Judgment on Case Norwegian Nobel Committee

 

Case No. 26-2017: “NORWEGIAN NOBEL COMMITTEE”

 

ETHICAL JUDGMENT

Dear Prosecutor, Public Defender, Ambassadors and Jury Members of the International Buddhist Ethics Committee (IBEC) and Buddhist Tribunal on Human Rights (BTHR), regarding the Case 26-2017 against NORWEGIAN NOBEL COMMITTEE, hereby on May 23, 2017, it is recorded that the trial of the Buddhist Tribunal has been concluded to analyze the violation of Human Rights made by the accused. This Case has been carried out as a result of the “Case Myanmar” as well as from the “Case UN”.

After analyzing the presentation of the case and the validation of the large number of evidence, it has proceeded with the vote of 7 Jury Members. There were 1 vote of “Innocent”, 1 “Invalidated” vote and 5 votes of “Responsible” concerning the NORWEGIAN NOBEL COMMITTEE for the serious crimes of CORRUPTION and COMPLICITY WITH CRIMES AGAINST PEACE. The actions of the NORWEGIAN NOBEL COMMITTEE when awarding international criminals with the Nobel Peace Prize not only contradict Alfred Nobel’s vision but also cause enormous damage against World Peace and Planetary Justice. These terrible acts prove that members of the NORWEGIAN NOBEL COMMITTEE have corruptly used Alfred Nobel’s inheritance funds, which should be used to reward peace champions (Santi-raja) instead of rewarding international criminals. Even the NORWEGIAN NOBEL COMMITTEE on many occasions has refused to cancel awards that violate World Peace, which demonstrates an immoral politicization of its prizes. Thus, the NORWEGIAN NOBEL COMMITTEE must be held accountable for its actions, which violate Alfred Nobel’s ethics and his own will inspired by the values of pacifism. Giving a Peace Prize is a great responsibility, because if this ethical acknowledgment is given to an international criminal, it would be violating the very nature of Peace (Santi), being complicit in these violations of international Law. In this sense, the Buddhist Tribunal on Human Rights establishes that the NORWEGIAN NOBEL COMMITTEE not only disrespects the memory of Alfred Nobel, but also illegally manages his inheritance by having given Peace Prizes to individuals and countries that violate human rights by means of acts of genocide and crimes against humanity, as has happened when rewarding Aung San Suu Kyi, the PEACEKEEPING FORCES, the UNITED NATIONS (U.N.) and the US GOVERNMENT, among others. These awards go against the construction of a pacifist and empathic civilization.

The Buddhist Tribunal on Human Rights ruled that the NORWEGIAN NOBEL COMMITTEE is “Responsible” for Corruption because it has illegally used Alfred Nobel’s inheritance for delivering Peace Prizes to many figures that violate human rights. Alfred Nobel, like Siddhartha Gautama, had the purpose of creating a world without militarism and without wars, and this is the supreme responsibility that must be fulfilled by the Nobel Peace Prize. In contrast, the NORWEGIAN NOBEL COMMITTEE has not used the Alfred Nobel heritage funds to fulfill this goal of supporting an international demilitarized system of World Peace and brotherhood among nations. Not only has been breached Alfred Nobel’s mission to abolish or reduce armies, but even the NORWEGIAN NOBEL COMMITTEE has come to reward countries with genocidal armies. In harmony with Siddhartha Gautama, the Peace Prize created by Alfred Nobel sought to provide the greatest benefit to all peoples, creating a world where nations are disarmed and resolve their conflicts through peaceful negotiations.  Alfred Nobel’s testament is a contribution to the same kind of civilization that the Buddhist Law seeks to build, only rewarding the peace champions (Santi-raja). However, the NORWEGIAN NOBEL COMMITTEE has betrayed Alfred Nobel’s will, using his funds corruptly and for national political purposes in defending another idea of Peace (Santi). While Siddhartha Gautama and Alfred Nobel wished to build a demilitarized world where the Law would replace aggressive force, where nations would cooperate with each other and would not compete for military superiority, instead, President Jagland of NORWEGIAN NOBEL COMMITTEE has publicly stated that they apply another concept of Peace (Santi) that is different from the one used by Alfred Nobel, confirming then that the economic funds of the Prize are being allocated for corrupt acts that violate Nobel’s testament. The Buddhist Tribunal on Human Rights has demonstrated that the NORWEGIAN NOBEL COMMITTEE has the duty of fulfilling the will of Alfred Nobel, who defined Peace (Santi) in a very specific way. Therefore, when the NORWEGIAN NOBEL COMMITTEE uses another definition of Peace (Santi), which is functional to the vision of Norwegian politics, then it is incurring an act of corruption. In the international community there are many individuals and organizations working to reduce or abolish armies and prevent wars, which is exactly what Alfred Nobel sought to reward, although the NORWEGIAN NOBEL COMMITTEE often does not recognize these potential nominees, preferring to reward political leaders who usually violate human rights and attempt against world peace and the rule of righteousness (dhamma-cakkam). Giving Nobel Peace Prizes to individuals or organizations that violate human rights is not only an immoral act, but is also an act of deep corruption, being an affront and scam against the will of Alfred Nobel.

