§1: Who has natural rights?
does not have natural rights?
Violations of rights
§4: Individual rights of adults. The right to
§5: The rights
of children and others under guardianship
§6: Animals' rights
§7: The right to life
§8: Self-determined abortion
Establishing property right and right to use
§10: Property right and free enterprise
§12: Right to organize
§13: Freedom of speech
The function of the State
§16: Military defense
Citizenship and access to the country
The limitation of the laws
The validity of the Superior
of the Superior Constitution
The paragraphs of the Superior Constitution
All legitimacy is based on not violating already achieved or directly inborn
rights. Each collection of matter having the ability
to perceive happiness/unhappiness has a natural right to pursue happiness accordingly to its fundamental nature.
a) Adult humans (not being under
guardianship) plus elements mentioned in §12a. The latter have only
indirectly the right to pursue
happiness accordingly to their constitution on behalf of the
happiness-perceiving elements of §1a that directly or indirectly make up
b) Humans who are not of legal age,
included embryos with ability to perceive happiness/unhappiness.
c) Humans who are under guardianship
due to low intellectual capacity, psychical disturbances etc.
d) Superior animals – wild ones and
animals possessed by an owner.
e) The statements in §1 a-d do not
exclude other happiness-perceiving beings that will arise by evolution or
human-made technology after the onset of the Superior Constitution.
The State may give extra non-natural rights to elements mentioned in
a-e as long as this does not violate the natural rights of elements mentioned
in this paragraph's points a-e. The General
Constitution and the Law give further instructions.
g) Considering limiting cases, the
State has to estimate the practical content of the actual right from an
intersubjective judicial evaluation ensuring that the natural rights of
others are not violated. The State is obliged to defend all rights of all
elements of §1a-e inside the territory of the State. The practical exercise
of this defense is prescribed by the General Constitution and the Law.
Each collection of matter that does not
have the ability to perceive happiness/unhappiness does not possess
any natural rights whatsoever. This includes plants and also early human
embryos and animals which are not so superior that they have developed a
nerve system capable of perceiving happiness/unhappiness, but does not
An action is punishable only if it is
right-violating. Rights may be violated as mentioned in §3a,b,c:
Initiation of physical/psychical force or planning of such activity
against elements of §1a or their property. Psychical force is the use of
non-physical activity for preventing an element of §1a from using his
rational abilities during a choice of action. This includes all forms of
non-physical activity directly addressed against another individual
which this individual clearly has marked that he does not accept or which the
performer ought to know that he would not accept, and which this individual
has to do something actively to avoid (e.g. threats of physical violence,
screaming, scolding, roaring, sharp tone, defamation). It also includes swindle
and contract breach and activity that are proven to have a significant risk
to life, health or property of others. Physical force includes murder,
violence, assaults, rape, vandalism, theft, unauthorized imprisonment,
occupation against owner's wish, and hindrance of established use of natural
b) Parental omission of developing a
child's rational potential as mentioned in §5. Initiation of
physical/psychical force against elements of §1b,c
which does not contribute to develop their rational potential or to take care
of their self-interest. Initiation of physical/psychical force against
elements of §1b,c without permission from the
parents/guardian except when being necessary for preventing such elements
from acutely hurting themselves.
c) The use of force against elements
of §1d suppressing their fundamental natural instincts as mentioned in §6b.
An exception from point a is if there exists
an explicit acceptance of such force on beforehand (§11b).
The use of force may be free of punishment in
self-defense against physical or psychical force. Such force may only be
directed against those who have initiated force. The one who is practicing
self-defense may not use more force against the aggressor than what is
necessary for escaping the aggression and he has to make maximum efforts to
prevent third party damage. If so, all responsibility for any third party
damage rests upon the aggressor; in the opposite case, the performer of
self-defense and the aggressor share the responsibility for the third party
Remaining passively to other humans or other elements will never be
right-violating unless you on beforehand voluntarily have committed to
The State is obliged to defend rights mentioned in §3 in accordance
with the principles of §1g.
