by the majority of the populace.

Tyranny by majority is not a good idea.

The Stuff

Spelling fixed.

- Must be Democratic

No. As I said, tyranny by majority is not a good idea.

- Freedom of speech

Absolutely.

- Fair trials

If that means presumption of innocence, trial by jury, no double jeopardy, no detention without trial, and protection of contracts, then its agreed.

- Freedom of and from religion
- Seperation of church and state

Yes.

- freedom of travel

Not on privately owned land without the owners permission.

- Freedom to assemble

I would prefer to have it worded as "voluntary association".

- Freedom to marry any and every consenting adult

More like freedom-to-do-whatever-the-fuck-you-like-as-long-as-you-do-not-infringe-on-the-rights-of-others, marriage-included.

[Nazis in Space]

Conscious of their responsibility before their own kind, and inspired by the determination to promote world peace, the people of earth, in the exercise of their constituent power, have adopted this Basic Law. People on all continents, Africa, Asia, Australia, Europe, North- and South America have achieved the unity and freedom of our planet in free self-determination. This Basic Law thus applies to the entirety of the people of planet earth.

I. Basic Rights

Article 1
[Human dignity – Human rights – Legally binding force of basic rights]

(1) Human dignity shall be inviolable. To respect and protect it shall be the duty of all state authority.
(2) The people of earth therefore acknowledge inviolable and inalienable human rights as the basis of every community, of peace and of justice in the world.
(3) The following basic rights shall bind the legislature, the executive and the judiciary as directly applicable law.

Article 2
[Personal freedoms]

(1) Every person shall have the right to free development of his personality insofar as he does not violate the rights of others or offend against the constitutional order.
(2) Every person shall have the right to life and physical integrity. Freedom of the person shall be inviolable. These rights may be interfered with only pursuant to a law.

Article 3
[Equality before the law]

(1) All persons shall be equal before the law.
(2) Men and women shall have equal rights. The state shall promote the actual implementation of equal rights for women and men and take steps to eliminate disadvantages that now exist.
(3) No person shall be favoured or disfavoured because of sex, parentage, race, language, homeland and origin, faith, or religious or political opinions. No person shall be disfavoured because of disability.

Article 4
[Freedom of faith and conscience]

(1) Freedom of faith and of conscience, and freedom to profess a religious or philosophical creed, shall be inviolable.
(2) The undisturbed practice of religion shall be guaranteed.

Article 5
[Freedom of expression, arts and sciences]

(1) Every person shall have the right freely to express and disseminate his opinions in speech, writing and pictures, and to inform himself without hindrance from generally accessible sources. Freedom of the press and freedom of reporting by means of broadcasts and films shall be guaranteed. There shall be no censorship.
(3) Arts and sciences, research and teaching shall be free. The freedom of teaching shall not release any person from allegiance to the constitution.

Article 6
[Marriage – Family – Children]

(2) The care and upbringing of children is the natural right of parents and a duty primarily incumbent upon them. The state shall watch over them in the performance of this duty.
(3) Children may be separated from their families against the will of their parents or guardians only pursuant to a law, and only if the parents or guardians fail in their duties or the children are otherwise in danger of serious neglect.
(4) Every mother shall be entitled to the protection and care of the community.
(5) Children born outside of marriage shall be provided by legislation with the same opportunities for physical and mental development and for their position in society as are enjoyed by those born within marriage.

Article 7
[School system]

(1) The entire school system shall be under the supervision of the state.
(2) Parents and guardians shall have the right to decide whether children shall receive religious instruction.
(4) The right to establish private schools shall be guaranteed. Private schools that serve as alternatives to state schools shall require the approval of the state and shall be subject to the laws of the states. Such approval shall be given when private schools are not inferior to the state schools in terms of their educational aims, their facilities, or the professional training of their teaching staff, and when segregation of pupils according to the means of their parents will not be encouraged thereby. Approval shall be withheld if the economic and legal position of the teaching staff is not adequately assured.
(5) A private elementary school shall be approved only if the educational authority finds that it serves a special pedagogical interest or if, on the application of parents or guardians, it is to be established as a denominational or interdenominational school or as a school based on a particular philosophy and no state elementary school of that type exists in the municipality.

Article 8
[Freedom of assembly]

(1) All human beings shall have the right to assemble peacefully and unarmed without prior notification or permission.
(2) In the case of outdoor assemblies, this right may be restricted by or pursuant to a law.

Article 9
[Freedom of association]

(1) All human beings shall have the right to form corporations and other associations.
(2) Associations whose aims or activities contravene the criminal laws, or that are directed against the constitutional order or the concept of international understanding, shall be prohibited.
(3) The right to form associations to safeguard and improve working and economic conditions shall be guaranteed to every individual and to every occupation or profession. Agreements that restrict or seek to impair this right shall be null and void; measures directed to this end shall be unlawful.