The Buddhist Tribunal on Human Rights rules that the NORWEGIAN NOBEL COMMITTEE is Responsible for Complicity with Crimes against Peace, because it has supported and rewarded criminals who have committed international crimes. As the Nuremberg Tribunal has pointed out, Crimes against Peace are supreme international crimes because they contain within them all the evil of the other international crimes. Thus, crimes against peace not only are referred to planning, preparation, conspiracy and the carrying out of aggression wars that violate international treaties, but also include genocides, crimes against humanity and war crimes. Also, the Nuremberg Tribunal has pointed out that crimes against peace are not only committed by States but also by individuals. The Buddhist Tribunal on Human Rights agrees with Judge Jackson that incitement is an act as criminal as execution, considering that complicity (active or omissive) entails being responsible for the criminal acts of others. The NORWEGIAN NOBEL COMMITTEE has rewarded subjects who had already committed crimes against peace, and it also decided that the award be kept by individuals who subsequently committed crimes after receiving the Nobel Peace Prize. Undoubtedly, for the ethical vision of the Buddhist Tribunal on Human Rights this is an act of complicity. In extending the application of the Draft Code of Crimes Against the Peace and Security of Mankind by the International Law Commission, the Buddhist Law states that NORWEGIAN NOBEL COMMITTEE is complicit with crimes against peace, since there is a responsibility for these international crimes when failing to prevent or punish the commission of such crimes, when consciously assisting with direct and substantial means, when publicly inciting to commit such crimes. While the NORWEGIAN NOBEL COMMITTEE has the moral power to take away the prizes awarded to international criminals, by overseeing that prizes are awarded only to peace champions (Santi-raja), there is a clear flaw in the ethical duty to supervise those who are supported by a Peace Prize. Although the NORWEGIAN NOBEL COMMITTEE does not have juridical power to sanction the criminals it awarded, it certainly has the moral power to sanction them ethically by canceling the prize. Moreover, granting criminals with a Nobel Peace Prize along with a large sum of money is not only a public incitement to follow the criminal’s behavior, but is also providing them with monetary means to continue carrying out such crimes against peace. Clearly, the NORWEGIAN NOBEL COMMITTEE has never taken steps to prevent the Nobel Peace Prize from falling into the hands of international criminals, to whom it has supported through such a noble prize. Through the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination and the American Convention on Human Rights, the International Law prohibits any propaganda or incitement in favor of war, racism, discrimination and violence, so that undoubtedly the act of awarding Nobel Peace Prizes to those who commit international crimes constitutes a violation of the International Law. The act of judging the NORWEGIAN NOBEL COMMITTEE for Complicity with Crimes against Peace is something unique in world jurisprudence, being of transcendental importance for present and future generations, since it is a teaching about what is truly Peace (Santi). In revalidating the actions of international criminals through the awarding of Nobel Peace Prizes, the NORWEGIAN NOBEL COMMITTEE has violated the solidarity that unites the nations of the world, by maintaining the practice of inadequate peace or false peace that does not really solve the conflicts but worsens them through the use of violence and war. Even if they are self-defense actions, violence and war never lead to Peace (Santi) and justice. The Buddhist Tribunal on Human Rights agrees with the Kellogg-Briand Pact on condemning war as an inadequate way of resolving international disputes, having to renounce to it in order to maintain adequate and peaceful relations between the peoples. The NORWEGIAN NOBEL COMMITTEE has rewarded individuals who have used war as a national policy, which is illegal under International Law. The complicity of NORWEGIAN NOBEL COMMITTEE constitutes a supreme offense against international ethics and the sacredness of the human right to Peace (Santi). In this way, the fact that the international community does not impose any sanction against the NORWEGIAN NOBEL COMMITTEE does not mean this organization was unpunished in the face of the Buddhist Law.