A rational being is a being that has the
ability to process the sense perceptions by logical thinking in order to
choose to perform actions so the being can influence its own destiny through
technological evolution and thereby liberate itself from its natural
instincts. Happiness-perceiving rational beings have a natural right to liberty according to the
following definition: “the right to think up and to choose to perform those
actions which are necessary in the pursuit of maximization of self-happiness
during the life span as long as one does not violate the similar right of
others or other natural rights or their logical consequences”.
a) Elements of §1a are (or function
indirectly as) happiness-perceiving, rational beings and therefore, they have
the right to liberty.
Elements of §1a may not legitimately violate the similar right of similar
elements, neither the rights of other elements mentioned in §1. This also
applies for the State.
Neither the State nor anyone else has the right to impose any kind of
slavery, involuntary servitude or similar upon any element of §1a except as a
punishment for a right-violating action whereof the party shall have been
Eventual other non-human rational, happiness-perceiving beings that
might arise after the onset of the Superior Constitution will have the
similar rights. Such a new rational being must have a nature enabling it to
respect the rights of elements in §1 and to carry out its own technological
evolution liberating the being from its natural instincts.
The State is obliged to defend the rights in §4 in accordance with the
principles of §1g.
a) The nature of the child is a
potential rational being and thus, a child has potential right to liberty.
Elements of §1b have
a natural right to parents in the
sense that the biological parents (or others who have adopted this function)
are obliged to be a leader for the child in order to develop its inborn
rational genetic potential into an adult human being who is able to use the right to liberty for maximizing
self-happiness accordingly to §4. The duty of the parents includes the right to maintenance, care,
natural biological development (health), upbringing, and fundamental
A parent is a person who voluntarily has accepted the obligations in
§5a either by making the decision of producing a baby or by entering into a
contract accepting this responsibility.
Elements of §1c have the rights as mentioned in §5a until they can
live without guardianship – eventually for the rest of their lives.
The State is obliged to defend the rights in §5 in accordance with the
principles of §1g.
a) Superior animals have an
instinctive, happiness-perceiving nature. According to §1, elements of §1d
therefore have a natural right to act in accordance with their fundamental
instincts, but such elements do not possess the right to liberty
since they are not rational beings.
The State, in cooperation with the most outstanding experts on the
subject, shall make an intersubjective judicial estimation of the limits of “in accordance with the animal's
fundamental instincts” for each species. The Law gives further
Eventual other rational, happiness-perceiving beings than the humans
will have the right to liberty if they comply with the criteria of §4d
in the future.
The State is obliged to defend the rights in §6 in accordance with the
principles of §1g.
a) Each individual of §1a has the right to life; i.e. the right to
perform those actions needed for sustaining life as long as he does not
violate any rights of any element mentioned in §1.
Elements of §1b-c have the right
to life in the sense that the parents or guardian are obliged to ensure “survival within the scope of reasonable
technology” accordingly to the principles of §5a.
No contemporary non-human being has the right to life.
Eventual other rational, happiness-perceiving, future beings than the
humans will have the right to life if they comply with the criteria of
The State is obliged to defend the rights in §7 in accordance with the
principles of §1g.
a) Women have unlimited right to
self-determined abortion as long as the embryo's nerve system is not
developed in such a way that it has the ability of perceiving
happiness/unhappiness (e.g. pain).
After the embryo is developed to a level where it possesses the
ability of perceiving happiness/unhappiness (e.g. pain), it is counted as an
element of §1b and has rights thereof. The woman has to give the embryo
sufficient time to leave her body (i.e. until the time point of natural
birth). Abortion is then only legitimate if the pregnancy will threaten the
woman's life or health.