Article 10
[Privacy of correspondence, posts and telecommunications]

(1) The privacy of correspondence, posts and telecommunications shall be inviolable.
(2) Restrictions may be ordered only pursuant to a law. If the restriction serves to protect the free democratic basic order or the existence or security of the Federation or of a state, the law may provide that the person affected shall not be informed of the restriction and that recourse to the courts shall be replaced by a review of the case by agencies and auxiliary agencies appointed by the legislature.

Article 11
[Freedom of movement]

(1) All human beings shall have the right to move freely throughout the federal territory.
(2) This right may be restricted only by or pursuant to a law, and only in cases in which the absence of adequate means of support would result in a particular burden for the community, or in which such restriction is necessary to avert an imminent danger to the existence or the free democratic basic order of the Federation or of a state, to combat the danger of an epidemic, to respond to a grave accident or natural disaster, to protect young persons from serious neglect, or to prevent crime.

Article 12
[Occupational freedom]

(1) All people shall have the right freely to choose their occupation or profession, their place of work and their place of training. The practice of an occupation or profession may be regulated by or pursuant to a law.
(2) No person may be required to perform work of a particular kind except within the framework of a traditional duty of community service that applies generally and equally to all.

Article 13
[Inviolability of the home]

(1) The home is inviolable.
(2) Searches may be authorised only by a judge or, when time is of the essence, by other authorities designated by the laws, and may be carried out only in the manner therein prescribed.
(3) If particular facts justify the suspicion that any person has committed an especially serious crime specifi cally defi ned by a law, technical means of acoustical surveillance of any home in which the suspect is supposedly staying may be employed pursuant to judicial order for the purpose of prosecuting the offence, provided that alternative methods of investigating the matter would be disproportionately diffi cult or unproductive. The authorisation shall be for a limited time. The order shall be issued by a panel composed of three judges. When time is of the essence, it may also be issued by a single judge.
(4) To avert acute dangers to public safety, especially dangers to life or to the public, technical means of surveillance of the home may be employed only pursuant to judicial order. When time is of the essence, such measures may also be ordered by other authorities designated by a law; a judicial decision shall subsequently be obtained without delay.
(5) If technical means are contemplated solely for the protection of persons offi cially deployed in a home, the measure may be ordered by an authority designated by a law. The information thereby obtained may be otherwise used only for purposes of criminal prosecution or to avert danger and only if the legality of the measure has been previously determined by a judge; when time is of the essence, a judicial decision shall subsequently be obtained without delay.
(6) The Federal Government shall report to the parliament annually as to the employment of technical means pursuant to paragraph (3) and, within the jurisdiction of the Federation, pursuant to paragraph (4) and, insofar as judicial approval is required, pursuant to paragraph (5) of this Article. A panel elected by the parliament shall exercise parliamentary oversight on the basis of this report. A comparable parliamentary oversight shall be afforded by the states.
(7) Interferences and restrictions shall otherwise only be permissible to avert a danger to the public or to the life of an individual, or, pursuant to a law, to confront an acute danger to public safety and order, in particular to relieve a housing shortage, to combat the danger of an epidemic, or to protect young persons at risk.

Article 14
[Property – Inheritance – Expropriation]

(1) Property and the right of inheritance shall be guaranteed. Their content and limits shall be defined by the laws.
(2) Property entails obligations. Its use shall also serve the public good.
(3) Expropriation shall only be permissible for the public good. It may only be ordered by or pursuant to a law that determines the nature and extent of compensation. Such compensation shall be determined by establishing an equitable balance between the public interest and the interests of those affected. In case of dispute concerning the amount of compensation, recourse may be had to the ordinary courts.

Article 15
[Socialisation]

(1) Land, natural resources and means of production may for the purpose of socialisation be transferred to public ownership or other forms of public enterprise by a law that determines the nature and extent of compensation. With respect to such compensation the third and fourth sentences of paragraph (3) of Article 14 shall apply mutatis mutandis.

Article 16
[Citizenship – Extradition]

(1) No citizen may be deprived of his citizenship.

Article 17
[Right of petition]

(1) Every person shall have the right individually or jointly with others to address written requests or complaints to competent authorities and to the legislature.

Article 17a
[Restriction of basic rights in specific instances]

(1) The basic rights do not apply to any person of English descend

Article 18
[Forfeiture of basic rights]

(1) Whoever abuses the freedom of expression, in particular the freedom of the press (paragraph (1) of Article 5), the freedom of teaching (paragraph (3) of Article 5), the freedom of assembly (Article 8), the freedom of association (Article 9), the privacy of correspondence, posts and telecommunications (Article 10), the rights of property (Article 14), or the right of asylum (Article 16a) in order to combat the free democratic basic order shall forfeit these basic rights. This forfeiture and its extent shall be declared by the Federal Constitutional Court.