Unlike traditional jurists, Maitriyana cannot remain silent in the face of phenomena of contemporary civilization that threaten world peace and the rule of righteousness (dhamma-cakkam). The Buddhist Law as an ethical order ruling the peaceful coexistence among peoples has much to say in the face of the world’s problems, never yielding to the phenomenon of war. The Maitriyana has juridical capability of processing and solving events that produce miseries at the international level, carrying out an ethical analysis on the causes and solutions of the ills of the world. In this way, the Buddhist law makes a contemplative use of reason to denounce war and militarism as insane violations of international human rights standards. At the same time, the Maitriyana proposes the construction of a new international community that will definitively puts an end to the illegal resource of war. Obviously, the development of a pacifist civilization involves the challenge of eliminating discrimination and violence from communities and individuals. The Buddhist Law states that there is an absolute contradiction between war and justice. In agreement with the jurist Luigi Ferrajoli, the Maitriyana confirms that war is the denial of human rights, just as Buddhist Law is the denial of war. The Buddhist Tribunal on Human Rights states that crimes against peace are prohibited in an omni-comprehensive way by the Nuremberg Tribunal and also by the Charter of the United Nations, since the threat and use of military force undermine the integrity and independence of the peoples in an incompatible way with the purposes of humanity. Like International Law, Maitriyana declares that wars are illegal and that conflicts must be resolved only by peaceful means, never jeopardizing or endangering Peace (Santi) and international justice through illusions and false just wars or humanitarian wars. Buddhist law considers any justification for war as unlawful, since its verbal defense is an act as criminal as carrying out the war. In this sense, the Maitriyana affirms that justificationism that uses resources such as holy wars, just wars, ethical wars or humanitarian wars, constitutes complicity with crimes against peace, instead of complying with international law and resolving disputes by peaceful and adequate means. Against this, the Buddhist Law denounces as false peace those Nobel Prizes awarded to criminals who have carried out acts of war or violence, by arguing that this false peace has an immoral and anti-legal nature because it produces devastating effects on the civilian population by stripping them of their fundamental rights. In the same way as jurist Luigi Ferrajoli, the Maitriyana understands war as an absolute evil, stating that it is false the idea that good and Peace (Santi) can be reached by evil and warlike means. Because contemporary civilization uses the idea of just, ethical and humanitarian wars that aim to seek Peace (Santi), the Buddhist Law then considers it is necessary to clarify that this false peace is totally opposed to the vision of right and appropriate peace (Samma-santi) of Maitriyana. False peace, which is the apparent quest for Peace (Santi) by violent means, violates the ethical principle of doing the least possible harm by attacking thousands of peaceful civilian lives in the name of freedom. False peace and false freedom violate the right to life of the human being, while violating political, economic, cultural and environmental rights, achieving an inadequate or incorrect peace that, in fact, has aggravated the conflict it intended to solve. This fundamental incapacity of war to achieve Peace (Santi) not only can be perceived by the example of American atomic bombs thrown at two Japanese cities, massacring thousands of civilians and sending the dangerous message to the world that it is legitimate to use nuclear weapons, but is also evident in the case of the fight against terrorism, which has been worsened and strengthened instead of eliminating the causes that have generated it. For the Buddhist Law, war only generates an uncontrollable spiral of greed, hatred and deceit. In fact, just or ethical war is merely an excuse to invade other countries for economic reasons. Faced with this perverse feature of capitalist civilization, the Maitriyana agrees with Ferrajoli that a global and cosmopolitan government must be created, being similar to a Constitutional Democratic Supra-State or Human Rights State that effectively complies with the norms of International Law, unlike what has been done by the UN. The mission of this new type of international community must be the guarantee of world peace and the rule of righteousness (dhamma-cakkam), which can only be achieved by disarming both the States and the citizens of the world, prohibiting the production and trading of all kinds of weaponry, which would obviously reduce both citizen crime and international wars to the minimum. This goal is one of the main responsibilities assumed by the Buddhist Law, seeking to ensure that the economic funds of the enormous military budgets are destined to cure social injustice, ignorance and pollution. In harmony with Ferrajoli’s long-term realism, the Maitriyana proposes the utopian way of a democratic reform of the international community, establishing a system of liberty, equality and fraternity in the relations between peoples. This construction of a future pacifist civilization that is a real alternative to the present warlike civilization is the maximum fulfillment of the human rights of all peoples, which is the main ethical and legal aim of Buddhist Law.