Property is a physical or intellectual manifestation
arising from the use of the right to
liberty to process natural resources away from the natural state in the
direction of increased usability. Property
right is “the right to acquire
property and to dispose this property as long as the owner does not violate
the similar right of others or violates other natural rights or their logical
Right to use is “the right to continue an initiated use as long as one does not
violate the similar right of others or violates other natural rights or their
logical consequences.” This right arises by using the right to liberty to initiate the use
of an unused and non-owned natural resource or land area without processing
it away from the natural state.
a) Each element of §1a has the right
to pursue to work up property right
on non-owned land areas and natural resources. It is the preparation of the
land area that gives rise to the property
right and not the area in itself. The property
right may be transferred to other elements of §1a,b,c,e
as a consequence of the contractual
b) Each element of §1a may try to
establish right to use on non-owned
and unused natural resources or land areas. The right to use may be transferred to other elements of §1a,b,c,e as a consequence of the contractual freedom (§11).
Establishing right to use to professional fishing and hunting
on non-owned resources may occur by the ones traditionally having performed
fishing/hunting on a particular resource, acquire right to use to a part of the annual increase of the actual
Conflicts over who has the right to establish property right or
right to use are settled by the principle “first come, first served”.
It is not possible to achieve right to use on property of
elements of §1a through continuing use (by prescription); rights on such
property may only be achieved through an accepting agreement.
The State does not possess the right to discriminate any element of
§1a in connection with §9 with reference to “public considerations”, “the
peoples' best”, “the total maximization of happiness” or “just distribution”
etc. The State may only intervene if the establishing violates the rights of
elements of §1.
When a worked-up property or land area for practical purposes decays
to a state similar to the natural state or to a state without increased
usability compared with the natural state, the property right ceases, and each element of §1a has the right to
pursue to establish new property right
without compensating the former owner. The right to use ceases when the initiated use ceases. The practical
accomplishing is prescribed by the Law.
The State is obliged to defend the rights in §9 accordingly to the
principles of §1g.
a) As a consequence of §4 and §9,
each element of §1a has the right to acquire property as long as he does not
violate the similar right of others or the rights of other elements of §1.
Each element of §1a has the right to manage their property and
enterprises (including currency management) as long as they do not violate
any rights of any elements of §1. Such violations also include those which as
a part of a sum violate the right to
life, liberty, property or instincts according to a court's evaluation
(including negative environmental disturbances and trade with §1a-elements in
All kinds of expropriation, confiscation or compulsory taxation of
property of elements of §1a are forbidden unless the owner has committed or
contributed to a right-violating action. In extreme situations confiscation
may occur via collateral damage (§3e), without being illegitimate by the
State, when the State exercises self-defense on
behalf of elements of §1 against right-violators, but only for financing the
judicial system, Police and military defense
(strictly defined) when absolutely all other options of legitimate financing
The State does not have the right to regulate private property or
enterprises (private currencies included) of elements of §1a with reference
to “public considerations”, “the peoples' best” or “the total maximization of
happiness” etc. unless the owners voluntarily have signed a contract on this or if a right-violating action has
The State does not possess the right to prohibit, regulate or break up
any company etc. owned by elements of §1a because of dominating market
position unless the owners voluntarily have signed a contract on this. The
State does not have the right to keep any monopoly where the State prohibit
private actors of §1a from competing – except for system of justice, military
and Police tasks in a strict interpretation.
The price of a product or service is settled by a contract between the
parties (§11). Considering the consumption of a product or service where the
price is not agreed on before the consumption starts, the price (and other
terms) is to be what the customer realistically could expect at the time
point when the seller accepted that the consumption was initiated, i.e.
accustomed price for existing customers and average market price for new
A newly established currency may not be inflated significantly more
than what is normal for commonly used currencies unless an option for this is
very clearly stated in the currency's constitution before it was introduced
the first time. Currencies that have been
compulsory tender or that have been monopolistic by law (or these currencies'
successors) may never be legitimately inflated. Inflation is defined
as an increase in the money supply exceeding the increase in real GDP. This
paragraph is a consequence of §10f. Violation of this point is to be
considered as confiscation of property.
The State may not prohibit any element of §1a to produce, sell, buy or
own products or services unless these are to be considered as a direct threat
against the rights of third party elements of §1.
Elements of §1a has property right to outlines of non-trivial product ideas.
Therefore, patent rights are legitimate instruments to defend the property right, but may be restricted
to a certain period of time. The same applies for registered trademarks,
design protection and copyright.
