Dear Sir, The issue is related to IT, and companies like Apple, Android, or an IT expert need to develop interactive and dynamic applications to contest decisions sentence by sentence online, supported by multimedia evidence in public or private disputes. Currently, the problem lies in handling old or future-use evidence, ensuring its traceability, long-term organized storage, and timely access for competent courts. It is burdensome to contest everything in a timely manner through paper formats and to revisit old paper or digital evidence (such as emails) for all the relevant authorities involved in handling a case. Sending all email evidence to the authorities is a complex process, and there is a need for automation that facilitates sending evidence to all relevant authorities in advance with a direct option integrating electronic signatures, submission to encrypted and recognized judicial platforms, and the conversion of one or multiple emails into an electronically admissible format for all competent courts. Whenever an email contains a request to a guardian or civil ******* that risks being ignored and a dispute arises due to inaction, all courts should be informed in advance that a request risks being overlooked. I need an IT solution: Subject: A request to a guardian or a civil ******* at risk of being ignored and where a dispute is likely to arise from a lack of timely action. All courts should be informed in advance that such a request is in progress and risks being ignored. I believe that the evolution of new technologies, often without our knowledge, when dealing with judicial authorities—which lack transparency in this area—makes interacting with them through digital formats challenging due to varying standards of admissibility for paper or digital formats. Apple, Android, or the state should develop interactive and dynamic applications to challenge decisions sentence by sentence online using multimedia evidence in public or private disputes. The current issue is the multimedia traceability of old or future-use evidence in potential disputes, its organized long-term storage, and necessary access for parties and competent courts. At present, adhering to paper or digital judicial procedures within a short timeframe, making copies for all concerned parties, and retrieving old paper or digital evidence (emails) to send to all relevant authorities or parties involved in handling a case is burdensome and costly. Sending all email evidence to authorities and parties is a complicated matter, as this digital option is not universally acceptable. An automated process is required to facilitate the submission of multimedia evidence or a group of emails, immediately convertible with electronic signatures and submission to encrypted judicial platforms. Examples of my struggles: • The X judges have failed for years to document the accurate statements of my general practitioners in official transcripts. Testimonies are filtered at the judges’ discretion. Many judges distorted testimonies; my psychiatrists’ initial favorable statements were pressured by the judge into unfavorable interpretations, which were then officially recorded, ignoring my specific requests to be protected as a victim of violations. • Evidence traceability issues: My guardians do not respond to my requests, leaving email correspondence unstructured and unclear. • The judges disregard medical certificates I have submitted in the past (e.g. a surgery), leading to challenges in retrieving evidence dating back 15 years. Maintaining written records is impossible in my small apartment, and manually synchronizing my emails with a dynamic and automated application for electronic signature and use of INCAmail (legal app) should be automated. The evidence should be sent automatically to the four institutions in charge of my defense (TPAE, Chamber of Supervision, Federal Tribunal, and Court of Auditors) when a guardian fails to respond to a request or a medical prescription is disregarded. • Interactions with guardians: They fail to follow up on specific medical requests, endangering my life and health, which I must escalate to multiple bodies (TPAE, Chamber of Supervision, Federal Tribunal, Court of Auditors). After enduring institutional inertia (TPAE, guardians, Public Ministry, police, administrative mediation, psychistrits clinics) in response to my cries where my rights are violated through phone calls by guardians obstructing care and failing to follow special prescriptions, the disregard for my alerts has resulted in fundamental rights violations. Psychiatric manipulations, combined with guardians’ bad faith to minimize their work by administering unnecessary treatments for theoretical mental illnesses, and the actions of TPAE tribunal and civil chambers that prioritize psychiatric assessments over the criminal violations endured by victims, leave me defenseless. Judicial systems fail to retain accurate testimony, and pertinent evidence in my favor is ignored or destroyed during hearings. Evidence preservation is challenging, especially in cases where access to phones or data is restricted (e.g., psychiatric hospitals, prisons). Institutions often aim to discredit the citizen rather than ensure justice. The lack of respect and punitive measures inflicted upon me in a digital age where evidence traceability is inadequate underscores systemic issues. SwissID malfunctions only add to the challenges. This vicious cycle of institutional disrespect and power abuse marginalizes citizens in Switzerland. Developing an interactive judicial dossier system would alleviate these challenges. Who has a better idea? The Future of Justice: When it comes to acting in good faith, being in the right place, and being respected in one’s rights—or when a third party is recognized as acting in bad faith under specific circumstances, violating your rights and acting outside their bounds—the current justice system often fails to provide solutions. Escaping or avoiding the situation through exile is not a viable solution. The inertia of judges and public or private actors creates significant problems in defending rights and properly documenting every step of a legal process. When a lawyer does not have the time to submit for approval an appeal that is manifestly incomplete on the facts; When justice