The Maitriyana, which was born for the good and the happiness of humankind (manussaloka hita-sukhataya jato), honors Siddharta Gautama as an architect not only of Buddhist Law but also of the path of fundamental rights, which are understood as intrinsic dignity or righteous law. Maitriyana possesses a juridical-political theory that installs itself in the history of philosophical thought as the maximum representative of the ideal of world peace and the rule of righteousness (dhamma-cakkam), considering that the fundamental rights impose negative limits and positive bonds to the executive, legislative and judicial powers. In this way, the Buddhist Law belongs to the iusphilosophical tradition of creators of world peace, such as Kant, Hegel and Ferrajoli. However, Maitriyana has the singularity of presenting a new contribution to the struggle for world peace and the rule of righteousness (dhamma-cakkam) that is different from the contribution of other authors, since it proposes as necessary to implement a world-wide Ethical Power that corrects and guides the international community toward the fulfillment of the human rights and fundamental freedoms. Unlike State Law, the Buddhist Law has no coercive power, being a model of Supra-State Law whose constitutionalism has the transcendental values of liberty, equality and fraternity as its legitimating foundation. This utopia (brahma-vihara) of the Maitriyana’s juridical cosmovision is a critical alternative to the contemporary civilization. For two thousand six hundred years the model of all political juridical organization of Buddhist Law has been the tribal republic (sangha), which is a utopian community that has justice as its central issue, considering the supremacy of the contemplative reason as a cornerstone. It is also a proposal that returns to the ideals of compassionate wisdom (karuna-prajña), so that it is both a theory and praxis of life. The spiritual commune of Maitriyana is the place of a critical encounter between various disciplines that share a similar way of understanding life and the world, clearly stating that the utopia (brahma-vihara) of world peace and the rule of righteousness (dhamma-cakkam) is possible and necessary. Thus, the Buddhist Law is both an ancient and a new paradigm in which social relations between individuals and state powers must be founded on the basis of Peace (Santi), justice, education and health. Therefore, it is a direction beyond egoism, dualism and consumerism; because it transcends the Ego, the Ideology and the Nation, being a new perspective whose main role is human rights. The Maitriyana is the ultimate expression of the desire to transform reality, seeking to create a better world without falling into the illusion of a perfect, permanent and substantial world. It is about the construction of a new libertarian and emancipatory alternative for humanity, aspiring to a new way of political, economic, cultural and ecological organization where world peace, social justice, advanced education and environmental health will reign. In this sense, the utopian juridical cosmovision of Buddhist Law is based on contemplative rationality, which always perceives the constitutional democracy as a guarantee of the fulfillment of the fundamental rights that transcend the mere parliamentary agreement of the majorities, since it protects nothing less than the adequate liberty (samma-vimutti) and intrinsic dignity of the human being. The legal principles of Maitriyana position it as a guarantor movement of the fundamental rights facing the state powers, developing a contemplative science that is constantly socially engaged with an ethical, critical and projective function. The constitutionality of Buddhist Law allows knowing the reality of the suffering of the fellow beings, who suffer injustices, aggressions and oppressions against their fundamental rights, in order to offer adequate and non-provisional solutions. The Maitriyana always defends the victims, the poor and oppressed, reconfiguring justice as a guardian system of liberty, equality and fraternity. In this way, from the supranational paradigm of the Buddhist Law a new civilization can be created that establishes the empire of ethical values, by vanishing the primitive empire of war, injustice, ignorance and pollution. In agreement with Ferrajoli, the Maitriyana points to a global constitutionalism, building a cosmopolitan democracy that guarantees the full compliance of human rights and fundamental freedoms. Here, Abolitionism becomes the formulation of the annulment of State Law, which should leave place for the operative effectiveness of International Law in order to ensure harmonious coexistence and peaceful solution of conflicts both between individuals and between nations. Although the legitimacy of Buddhist Law does not come from the consensus of the majority (consensus omnium) of society, its foundation of legitimacy is nothing less than the defense of liberty, equality and fraternity, which are superior values to both laws and acts of the governments of majorities. Although the universal system of human rights is currently in crisis and decay due to populist regimes emerging as symptoms of the decline of capitalist civilization, undoubtedly, the Path of the Maitriyana will never fail to sustain the constitutionality of fundamental rights, guiding the peoples toward a global democratic constitutionalism. This utopia goes back to the ancient Buddhist Civilization, appealing to conquer the world through the Purpose (Dharma) of world peace and the rule of righteousness (dhamma-cakkam). In this way, the Maitriyana does not aim at a mythical time and place, but rather is a critical way to build a better world in the here and now. This perspective revalues not only the ethical value of Peace (Santi), but also its pragmatic value, because in times of Peace (Santi) people are happier, more developed and friendly, while in times of war only the suffering, involution and hatred emerge. The Utopia of Buddhist Law is a New Reformation that criticizes the incorrect concept of Peace (Santi) that is characteristic of contemporary civilization, building what is understood as righteous or adequate peace (Samma-santi). A just society can only be developed as a product of the beneficial result of the defense of the supreme human right to Peace (Santi). Like the juridical tradition of Kant and Ferrajoli, the Maitriyana seeks the establishment of a Cosmopolitan Supra-State that abolishes war by means of the unity of the peoples, bringing Peace (Santi) back, which is the intrinsic nature of the human being. Such a Cosmopolitan Supra-State must be ruled by World or International Law, which is what the Buddhist Law is proposed to be. The Maitriyana designs an ethical framework of international community in which ethics, metapolitics and justice are integrated, and where Peace (Santi) should not be established but rather reconquered, since it is the natural condition or intrinsic dignity of humanity, even though this has been forgotten. In tune with Kant and Ferrajoli, the Buddhist Law has the idea of creating an international community regulated by world peace and democracy, fully recognizing and fulfilling the fundamental rights of sentient beings. This is because Buddhist Spirituality is the incarnation of the Supreme Compassion (Maha Karuna) extended to all humankind, animals and the Cosmos. Therefore, because they belong to a higher legal ethical order, the spiritual masters of Maitriyana can never stop saying what the world should be. In agreement with Ferrajoli, the Buddhist Law proposes to erect a new international community that is a Constitutional Supra-State of Fundamental Rights, functioning above all the local executive, legislative and judicial powers. The daily work of Maitriyana, whose force of righteous and adequate peace (Samma-santi) is reconciliation (maitri), aspires to the effective realization of this social construction. By eliminating violence and war as legal sanctions, the Buddhist Law is a global juridical pacifism whose utopian horizon is to reshape contemporary civilization. This cosmovision teaches the peoples to be liberated from all forms of domination that violate their fundamental rights, so that contemplative reason is always directed by the Analytical-Existential-Libertarian Discourse (Buddha-Dharma-Sangha). Thus, the Maitriyana’s ethical and spiritual counterculture has a constituent legal function. In this way, the juridical sense of Buddhist Law is guided by the logic of contemplative rationality, which is recognized for its ethical and evolutionary character, so it is not tied to the production of legal norms but rather to transcendental values of the human being. In this way, the duty or raison d’être of Maitriyana’s justice is a metapolitical theory and practice. By placing itself on the raison d’être of justice, the praxis of Buddhist Law eliminates the antinomies and fills the gaps of State Law by means of the normative principles of coherence, unity and plenitude. But the courts of Maitriyana, as well as the role of the spiritual commune (sangha) during Buddhic Civilization, are mainly characterized by guaranteeing the fundamental rights, so that they are courts of Ethical Power  with positive (legitimating) and negative (delegitimating) functions with respect to the actions of the state powers (executive, legislative and judicial). This utopia of Buddhist Law transforms justice in the direction of the fundamental rights of liberty, equality and fraternity. Obviously, this implies that States will be subordinated to the fulfillment of fundamental rights, and not to their mere recognition. The courts of the Maitriyana are a great juridical utopia that will never be realized in a complete way, although certainly in each case judged it is realized in a partial form, because it is about a Path and never a finished construct. The Buddhist Law, as supra-state global constitutionalism, is deeply linked to the fundamental rights and never dissociates itself from the idea that world citizenship has universal access to Peace (Santi), justice, education and health. The constitutional legal dimension of Maitriyana is then integrated to the level of supra-state democracy and humanitarianism in which it is imperative to abolish war, poverty, ignorance and pollution. In the struggle for the Buddhist Law as a contemplative reason there is a realistic path towards the metapolitical juridical utopia, by glimpsing an emancipatory horizon of the human being in a clear and bright way. This ethical, juridical and metapolitical construction implies to surpass the limits of the national States, thinking from a globalized conscience whose support is liberty, equality and fraternity. The utopian juridical program carried out by the Maitriyana’s courts demands the ongoing struggle for higher principles of fundamental rights, such as the supreme human right to Peace (Santi), which is frequently violated by States and international bodies. As long as there is no righteous and adequate peace (Samma-santi), according to the point of view of the Buddhist Law, the international community will be failing, since violence and war -even when carried out for supposed ethical purposes- are unlawful and immoral acts. Although the Path of Peace (Santimagga) followed by Maitriyana is certainly difficult, for it implies the fulfillment of justice and the fundamental rights, there is no other alternative as long as the survival of the world is sought.