According to §3a obtaining, owning and carrying weapons may be
regarded as a violent threat or rationally anxiety-promoting activity
depending on type of weapon and situation. The same applies for chemical
poisons and biological organisms/molecules that may be used for mass
destruction. The State has to make an intersubjective judicial estimation of
the border between self-defense and violation of third-parties' rights with
respect to allowing weapons. Private armies and Police forces are not allowed
since the State has monopoly on these areas. Weapons of war are exclusively
permitted for the military forces.
Property right to forest does not exist, only right to use to forestry (§9b).
Therefore, the forester may not prevent other use of the forest that does not
violate his forestry, and anyone has the right to move about there. The
similar principal applies to other kinds of outlying fields that are not
processed away from the natural state.
Given two areas a and b which are owned by
person A and B, respectively, or which are non-owned without being naturally
localized inside an owned area. In the natural state it was possible to move
with a given transportation (e.g. walking, running, horse riding, biking,
motor cycling without sidecar etc.) between a and b, or this was possible
because there was worked up a path as a consequence of general use of the
natural state. The area between a and b is processed
away from the natural state by C (e.g. by building a road). In such a
situation all individuals of §1a still possess the right to move freely
without preconditions between a and b and in the
same way as in the natural state.
According to §15d, the State may – unless there is a prohibition in
the General Constitution or the Law – subsidize whatever activity as long as
the funding is not acquired in a right-violating manner.
Testator has unlimited right to decide how his belongings are to be
distributed after his death. Paragraphs like those stated in Contractual
freedom §11c,d,e also apply here. If the
deceased has not made any explicit decision on his inheritance, his
after-death-belongings are distributed accordingly to a presumptive testament
that expresses the most probable will of the
deceased at the very moment before his death. Rules
for defining presumptive testaments are specified in the Law.
For the whole of §10, where being relevant,
it is emphasized that all points under §11 has to be fulfilled in order to
The State is obliged to defend the rights in §10 in accordance with
the principles of §1g.
Contractual freedom is “the right to voluntarily renounce some natural liberty in the
individual pursuit of gaining more happiness in the life-long perspective
than complete natural liberty is expected to yield as long as one does not
violate the similar right of others or other natural rights or their logical
a) Each element of §1a has the right
to enter into voluntary, binding contracts with other similar elements.
Contracts where an individual of §1a accepts physical or psychical
force as a part of the contract may whenever be abolished by the potential
victim without being accused of contract breach. The use of force against the
contract partner will be punishable after the withdrawal of the acceptance of
A contract that has been entered by the use of physical or psychical
force is not valid.
Elements of §1b-c cannot enter binding contracts.
According to §3a and §11c, a contract between elements of §1a is not
valid if it is written in such a way or entered into under such circumstances
(e.g. not being with all senses alert) that one party is deluded into
entering the contract against his rational voluntariness. Such conditions and
circumstances are specified by the Law or the practice of justice.
If a contract clause seemingly is very unfair, unusual or
liberty-limiting, correspondingly bold information and emphasizing must have
been present before the contract entrance in order to be valid. The demands
for information and emphasizing also increase with the degree of asymmetry in
the information between the contract parties before the entrance. Absence of
such information or emphasizing may make the whole contract or parts of it
null and void. This paragraph is a consequence of §11e. Such demands are
further specified in the Law or practice of justice.
An element of §1a may break a contract without risking juridical
reprisals if the contract has such a character and has had such a duration
since the last entering that similar conditions as those described in §4c in
practice have arisen for this party. The terms are specified in the General
Constitution or the Law.
If two parties interact voluntarily without any explicit contract,
their interaction is primarily governed by direct logical implications of other parts of the right to
liberty than the contractual freedom. If such logical implications do not exist,
the parties are assumed to have interacted on the basis of a presumptive
contract defined by what the defendant realistically should expect that the complainant accepted at the time point and
circumstances of the interaction.
