|
If you wondered if there were areas of irrationality in Scientology™ - look no further. Among the Holy Cows we have been chasing, this
one is the holiest! It has earned 5 haloes! This was a surprise to us.
But as we kept going on with our tedious analysis, the picture became clearer and
clearer. Read for yourself. No 'selling', no 'black PR' needed ; just step by
step analysis of
"The Ethics Codes - Offenses and Penalties".
It reads like running out an Engram.
Justice and Group Engrams
I remember each time I tried to read the whole "Offenses and Penalties"
'the mind's protection' would set in and I would kind of black out and
not be able to read the page in front of me to the end. It has always puzzled
me what kept on happening to me as 'Misunderstood words' were not the
problem.
Doing this article I finally managed to read the whole thing
closely. But it struck me along the way, that if this kind of black out
happens for you too, and maybe many other Scientologists and Freezoners we
actually have some kind of Group engram here.
We have been subject to these rules and laws, but they were clouded by
'Pain and Unconsciousness'. They were too painful even to read. This may be the mechanism behind how
some oppressive regimes get away with harsh or worse justice. People
simply refuse to realize it exists. They go blank or black out when they run
into it. They may explain incidents of it away as unfortunate or unusual
cases.
The 'Court
records' in Scientology™ (Findings of Committee's of Evidence etc.) are not publicly
available either. This is
another way this justice stays out of sight and becomes part of the
'Group Bank' rather than the Analytical Mind of the group.
It would be quite a treasure for analysis if these Scientology™ records were as available and you could sit down and read
through them one by one, as you can do with court records in the government
court systems.
The Commodore's Law
The way the "Offenses and Penalties" is written
I will call it 'The
Commodore's Law". It bears similarities with the Justice that ruled in
the days of Admiral Nelson - the famous British Navy hero.
Since Hubbard was a
US Navy veteran (and Commodore of the Sea Org), we assume the
model is based on US Navy's Military
Law. Mutiny, insubordination, desertion,
misconduct, and other offenses harmful to military discipline are violations unique to military law. These are all
found in 'Offenses and Penalties'. The 'Courts' in Scientology™ as 'Board
of Investigation' (B of I) , 'Ethics Hearing', 'Court of Ethics' and 'Committee
of Evidence' (ComEv) bear resemblance with how the navy and military administers
justice. The best known military court being
Court Martial.
The Ethics Codes of Scientology™ have not gone
through a legislative body (such as a parliament, if it was a country),
nor through the hands of legal experts (which corporations
routinely do with their laws, bylaws and policies). So we have a Code, that is written by
the Commodore and is not subject to question or change. As Policy can
only be changed or cancelled by the Commodore himself - and he isn't available -
they are now permanent!
The Missing Review
Process
As a fiction writer Hubbard would have an agent and an
editor to smooth things out. They would come with suggestions and advice
- and sometimes directions and orders. They would be diplomatic or negotiate
on his
behalf and help him to 'flourish and prosper'. They would step in and
stand up for him if
critics attacked him; something most creative people abhor. LRH was no
different. He was a passionate
defender of his teachings - a common trait for trail blazing writers
and scientists.
When it came to writing the "Offenses and Penalties", Hubbard had
no friends like an agent or editor. We know of no legal experts, that
gave him advice. Most of the clauses were first published in
policies or technical bulletins on a
specific subject, with a foot note that such and such a deed be included
in the Ethics Codes as a Misdemeanor up to a High Crime (Suppressive
Act). These were never questioned or put through any kind of review
process. They were just added, because 'the Commodore says so'.
This May Be a First!
What we attempt here may be a 'First'.
At least I have never seen it done before - with Scientology™ 'Ethics
Codes' that is. As an academic exercise it's common practice. We are
putting the Ethics
Codes through a review process.
The US Congress did something more radical to
the US Military Code, when they in 1951 established the 'Uniform Code of
Military Justice'. On the background of atrocities done in the name of 'Military
Justice' during World War II, they completely revised the military justice
system and placed the operations in the hands of professional lawyers to ensure
fairer application.
The way we have done our review, is, that we first decided
upon a 'Constitution of Scientology'. That
was our first step. Both countries
and large corporations have such a thing. These are the senior
documents/laws, that set the guidelines for all consecutive laws,
rules or policies. It's 'unconstitutional' and illegal to pass laws in
conflict with these documents. Only 'Emergency
powers' (as a government or constitutional term) or
Martial law can override such laws in a regulated
way - and only on a temporary
basis.