Article 19
[Restriction of basic rights – Legal remedies]
(1) Insofar as, under this Basic Law, a basic right may be restricted by or pursuant to a law, such law must apply generally and not merely to a single case. In addition, the law must specify the basic right affected and the Article in which it appears.
(2) In no case may the essence of a basic right be affected.
(3) The basic rights shall also apply to domestic artifi cial persons to the extent that the nature of such rights permits.
(4) Should any person’s rights be violated by public authority, he may have recourse to the courts. If no other jurisdiction has been established, recourse shall be to the ordinary courts. The second sentence of paragraph (2) of Article 10 shall not be affected by this paragraph.

[Seleucas]

No constitution. Only unwritten rules and traditions that can be overwritten; legal positivism really isn't that different from a constitution which is interpreted countless different ways.

[Norsklow]

I still see a lot of features, and a shortage of design parameters.

And I should say that most annoyingly, with a few honourable exceptions - I should mention Risotta - , I see a lot of focus on features designed to change the way how human society works - as opposed to determining the relation between Citizen and State. I'm all for setting out the relationship between citizen and state, and I am dead-set against the attempts to change how human society works.

Get your noses out of other people's affairs!
Desirable as an improvement of the human condition may be, that is no legitimate concern of a Constitution, as opposed to determining how the state works and how citizens interact with it, which is the legitimate purpose of a Constitution.


On some features.

In theory I'm all for free speech and freedom of religion.

But as we saw in the child pornography interlude, so what on earth do you mean to say anyway when you say Free Speech or Freedom of Religion?

Do I get the right to burn witches if my religion said so?
Do I get the right to mutilate a child if my religion says so?
Do I get the right to ban the teaching of Creationism if my no-religion tells me that Creationism is wrong?

[Ostroeuropa]

What is your opinion on the US constitutions handling of that affair norkslow?

[Czechanada]

Why don't we name some obscure city be the capital of humanity? Rome and Washington are already famous.

Why not Asuncion or Khartoum?

[Risottia]

Why don't we name some obscure city be the capital of humanity? Rome and Washington are already famous.

Why not Asuncion or Khartoum?

Too famous.

Try Mosteiro.

[Alaje]

Confederacy... or centralised state? I know the French and the Swiss models, but I have no idea how Italy works.

Confederacy, like the Swiss.
But with a more rigid Constitution like the French or the Italian one.

Switzerland is a federation bro, it hasn't been a confederacy since the end of Napoleonic Wars.

[Norsklow]

What is your opinion on the US constitutions handling of that affair norkslow?

That the American model has 2 shortcomings.
a] the notion of natural rights, endowed by their creator, is unmitigated Creationism.
'why do I have the right to be gay? Because God said so'

In theory, I can live with that. I'm pretty religious myself, very much so even. The idea that God gave someone the right to be gay does not offend me. My God is big enough for that.

But is it intellectually satisfactory? Will it resolve all issues? I think History teaches that it does not satisfy . I think we can see around us the acrid debates between those who are not fully satisfied as to the meanings of these things.

b] the american model has a little 'sink' called the State ( province, region to you and me ) that serves to absorb all pressure points that the system cannot handle. It also can lead to War between the States. I don't think we should have this model.

I suggest that we refuse to be slaves to history. I suggest that we use our freedom to force ourselves into some hard work with the braincells. I further suggest that we accept that ;social constructs; may be a completely debunkable notion, but accept it none the less.

I suggest that we accept that everything we are going to work with will be about definitions that we by majority decision agree upon, to be bound with it. No one who does not accept this idea of Sovereign Majority will be invited to give their opinion or vote - and will not be permitted to do so. Those who do accept it agree that they are completely bound to honour our agreement.

I further suggest that we expressly state in our Constitution the Idea of Strict Constructionism.
A thing means what we explicitly stated that it means. And that our openly stated deliberations about what we mean are the source text that our successors shall use when in doubt.

If they need new ideas, let them use them, and do the same hard work before amending our Constitution. If things do go wrong in the future, everyone will know who was responsible for the error.

I am not infallible, I cannot foresee the future, I cannot be held responsible for it - and likewise, I cannot decide on behalf of future generations.

[Suzdal-Vladimir]

As some one who doesn't like constitutions (too limiting) I'd follow the British model: Set up a Parliament - it can amend the Constitution with a simple majority. Doesn't really matter what else I put in after that, but I'd say free and fair elections, a monarchy, and low taxes ... then sit back and watch the Parliament change it all

[Norsklow]

As some one who doesn't like constitutions (too limiting) I'd follow the British model: Set up a Parliament - it can amend the Constitution with a simple majority. Doesn't really matter what else I put in after that, but I'd say free and fair elections, a monarchy, and low taxes ... then sit back and watch the Parliament change it all

Exactly why I oppose this: I want the strictest limits possible imposed upon the Government.