An “automatic standard contract” is a contract that is specified in a
law and is considered to be valid between two or more parties unless the
parties explicitly have agreed on something else. The State does not have the
right to impose automatic standard contracts since they are considered to
undermine the right to liberty. All principles that are to have
automatic validity without an explicit contract have to arrive as a logical
consequence of the right to liberty
or through presumptive contracts (§11h).
No limitations on the contractual
freedom, as here described, may occur for elements of §1a.
The State is obliged to defend the rights in §11 accordingly to the
principles of §1g.
Right to organize means “the right to join organizations together with others and to manage
the organization in such a way that one does not violate the similar right of
others or other natural rights or their logical consequences.”
a) Each element of §1a has the right to organize with other similar
elements in order to pursue maximization of his self-happiness by making
decisions and effectuate them accordingly to the constitution of the
organization. An organization (companies and the State included) has the same
natural rights as adult humans of §1a, unless its constitution tells
otherwise, in the capacity of the owners', investors', members' or founders'
direct or indirect rights from §1a and §4.
b) The rights of an organization
(companies included) originate from its constitution, and its rights are
deduced thereof as a contract between everyone that deals with the
organization. The constitution has to comply with §11. In an “organization”
without a constitution all decisions have to be made according to the
An organization is only legitimate if each member may resign whenever
he likes. The resignation is not to be accompanied by other obligations than
those put down in the organization's constitution (contract) at that time
when the member entered the last time or what he specifically and explicitly
has signed later on.
A person of legal age has to actively accept a membership if it is to
be legitimate. A person of legal age who has been enrolled in an organization as a
child has to get a message (with a reasonable deadline, which is
stipulated in the Law) from the organization shortly after the age of
majority where eventual obligations of continued membership are enlisted. The
person may choose to renounce his membership before this deadline without
being inflicted any obligations no matter what his parents have agreed with
the organization earlier on.
Living together with another person also makes up an organization if
they have a contract on their marriage/cohabitance.
Organizations that in practice acts like private armies or Police
forces are prohibited since the State has a legitimate and necessary monopoly
on these areas. An organization is not to be considered legal if its
objective is to violate the rights of elements of §1, to plan such
violations, or to directly encourage this in a situation where the
encouragement may be expected to be effectuated.
If elements of §1a organize, it does not give them the right to stay
on the property (companies included) of another element of §1a unless the
owner voluntarily has signed a contract on this, and if so, to the extent
prescribed by the contract.
h) An organization has no obligation
to enroll members beyond the prescription of its constitution.
The State is obliged to defend the rights in §12 accordingly to the
principles of §1g, but if the organization does not possess a constitution,
those individuals representing the organization/company will be held juridically responsible.
Freedom of speech means “the right to express one's opinion as long as one does not violate
the similar right of others or other natural rights or their logical
a) Each element of §1a has complete
freedom of speech, also concerning religious, ethnical, racial and
sex-related cases, as long as not being in conflict with §13b,c.
Nobody has the right to express their opinion by the use of physical
or psychical force or real threats thereof. Nobody has the right to encourage
right-violating actions in a situation where the encouragement may be
expected to be effectuated.
Defamations against elements of §1a,b,c or
groups thereof are initiation of psychical force and thereby right-violating.
Publicly expressing negative views about elements of §1a,b,c
or groups thereof where the content can be proven and also is located outside
the boundaries of privacy, is not right-violating. Contempt against
philosophies, ideologies or religions etc. is not defamation; only
individuals can be defamed.
Nobody has the right to use the property of others as a tool or medium
for expressing his opinions without the consent of the owner.
The State is obliged to defend the rights in §13 accordingly to the
principles of §1g.
a) An element of §1a violating the
rights of similar elements or the rights of others in §1 does not possess the
complete right to liberty as stated
in §4a or logical consequences thereof. The State is to impose the element
with the minimum loss of liberty that is necessary for preventing reiteration
of the right-violating action. A larger loss of liberty than this minimum is
a right-violation against the violator from the State. In order to be
sentenced to loss of liberty, the guilt of the element has to be proven
beyond rational doubt.