Throughout the whole of its practice and theory, the Buddhist Law has demonstrated a social engagement with world peace and the rule of righteousness (dhamma-cakkam), being totally against any form of war, even denouncing that those supposed holy, just, ethical and humanitarian wars are nothing more than false peace or inadequate peace. For this reason, the courts of Maitriyana are within the tradition of juridical pacifism, whose model goes beyond state sovereignty in proposing that Peace (Santi) is a supreme international regulation. In accordance with Ferrajoli, the Buddhist Law califies war as the absolute denial of human rights, performing a pacifist activism that has been recorded in numerous cases and sentences of the Buddhist Tribunal on Human Rights. With the same pacifist commitment of Gautama’s, the Maitriyana responds to wars by means of arguments that de-legitimize their validity and legality, which means extending the abolitionist logic to the international field. Thus, the juridical pacifism of Buddhist Law even transcends dialectically the works of great jurists such as Kelsen, Bobbio and Ferrajoli, producing a major rupture with respect to the principles of State Law, which tend to undermine the development of International Law. Like Ferrajoli, the Maitriyana affirms that there is a pluralism of the regulations of International Law, because there are international normative orders that are diverse and independent within which it is undoubtedly found the Buddhist Law. There are not only multiple state juridical regulations but also international ones, because the UN has failed to consolidate itself as the great framework of International Law. In this sense, the Maitriyana would agree with the jurist Kelsen in the fact that Customary International Law is a priority over any regulatory order. For this reason, the Buddhist Law has so much value for the world, being a customary legal system with two thousand six hundred years of practice and theory, protecting the citizenship with respect to the sovereign powers of the States, to which it is intended to limit in Representation of the fundamental rights. The legal pacifism of Maitriyana must criticize the antinomies of State Law that are contrary to the protection of the human right to Peace (Santi), also having to fill the absences of the normative guarantees. This conception leads Buddhist Law to consider that the war, poverty, ignorance and pollution that people suffer are juridical violations. In this way, the Maitriyana reformulates the International Law from a new ethical, abolitionist and restorative paradigm, criticizing the unfulfilled promises of the International Law of UN with regard to Peace (Santi) and human rights. The legal nature of Buddhist Law is then communal but also international, and it is precisely the prohibition of violence and war which is its constitutive norm, since conflict resolution must always be through righteous and adequate peace (Samma-santi). This implies a show of respect for the peace agreement in Colombia, even though it may be included as a possible proof of the present case, since restorative justice has the right to special jurisdictions in order to resolve international wars and conflicts. Thus the Maitriyana argues that legality and justice must be clearly guided by ethical values and never by mere conventional laws that often justify the perverse existence of legal, just or humanitarian wars. Within the juridical pacifist paradigm of Buddhist Law, the legal exercise of violence and war is contradictory to fundamental rights, since Peace (Santi) is the structural essence of justice. When the law is not at the service of the peaceful settlement of disputes, making a justified use of violence or war, then the law becomes illegitimate. The Maitriyana concludes that Peace (Santi) consists of the Perennial Law of human nature or intrinsic dignity, whereas war is only an artificial and irrational construction of the State. From this perspective, the use of violence should never be exercised by the individual neither by the State, so that the legal foundation of Buddhist Law is the prohibition of all forms of violence. In agreement with Ferrajoli, the Maitriyana considers that affirming the existence of supposed just, legitimate, ethical or humanitarian wars is nothing more than to appeal to the contradiction of ethical or humanitarian genocides. Thus, in line with Ferrajoli, it is established that humanitarian military interventions have purely terrorist connotations, and therefore any political or moral justification of war is illegal. Since the time of Master Gautama and King Ashoka, the Buddhist Spirituality has explicitly taught that conquest by means of armies must be abandoned, replacing that primitive mechanism with conquest by means of Law (dharmavijaya), disseminating the message of Peace and tolerance instead of war and hatred. The fundamental norm of Buddhist Law is the prohibition of war, and this prohibition is what Ferrajoli has proposed as a fundamental norm for all legal regulations of International Law. At the same time, the Buddhist Tribunal on Human Rights meets the idea of the jurist Kelsen to create an international court with universal jurisdiction that has the capacity to prosecute individuals. The juridical pacifism of Maitriyana also goes beyond the mere abolition of war (adandena asatthena), since not only proposes Peace (Santi) as a means of resolving national and international conflicts, but also conceives the close link between world peace, social justice, advanced education and environmental health. In this way, like Ferrajoli, the Buddhist Law is a pacifism concerned with the full compliance of International Human Rights Law, seeking the abolition of war, poverty, ignorance and pollution. This implies prohibiting and declaring armies and armaments as illegal, redirecting the huge military expenditures toward eliminating social inequality. Thus, the role of the Buddhist Tribunal on Human Rights is fundamental for the world, being an example of how a network of international legal institutions should be created to guarantee fundamental rights. The Maitriyana does not propose a unicentric and monist juridical globalism, but rather agrees with Ferrajoli in proposing a polycentric and pluralistic juridical cosmopolitanism, which is a multidimensional constitutionalism without State. This model of Buddhist Law is concretized around the four social dimensions of politics, economics, culture and environment, proposing multiple international legal authorities that are independent for the full compliance with the fundamental rights. This means that there should be hundreds of international criminal courts and hundreds of international civil courts, among others, instead of just having a single world court. Even there should be multiple constitutional courts to review the resolutions of international bodies such as the UN and UNESCO, as the Buddhist Tribunal on Human Rights is currently doing. Although International Law is still delayed by the predominance of State Law, the Maitriyana agrees with Ferrajoli in indicating the horizon toward which the international community should go. This practical Path of Buddhist Law is accompanied by the powerful Analytical-Existential-Libertarian Discourse (Buddha-Dharma-Sangha), which is capable of producing a global counterhegemonic transformation from the very foundations of society, ensuring the survival of humanity and Mother Earth through the fulfillment of the human right to Peace (Santi) and the human right to a healthy environment. In this sense, the validation of jurist Ferrajoli regarding the Permanent Peoples’ Tribunal movement is very encouraging, defending it as a way for society to do justice, to fight against impunity and to defend International Law. Therefore, this strong support falls on the Maitriyana and its Buddhist Tribunal on Human Rights.