does not allow for proper investigation into facts due to vague civil law procedures regarding placements for assistance, with judges having excessive discretion and no interactive and fluid engagement with citizens; For example, when attempting to understand and uncover facts behind defamatory declarations prevents the establishment of truth due to short appeal deadlines at the Tribunal—often relying on testimony or expertise where your words leave no trace—it becomes clear that the justice system needs serious reform. Subject: Petition for Ensuring Respect for Fundamental Rights Through the Creation of a Secure Digital System for Evidence and Potentially Litigious Interactions with Public Actors (Judges, Clerks, Police, Experts, Doctors, Medical Advisors, Psychiatrists, Social Workers) and Private Persons (Relatives, Family, Private Clinics, etc.) To whom it may concern, I wish to draw your attention to a recurring and serious issue in the relationship between citizens and judicial institutions, as well as with third parties—public or private. This concerns the distortion of facts, loss of evidence, and lack of traceability in exchanges with judges (in writings or hearings abusively filtered by judges, or the absence of recordings to ensure factual accuracy), experts, medical advisors, doctors, psychiatrists, social workers, or private individuals. 1. The Problem of Evidence in Unjust Accusations and Interactions Often, the most vulnerable or best-positioned individuals (e.g., the ill, homeless, or those who have unjustly lost their freedom of movement) face limited deadlines of 10 to 30 days to gather evidence, find a lawyer (often unsuccessfully), and defend themselves in court. Citizens without legal assistance are forced to navigate justice alone, often failing to compile legal bases effectively. Even when witnesses or written evidence are submitted, hearings do not guarantee that these are formally recorded in the minutes. Postal submissions are expensive and time-consuming, and platforms like INCAMAIL and SWISSID are impractical. Penal cases are classified without the citizen’s knowledge, and visibility is needed. Accessing evidence on mobile phones is often difficult or impossible, especially when the individual’s freedom of movement is restricted (e.g., in prisons or psychiatric hospitals). Examples of Unjust Accusations: • A judge who misinterprets or distorts the facts; • A psychiatrist who imposes a subjective diagnosis; • A social worker whose decisions or statements are unfair or harmful. For vulnerable citizens, it becomes extremely difficult to defend themselves effectively because: • Public or private actors (judges, experts, doctors, social workers) often have short memories or biases that affect their decisions. • In cases where freedom of movement and phone access are restricted, there is no system (such as a “bancomat”) to access historical evidence or interact with justice effectively. • Citizens, often overwhelmed by stress and unfair decisions, may lack the capacity to present solid evidence within tight deadlines. • Verbal interactions (in hearings, meetings, or expert evaluations) leave no formal trace, allowing for abuse or erroneous interpretations. 2. Grave Consequences • Unjust accusations can lead to severe judicial or administrative decisions: imprisonment, curatorship, forced hospitalization, loss of fundamental rights, or even suicides. • Evidence presented by the citizen is often overlooked or forgotten over time. Short appeal deadlines make effective contestation nearly impossible. • Lack of transparency and traceability undermines citizens’ trust in the judicial and social systems. 3. Proposed Solution: A Secure Digital System for Evidence and Interactions To address these issues, I propose the creation of a centralized and secure digital system—akin to a bank account—where citizens can store and manage evidence and legal interactions. Suggested Features: 1. Recording and Archiving Interactions: • Using mobile apps linked to a secure platform, citizens could record their interactions (e.g., hearings or meetings with judges, witnesses, or third parties). • These recordings, along with supporting documents or multimedia evidence, would be accessible to the citizen and authorized parties, ensuring traceability and preventing abuse. 2. Digital Archiving of Evidence: • Citizens could upload documents or evidence online, with certified timestamps and geolocation to ensure authenticity. • Public or private actors (e.g., police, judges, experts, doctors) would be required to review these and justify their acceptance or rejection. 3. Interactive Digital Dossier: • Each citizen would have a digital file containing: • Past judicial and administrative decisions. • Evidence linked to each contested element, with room for testimonies and expertise. • This would enable citizens to contest each element online, with a complete trace of all exchanges. 4. Protection of Data and Secure Access: • The system would function like a bank, ensuring the confidentiality of information and access only to authorized parties. 5. Integration with Artificial Intelligence (AI): • AI could help structure facts, identify inconsistencies in testimonies or decisions, and suggest appropriate legal remedies. 4. Advantages of the Proposed System • Complete Traceability: No fact or document would be overlooked. • Increased Transparency: Judges, witnesses, and experts would be held accountable through accessible recordings and evidence. • Empowerment for Self-Representation: Citizens without access to legal counsel could effectively defend themselves. • Prevention of Abuse: Timestamped and geolocated recordings would prevent baseless accusations or arbitrary decisions. • Universal Accessibility: Particularly beneficial for the most vulnerable, such as detained individuals, hospitalized patients, or those without legal representation. 