The State is obliged to impose the right-violating element of §14a so
large loss of liberty and in such a way that the probability of reiteration
is minimalized. A less and different loss of liberty than this is a State
right-violation against those who become victims for the right-violations
arising as a consequence of the too low loss of liberty. A right-violating
action is free of punishment if the probability of reiteration in practice is
Following a contract breach the contract breaker shall i) compensate eventual positive values his contract party
has been deprived of, ii) compensate eventual negative values he has imposed
on his contract party, and iii) possibly be imposed sanctions by the State to deter similar
contract breaches in the future (if the deterrent effects of points i and ii are insufficient) but only if it is
a premeditated breach of contract that is planned prior to entering the
contract or if the contract breach is decided on after the conclusion of the
contract and the contract breaker simultaneously plans for similar contract
breaches in the future.
Death penalty is always prohibited in times of peace unless a criminal
asks for changing long imprisonment into death penalty. Mutilation and
handicapping are also prohibited as punishment.
The main rule is that death penalty also is prohibited during war. As
an extreme exception death penalty may be legitimate in a chaotic anarchy or
war situation where it is physically difficult to
keep a dangerous criminal imprisoned.
Torture and all kinds of physical and psychical force with the objective
of getting information or confessions are prohibited.
The State may summon a person to interrogation, if necessary with the
use of force, if it is reasonable to suspect him (predominantly probable) for
a right-violating action. The State may keep him in custody for a shorter
period when the objective is to prevent reiteration, loss of evidences or
escape. The Law is referred for further prescriptions.
The State may issue search warrants or set an element of §1a-c under
surveillance if it is reasonable to suspect him (predominantly probable) for
a right-violating action or for planning such an action.
The legitimacy of the State appears as a
consequence of the fact that the individual has a natural right to
self-defense of its natural rights and the fact the individuals have right to organize.
a) The State is obliged to defend the
rights of the elements of §1a through system of justice, Police and military
defense accordingly to §1g. This includes being arbitrator in connection with
honest disagreement over voluntary entered contracts described in §11.
The State has a legitimate monopoly on system of justice, Police and
military defense since these are prerequisites for the defense of the natural
rights of the elements of §1.
Elements of §1a has the right to self-defense and the right to ask
others for help, but the preparation of such defense must not expose other
individuals for disproportional anxiety or anything that intersubjectively
may be perceived as threats of violence. What kind of tools being legitimate
for self-defense are prescribed by the Law in accordance with §10j.
The State is an organization with its nationals as members, and with
the basis that the right to organize
is a natural right, the State has the right to do whatever it wants as long
as it does not violate the natural rights of the elements of §1, i.e. as long
as the authorities comply with the Superior Constitution and its subsequent
laws. Each element of §1a has a natural right to try to use the State in the
pursuit of maximization of self-happiness during the life span within the
limitation of the Superior Constitution, General Constitution and the Law.
The State is not allowed to perform any kind of compulsory taxation,
except for what is mentioned in §10c. Nevertheless, the State may offer
products, services, insurances etc. for elements of §1a which they
voluntarily may buy from the State. The State may not sell obligatory
monopoly services (§15) within the system of justice, Police or military
According to §15d, the State has unlimited right to acquire, own and
manage property accordingly to §9 and §10 as long as the property is not
acquired by right-violating behavior as described in §3 after the onset of
the Superior Constitution.
Limitation on the State's right to property or liberty may be
prescribed by the General Constitution or the Law, but not in such a way that
the obligations of the State, as described in the Superior Constitution, are
a) The State may use military forces
for the defense of its own territory against foreign forces or internal
violent elements threatening the constitution. §3e
also applies here, and implies that military force never may be legitimately
directed against the civilian population, but the civilian population may be
a victim of third party damage as a consequence of the aggressor's actions.
The State may participate in military operations abroad if the foreign
State being attacked is violating the natural rights of elements of §1 in a
severe way. The objective has to be to implement a new government that
defends these rights in a significantly better way.
The State may participate in military operations abroad in order to
help another State that has been attacked by a foreign State and where the
assisted State defends the natural rights of its citizens in a significantly
better way than what the aggressor is expected to do.