The political, economic, cultural and environmental changes that have taken place during the last two thousand and six hundred years in many places of the world have not led the Buddhist Law to abandon its spiritual traditions and ethical schemes. Even when making an adaptation of the language according to the times and challenges of the present, the Maitriyana is always maintaining the perennial core of Spirituality. For this reason, the Buddhist Law teaches the new generations how to fully enjoy Peace (Santi), social justice, education and health, rethinking the democratic system and the human rights. Faced with these essential themes the Maitriyana proposes a pragmatic and conceptual framework whose central axis is empathy, always identifying with the suffering of others. This means that the Buddhist Law is a metahistorical movement, since by positioning itself in the perennial heart of compassionate wisdom (karuna-prajna) it connects with the inner and outer world of every suffering sentient being. In this way, the Maitriyana maintains an enormous and unbreakable commitment to Truth, memory and justice, developing a peaceful and idealistic struggle for a better world. The starting point for this Path must be the empathic civilization, which is the development of peaceful and harmonious coexistence both between peoples and between humanity and nature. This goal leads to Buddhist Law and its pursuit of democratization and culture of justice. Currently, the Buddhist People have enjoyed two thousand six hundred years of history of culture of Peace (Santi), so that their experiences are vital for the future of humanity. Thus, the Maitriyana pathway is an absolute disregard for militarism, seeking to extinguish it completely through the Rule of Law and Righteousness (dhamma-cakkam). By propitiating the ethical transformation of society, the Buddhist Law is the main protagonist in establishing the empathic civilization, introducing and consolidating a systematic and generalized plan for the evolution of people. However, enormous challenges have to be faced in order to fulfill this Purpose (Dharma), having the duty to teach the individual to transform his or her daily behaviors and attitudes towards life. In this sense, the strengthening of liberty, equality and fraternity is a challenge that must be assumed both in the external world and in the internal world, avoiding falling into the superficiality of the mass media. Looking to the past and future, the Maitriyana gives form in the present to a democratic way that protects and evolves the human rights, being a foundational action of a new international order where the scourges of war, poverty, ignorance and pollution are adequately combated. Indeed, the framework of empathic civilization proposed by the spiritual masters allows addressing the ills of the world by considering the lessons of the past, the sufferings of the present and the goals of the future. The Buddhist Law, as a Global Ethical Power, has the duty to confront these conflicts, seeking the fulfillment of human rights in order to build a civilization of Peace (Santi) and solidarity.