5. Call to Action I urge public decision-makers, IT developers, and judicial institutions to collaborate on developing this system. Modernizing the judicial and social systems through digital tools is essential to ensure citizens’ fundamental rights and guarantee fair and transparent justice. *********** in other words : Subject: No One Is Safe from Bad Faith or the Insecurity of Justice. Petition to Ensure Respect for Fundamental Rights Through the Creation of a Secure Digital Judicial Dossier for Evidence and Litigious Interactions with Public and Private Actors Dear Sir or Madam, I wish to bring to your attention a proposal aimed at modernizing and securing the management of evidence and interactions between citizens and judicial institutions, particularly in the context of potential disputes involving public or private parties. This system would address recurring issues that hinder transparency and fairness in judicial decisions. 1. Current Issues: Limitations of the Judicial System 1.1 Problem of Traceability of Documented Evidence or Statements There is insufficient traceability for past, ongoing, or future disputes involving citizens, judges, experts of all kinds, medical advisors, social or administrative actors, private individuals, the homeless, prisoners, retirees, or patients confined without freedom of movement. This lack of traceability often leads to misinterpretations or distortions of facts, impeding the defense of individual rights. Citizens do not always have the resources or ability to preserve or present solid evidence, especially within short deadlines. Vulnerable individuals, deprived of legal assistance and limited by strict procedural timelines, require technological tools to ensure the proper format for legal actions or appeals, using updated laws supported by tailored AI systems. 1.2 Injustice Linked to Material and Digital Constraints • Restricted Freedom of Movement: In cases of detention, placement in retirement homes, or forced hospitalization, access to evidence or digital tools for defense is often impossible within short deadlines. This highlights the need for digital admissibility of legal actions and a system for organizing evidence over time. • Inadequate Platforms: Current platforms like INCAMAIL or SwissID are not accessible to everyone and fail to provide organized or interactive management of legal data globally. Sending documents to all parties involved in a case by post is expensive and time-consuming, especially when tribunals impose short deadlines and resist adopting new technologies. 1.3 Lack of Visibility and Active Participation • Citizens lack a comprehensive overview of their legal or administrative cases. • Verbal interactions during hearings or meetings leave no formal trace, making abuses possible. 1.4 Unrealistic Appeal Deadlines • Extremely short deadlines (10 or 30 days) often prevent individuals from gathering evidence, finding a lawyer, or preparing a solid appeal. 2. Proposed Solution: A Centralized and Secure Digital System I propose the creation of a secure digital judicial dossier for each citizen, similar to a digital patient record. This system would allow citizens to manage their evidence and judicial interactions effectively, even in complex situations. Key Features 1. Recording and Archiving Declarations: • Citizens could record their statements with public actors (e.g., police, experts, medical advisors, judges) or private parties during hearings or meetings. • These recordings, timestamped and geolocated, would be securely stored and accessible only to authorized individuals, ensuring accuracy and preventing distortions of facts. 2. Digital Archiving of Evidence: • A platform would allow citizens to upload and organize documents or evidence with certified timestamps and full traceability. • Parties involved in legal actions or appeals would be required to review this evidence and justify its acceptance or rejection, with the option to counter specific elements using additional evidence (e.g., audio, video, or material proofs). 3. Interactive Legal Dossier: • Each citizen would have access to a personal digital space containing: • Judicial and administrative decisions, with detailed records of any required revisions due to incomplete evidence. • Audio, video, or documentary evidence linked to specific contested elements of an action or decision. Judges would no longer be able to ignore such evidence in their rulings. • This dossier would facilitate dynamic interaction among parties involved in a case (judges, lawyers, caregivers, curators, etc.), with a detailed history of exchanges. Access to documents would be subject to the approval of the dossier holder. 4. Accessibility in Restricted Environments: • Secure, limited-access computers could be made available in prisons, retirement homes, hospitals, or other settings that restrict freedom of movement. • This would allow citizens to access and transmit their evidence and take timely legal action or file appeals electronically, even without access to legal assistance. 5. Data Protection and Confidentiality: • The system would guarantee restricted and secure access, limited to authorized parties. 6. Integration of Artificial Intelligence: • AI could assist in structuring facts, identifying inconsistencies in testimonies or decisions, and suggesting appropriate legal solutions. 3. Advantages of the Proposed System 1. Increased Transparency: • Judges, clerks, experts, medical advisors, psychiatrists, and all other public or private actors would be held accountable through accessible recordings of citizens’ statements and relevant evidence. 2. Complete Traceability: • Every document or fact would be preserved and verified, ensuring justice is based on solid evidence. 3. Enhanced Equity: • Citizens, even without access to a lawyer, could defend their rights with organized and interactive access to their data. 4. Reduced Abuse: • Timestamped and geolocated recordings would prevent baseless accusations or arbitrary decisions. 5. Universal Accessibility: • The system would be especially useful for vulnerable citizens who lack sufficient legal assistance due to their situation or status. It could also enable individuals to act as their own lawyers using predefined legal action templates. 4. Call to Action I urge public decision-makers, IT developers, and judicial and social institutions to collaborate on developing such a system. The digital modernization of the judicial and social systems is essential to ensure fair and transparent justice for all citizens. I remain at your disposal for further input or clarification and hope this proposal will be given due consideration. Sincerely
Replies
1
Boosts
0
Views
376
Participants
2