The military forces may also be used for helping another State against
rebels who fight for a more totalitarian regime than the existing one.
The military forces may not be used for other military operations than
those described in §16. The military forces shall never be used if the
right-violations thereof as collateral damage in the long-term perspective
are expected to be significantly larger than what is obtained without the use
of military force.
According to §4c, the State may not impose any kind of compulsory
military services upon any element of §1a-c.
The Supreme Court hires the top military leaders of all branches of
the military. The top military leaders are to swear loyalty to the Superior
Constitution and the Supreme Court and nothing else. The top military leaders
are to obey the government, but in an acute situation where the government
refuses to accept the judgment of the Supreme Court, they are to obey the
a) A State is an organization where
membership is equal to citizenship.
The General Constitution or the Law prescribes who is to be offered
citizenship of the State. A person of legal age may whenever he likes renounce his citizenship
as described in §12c,d.
No person – national of the State or not – is to be
prevented from leaving the State's territory against his will. Exception from
this is if he has committed right-violating actions or if he is reasonably
suspected for such actions.
The State may not refuse any foreigner of §1a access
to the country since all humans have a natural right to liberty (§4a) independent of citizenship, race or
ethnical origin. An exception applies if the foreigner has committed
right-violating actions or if there is good reason to suspect that he has
done or plans to do so. Limitations also exist through the property right by the fact that nobody
may stay on the owner's property (State property included) against his
The State may decide whatever
through the General Constitution or the Law as long as the decisions are not
in conflict with the Superior Constitution. The
State cannot under any circumstances make amendments in the General
Constitution or the Law (or otherwise) that express exceptions from the
paragraphs of the Superior Constitution unless the legitimacy to do so are
directly authorized by the Superior Constitution. No redefinitions of concepts are allowed –
neither in law texts or elsewhere – in order to avoid the intentions of the
Superior Constitution. Each
paragraph in the General Constitution or the Law must contain references to
the paragraphs in the Superior Constitution on which it is based.
The Superior Constitution is deduced from the
fact that humans fundamentally are rational beings with the ability to
a) The paragraphs of the Superior
Constitution may never under any circumstances be legitimately changed – not
by general referendum, not by resolution in the National Assembly and not by
coup d'état – irrespective of the magnitude of the majority. This is because
no majority or minority may abolish the fundamental human nature and its
If paragraphs of the Superior Constitution in practice are abolished
or changed in spite of §19a, this is to be considered as coup d'état. All
direct or indirect cooperation with the perpetrators is punishable.
If the Government or the National Assembly refuses to accept a
decision of the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court may dissolve the National
Assembly and/or the Government, if necessary by the use of Police and
military forces, but not if the expected amount of third-party damages
thereof is significantly larger than the long-term right-violations from the
There is no time-limit for punishment of State violations against the
Superior Constitution. State violations against the Superior Constitution may
be subjected to criminal prosecution for all future irrespective of how long
time has passed since the Superior Constitution in practice was cancelled.
a) The Superior Constitution shall be
interpreted by the Supreme Court.
The interpretation shall occur in a strict, stringent manner from its
intention and not from the spirit of the time of interpretation. Contrarily,
the Superior Constitution shall form the spirit of time forever.
The Supreme Court is to consist of an odd number of members who are to
be elected by the judges of the High Courts, and only by these. The Supreme
Court, and nobody else, hires the judges of the High Courts. All decisions in
the Supreme Court are made by simple majority. The National Assembly,
Government or President does not possess any right to fire or hire the judges
of the Supreme Court or in other ways interfere with the work of the courts
of justice. Specified rules for the Supreme Court and other courts are given
in the General Constitution or the Law.
The Government, National Assembly, President and all other elements
inside the jurisdiction of the State are obliged to obey all judgments of the
Supreme Court. Disobedience is punished accordingly to §19b,
and the Supreme Court may in such cases issue arrest warrants.
Any element of §1a may take a law or case to the Supreme Court if he
claims it to be in disagreement with the Superior Constitution.