The Maitriyana makes a critical analysis of how the regimes of the world perversely violate democracy and establish authoritarianism in the name of Peace (Santi) and justice. This is due to the complicity by omission of those who do not denounce evil and tolerate the great genocides of history. The contemporary world lacks adequate ethical leadership, for the major superpowers and even some Nobel Peace Prizes seem to be actively participating in crimes against humanity. This shows that there is currently a clash of civilizations between the present Capitalist Civilization and the Dharmic Civilization of the future. Because history is moving towards a political, economic, cultural and environmental evolution in the form of socialist libertarian democracy, which is the best possible social order, then there is a resistance of the current status quo with respect to the emergence of a luminous planetary new social order. There is undoubtedly a clash of civilizations between the contemporary materialistic civilization and the peaceful buddhic civilization that will inevitably emerge. This evolutionary inevitability is due to the fact that humanity is at a point in its history in which, if it does not accept the harmonious lifestyle (samma-cariya) based on peaceful coexistence, then it will disappear from the face of the planet through self-destruction based on world war, extreme poverty, illiteracy and the destruction of ecosystems. Therefore, there is a turning point in which the human being must make the following decision: to evolve or perish. Thus, if humankind will survive it will inevitably be due to an ethical transformation or spiritual evolution of the international community. The Buddhist Law is then a progress on the Path of Peace (Santimagga) toward the emergence of this new order of planetary justice. While the Buddhist Tribunal on Human Rights criticizes USA’s claim to be the world police, the Ethical Power of Maitriyana is undoubtedly in favor of building a universal Juridical Power in which all citizens and nations of the world are able to solve conflicts through appropriate peaceful means. This goal to which the Buddhist Tribunal on Human Rights contributes is the most important democratic norm in history, being the great legacy of spiritual masters so that the present and future generations may learn to live in equanimity and adequate tolerance. The Buddhist Law, despite having problematic relationships toward the authoritarian powers of the world, represents the ethical and contemplative use of reason, developing a space of peak knowledge (satori) that is countercurrent to the State control. In a world where many social activists are considered terrorists, clearly the Maitriyana’s socially engaged mission endangers or threatens the weaponry status quo. Although it would be foolish to characterize the Buddhist Tribunal on Human Rights as a terrorist movement, it is undoubtedly a pacifist tradition of civil resistance against the authoritarian governments that are violating human dignity and adequate liberty (samma-vimutti). These authoritarian regimes that have caused genocides, ethnic cleansings, crimes against humanity, crimes against peace and ecocides, have often been awarded with the Nobel Peace Prize, which is why the Buddhist Law has not hesitated to make an ethical judgment against the NORWEGIAN NOBEL COMMITTEE. While the capitalist civilization does not lead to the vision of emancipated humanity, the Maitriyana proposes the construction of a new ethical universalism. Since the materialistic liberal universalism of the contemporary civilization has absolutely failed, which its greatest symptoms are terrorism and populism, the Buddhist Law is positioned beyond the left and right politics in proposing a libertarian socialist universalism as a solution to the great problems of the world which are wars, social injustice, ignorance and pollution. The Maitriyana works in the development of a new style of living for the Law (dhammacariya), seeking the reconciliation (maitri) of humanity both with itself and with the Mother Earth. This implies a psychic and social transformation of the human being, who must assume the guidelines of Peace (Santi), justice, knowledge and ecology, since otherwise humanity will self-destruct. Although the Buddhist Law does not have political and economic power, it certainly has an ethical and cultural power that is powerful enough not only to criticize the course of civilization but also to offer a new alternative pathway. The Maitriyana confirms that the global revolution will not come from the figures of workers, as Marxism mistakenly considered, but rather the future global revolution will come actually from those human beings willing to realize an existence of Peace (Santi) and respect for the entire human community and also toward all ecosystems. Therefore, in order to establish this new relationship with society and with nature, it is fundamental a radical change at the political, economic, cultural and environmental levels, being what the Buddhist Law calls the ethical evolution of human being. Only this spiritual revolution will guarantee world peace and the rule of righteousness (dhamma-cakkam) among the different nations of the world. In accordance with Hegel, Maitriyana’s ethics culminates into an act of heroism and self-sacrifice for the welfare of all sentient beings, which means a commitment to the criticism and correction of the violent relations between States. The task that is urgently imposed by the Buddhist Tribunal on Human Rights is to civilize the civilization, developing the rule of universal solidarity and mutual support among all the peoples of the world. The evaluations of Buddhist Law are necessary for the survival and evolution of humankind, overcoming the regime of materialistic expansionism to replace it with an international community of cooperation, altruism and libertarian socialism. In spite of the miseries of current civilization, the Maitriyana teaches that the idea of peace should not be perverted, and that its name should never be associated with the defense of war. The Buddhist Tribunal on Human Rights is a transnational organization with ethical authority to use universal jurisdiction and to make that the sovereignty of the States is limited by the fulfillment of human and environmental rights. This Supreme Ethical Power that characterizes Maitriyana descends directly from the best spiritual traditions of the past, which even knew how to become authentic civilizations. The duty of the Buddhist Law is not to be an accomplice of human rights violators, but rather to fight for the defense of the most important ethical legacy in history, which is fundamental to the survival and evolution of humanity. In the contemporary civilization, the Buddhist Tribunal on Human Rights is increasingly alone, since even some Nobel Peace Prize laureates often violate human rights. However, even though Maitriyana is alone, only the Buddhist Spirituality can save the world.

