Anti-Lawfare Arbiter
The Anti-Lawfare Arbiter ensures that those leading the digital society presently cannot use parts of the digital society to abuse former members of the leadership of that society.
The Anti-Lawfare Arbiter has the needed oversight to prevent the following abuses of the apparatus of the digital society against former political opponents once a particular group or party gains executive power.
Appointment
The Anti-Lawfare Arbiter is appointed by the last administration in charge. A new Arbiter is added by each administration with a maximum of three appointed at any given time. The oldest is removed by the newest as they rotate out.
Examples
Thankfully, we are surrounded with examples of such abuse that gives us ample understanding of which powers need to be delegated to such an arbiter in order to prevent abuse.
Abuse of intelligence and security services
For example:
Deploying covert surveillance on rival political campaigns.
Fabricating security threats to justify invasive investigations.
Infiltrating opposition organizations with state agents.
Classifying political dissent as state subversion.
Weaponization of the judicial and legal system
For example:
Initiating bad-faith prosecutions to drain opponent financial resources.
Selectively enforcing obscure laws exclusively against political enemies.
Pardoning political allies to signal immunity for state-sanctioned illegal acts.
Manipulation of financial and tax authorities
For example:
Directing punitive tax audits against opposition leaders and their primary donors.
Freezing the financial assets of rival organizations under the guise of regulatory compliance.
Pressuring private financial institutions to deny banking services to dissenting groups.
Weaponizing anti-money laundering statutes to seize campaign funds.
Exploitation of regulatory and administrative agencies
For example:
Revoking operational licenses for businesses affiliated with political opponents.
Deploying health, labor, or environmental inspectors to harass rival-aligned enterprises.
Subversion of electoral machinery
For example:
Executing targeted voter roll purges in demographics favorable to the opposition.
Disqualifying opposition candidates through arbitrary administrative or technical rulings.
Altering ballot structures to confuse voters or disadvantage specific candidates.
Coercion of information and media channels
For example:
Directing state-funded media to amplify fabricated narratives about rivals.
Threatening independent journalists with prosecution for unfavorable coverage.
Revoking press credentials for reporters investigating state abuses.
Powers
The Arbiter has the right to intervene in all cases in which it sees abuses like the ones above, to put on hold any activity in question, and to refer them to the highest currently available court in the society for judgment.
However, the Arbiter loses the right to do this for four months each time it loses a case.
Nonpolitical
Arbiters are not removable, for the very purpose that they are not subject to political powers. They are to take an oath to be non-political in their decisions and to preserve justice and not allow any misuse of the state for political purposes.
Their goal is to block pretextual prosecution and obstruction, namely, an investigation or action that begins with a person or group rather than a crime or regulatory violation. The judges referred to are to weigh in on if something was pretextual or not.