[Zweite Alaje]

As some one who doesn't like constitutions (too limiting) I'd follow the British model: Set up a Parliament - it can amend the Constitution with a simple majority. Doesn't really matter what else I put in after that, but I'd say free and fair elections, a monarchy, and low taxes ... then sit back and watch the Parliament change it all

Exactly why I oppose this: I want the strictest limits possible imposed upon the Government.

You don't want to restrain the government too much or it won't be powerful enough to help the people in the event that state intervention is necessary.

[Norsklow]

Exactly why I oppose this: I want the strictest limits possible imposed upon the Government.

You don't want to restrain the government too much or it won't be powerful enough to help the people in the event that state intervention is necessary.

And who shall guard the People from that Guardian?

[Benutanairan]

You don't want to restrain the government too much or it won't be powerful enough to help the people in the event that state intervention is necessary.

And who shall guard the People from that Guardian?

The interior guardians ofcourse.

[Zweite Alaje]

You don't want to restrain the government too much or it won't be powerful enough to help the people in the event that state intervention is necessary.

And who shall guard the People from that Guardian?

In a proper government format the people and the state would be one and the same. Unless we're talking about a dictatorship.

[Norsklow]

And who shall guard the People from that Guardian?

In a proper government format the people and the state would be one and the same. Unless we're talking about a dictatorship.

3 separate entities.
People
GOvernment
State.

[Zweite Alaje]

In a proper government format the people and the state would be one and the same. Unless we're talking about a dictatorship.

3 separate entities.
People
GOvernment
State.

The thing is if the society is sufficiently democratic they'd all be one.

[Norsklow]

3 separate entities.
People
GOvernment
State.

The thing is if the society is sufficiently democratic they'd all be one.

Even then, Not True.

People = State? Aye.
People = Government? Maybe... but no high hopes.
Government = State? Forbid it, Almighty God!

[Jakobea]

Why don't we name some obscure city be the capital of humanity? Rome and Washington are already famous.

Why not Asuncion or Khartoum?

Why don't we just build a city for the Capital on the Island of Cyprus and declare the city International territory. America build it's own capital and Cyprus, though not my first choice (Jerusilem), does have a centralized location in the world. We could give it some universal sounding name like Humanikni-ah.

[Kintaria]

I don't really think there should be ONE central capital city in a united Earth. Perhaps regional capitals and sub-capitals would be the way to go, with no individual city or region having a monopoly on power. With the Internet and other forms of instant communication, do we really need all the power and all the important institutions to be in the same place?

If a capital city really is a requirement, I suggest building a new city from scratch in a currently unpopulated area of the planet. Possibly on the Ocean like Atlantis from Stargate: Atlantis. The area around the city and the city itself, should be designated "Federal Territory" and not belong to any of the regional governments.

As for the laws and civil rights of such a society; I agree with the OP and many of the other liberal minded posters on here. Freedom of travel, religion, speech and right to marry whoever you want (although I'm not a fan of polygamy). Also equal rights regardless of creed, colour, gender, sexual orientation, race, ethnicity, age, physical abilities, social status, social background, financial status etc.

Saying all that; I would not give any rights at all to Spiders and Human Beings that like Spiders. An arachnid genocide would be my first order of business.

[Ostroeuropa]

I don't really think there should be ONE central capital city in a united Earth. Perhaps regional capitals and sub-capitals would be the way to go, with no individual city or region having a monopoly on power. With the Internet and other forms of instant communication, do we really need all the power and all the important institutions to be in the same place?

If a capital city really is a requirement, I suggest building a new city from scratch in a currently unpopulated area of the planet. Possibly on the Ocean like Atlantis from Stargate: Atlantis. The area around the city and the city itself, should be designated "Federal Territory" and not belong to any of the regional governments.

As for the laws and civil rights of such a society; I agree with the OP and many of the other liberal minded posters on here. Freedom of travel, religion, speech and right to marry whoever you want (although I'm not a fan of polygamy). Also equal rights regardless of creed, colour, gender, sexual orientation, race, ethnicity, age, physical abilities, social status, social background, financial status etc.

Saying all that; I would not give any rights at all to Spiders and Human Beings that like Spiders. An arachnid genocide would be my first order of business.

Well, how about a virtual world capital?
(Think second life, but it's own programme and such.)

[Scandza]

My list:

1. All trade must be mandated to stop unfair trading schemes, e.g. subsidizing something massively to make your market "better" for companies in the short term.
2. Every government must be a Republic of some type, be completely democratic by international guidelines.
3. Every government must be completely secular in all it's properties; Complete separation of Church and State.
4. No single or group of member States will have more power over votes then any other member.

Everything else will be voted on by the international coalition of member countries, the above is nonnegotiable.