Unlike the NORWEGIAN NOBEL COMMITTEE, the Buddhist Law teaches the nations of the world how to cultivate inner Peace (ajjhatta-santi) and outer peace, conveying that righteous and adequate peace (samma-santi) can only be achieved through the three essential practices of contemplation (dhyana), compassionate wisdom (karuna-prajna) and ethics (sila). The Maitriyana trains the individual to become a peace champion (santi-raja), who can assume a position of tranquility and serenity in the face of the great adversities of existence, overcoming them through the peaceful resolution of conflicts, by the achievement of Evanescence (Nirvana) or Sublimation of greed, hatred and deceit. Therefore, the Buddhist Law is the Path of Peace (Santimagga), being deeply associated with the attitude of reconciliation (maitri) and solidarity, which is fundamental to be able to learn with equanimity, overcoming conflicts and never causing harm to others. This allows the individual to become a peace champion (santi-raja) that is someone who is empty of selfishness, dualism and consumerism, being free from attachments and determinations of the materialistic civilization. In this way, the Maitriyana or Path of Peace (Santimagga) is actually a harmonious lifestyle (samma-cariya) in which the subject learns to be a peaceful force of love, evolution and Awakening (Bodhi) toward all beings, instead of being attached to the Ego, the Ideology and the State. This obviously implies denouncing the contemporary civilization as a system of domination and exploitation for both the poor and the Nature. The practice of the Free and Enlightened Beings (Arhats-Bodhisattvas) is an absolute defense of peace (santi) in mind, in society and in the planet, because its action is a permanent revolution of contemplation (dhyana), compassionate wisdom (karuna-prajña) and ethics (sila) around the world. These practices are the true way of contributing to the righteous and adequate peace (samma-santi), by performing non-violent humanitarian actions and transcendental values that transform and evolve the human life. The Buddhist Law affirms that every individual has intrinsic dignity, which is the foundation of human rights, so that everyone can become Free and Enlightened Beings (Arhats-Bodhisattvas) provided that they practice friendship, empathy, tolerance, solidarity and coexistence with their fellow beings and the Mother Earth. In order to solve global problems at a political, economic, cultural and environmental level, humankind must ethically transform its consciousness, by following a harmonious lifestyle (samma-cariya) of peace, justice, knowledge and health.

In conclusion, the Buddhist Tribunal on Human Rights has the Purpose (Dharma) to defend True Peace in the world, which implies criticizing and correcting those organizations that promote a false vision of peace (santi). Therefore, it is confirmed that NORWEGIAN NOBEL COMMITTEE is violating the Buddhist Ethics and the human right to peace (santi) by means of complicity with international criminals. Undoubtedly, the international organizations should be working together in the creation and maintenance of a pacifist civilization. But without ethical and spiritual guidance the organizations become corrupt, associating themselves with a degenerating vision of what is peace. Only by practicing the Path of Peace (Santimagga) taught by Master Gautama and other Awakened Beings (Buddhas) of history, the international organizations will be able to develop Peace (Santi) as a way to save humanity. In this way, the Case against the NORWEGIAN NOBEL COMMITTEE is a supreme teaching for the entire international community, perfectly demonstrating what is the Righteous and Adequate Peace (Samma-Santi). When international organizations are guided by the Ethical Power of human rights and Buddhist Spirituality, then they become operators of transformation and evolution of the world.

Following the Path of Master Gautama, who is the model of the Gautama Peace Prize, the Buddhist Tribunal on Human Rights oversees that the international organizations that are responsible of being ethical leaders do not pervert themselves and do not attack against world peace and the rule of righteousness (dhamma-cakkam), so that the NORWEGIAN NOBEL COMMITTEE has been sentenced as “Responsible” for CORRUPTION and COMPLICITY WITH CRIMES AGAINST PEACE.

 

With a spirit of reconciliation (maitri),

Master Maitreya Samyaksambuddha

President and Spiritual Judge of the International Buddhist Ethics Committee (IBEC) & Buddhist Tribunal on Human Rights (BTHR)

One thought on “Judgment on Case Norwegian Nobel Committee

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s