Under certain circumstances basic individual rights can be set
aside if the situation warrants immediate action without time for explanations.
That is by the way exactly what group engrams are all about. Urgent orders
without time to explain.
(World War II veterans were subject to countless group engrams due to harsh
military justice).
'A Scientology™
Constitution'
We looked at the vast literature of Scientology™
to isolate constitutional points. Since Scientology™ is
basically a humanitarian effort, they were not hard to find. If we
should pick just one Document, it would be The Creed of the Church of
Scientology. A Creed in any Church is a founding document and an
Absolute. We looked a little further, however and have only picked a few
points here and there.
The most relevant
are The Goals of Scientology, The Creed of the Church of Scientology™
and The Code of a Scientologist. I am here just
quoting a few lines relevant to justice and constitutions.
From the Creed, that in part follows
'Human rights' we needed the following:
That all men have inalienable rights to their own religious
practices and their performance.
(Label: Free religion)
That all men have inalienable rights to conceive, choose,
assist and support their own organizations, churches and governments.
(Label: Organize)
That all men have inalienable rights to think freely, to talk
freely, to write freely their own opinions and to counter or utter or write upon
the opinions of others.
(Label: Free speech)
That all men have inalienable rights to their own defense.
(Label: Own defense)
(The 'Label' is the short hand we use in
table below).
From Code of a Scientologist we are using these:
1. To keep Scientologists, the Public and the Press accurately
informed concerning Scientology, the world of Mental Health and society.
4. To decry and do all I can to abolish any and all abuses against life and
Mankind. Label: Abuse
8. To support true Humanitarian endeavors in the field of
Human Rights.
9. To embrace the policy of equal justice for all. Label: Eql. Just
10. To work for freedom of speech in the world. Label: Free speech.
11. To actively decry the suppression of knowledge, wisdom, philosophy or data
which would help Mankind. Label: Free thought
12. To support the freedom of religion. Label: Free Religion
These are all good human rights principles.
You find many of them in constitutions. Some of them are unique to
Scientology.
We are not trying to write the constitution for Scientology™ here. But we
needed something to evaluate each point against. We held each point of the
Justice Code up against the above points - our 'constitutional' points - and
asked, is this point in conflicts with these basic rights and rules? Is it
'Constitutional in Scientology?'
Table and Tabulation
Below is a long table, where we evaluate
each of the 160 offenses listed in the 1978 edition of the "Offenses and Penalties". Later editions of
this Code exist. The difference is, that more offenses have been
added and post titles may have changed (e.g. WW is now International
Justice Chief). Since no offenses have been deleted,
the 1978 edition works for our purposes, namely to survey the character of
the system. In addition, in 1978 Hubbard was still running things, so we
know the Code was his work without alterations.
We then evaluated each point and added it all up
in the table below.
You may want to read the tabulation
first. That is a summary and bottom line of doing the 160 plus rows
table, line by line.
Don't miss out on the
whole thing. Do yourself a favor and go back and read through the whole
table; it is quite fascinating and enlightening to understand the details.
To me it was like running out an engram
(to old timers it may be a whole engram chain). You
don't just skip the whole thing saying "Yeah, I pretty much know what
happened". To me it was a revelation to look at the
ins and outs. Maybe no wonder, since this was, I believe,
the first time I managed to actually go through the whole thing without
going 'unconscious' or black out or run.
The
detailed analysis of the Code is what sets this essay apart from all the 'black PR and
'selling' accounts countless individuals have attempted. The Scientology™
Justice system has been 'trashed' many times. This article is intended to
run out the 'actual incident' or chain of incidents.
Click here if you want to go to
the summary Tabulation. now.
Read related short encyclopedia articles,
used in the research for this article.
|
Check our Content Page
Read related short encyclopedia articles,
used in the research for this article.
it struck me along the way, that if this kind of black out
happens for you too, we
actually have some kind of Group engram here.
The 'Court
records' in Scientology™ are not publicly
available either. This is
another way this justice stays out of sight and becomes part of the
'Group Bank'
we assume the
model is based on US Navy's Military
Law.
The Ethics Codes of Scientology™ have not gone
through a legislative body, nor through the hands of legal experts
As Policy can
only be changed or cancelled by the Commodore himself - and he isn't available -
they are now permanent!
LRH was a passionate
defender of his teachings - a common trait for trail blazing writers
and scientists.
When it came to writing the "Offenses and Penalties", Hubbard had
no friends like an agent or editor. We know of no legal experts, that
gave him advice.

(click to enlarge)
Handwritten unofficial 'Justice Pl'
by Hubbard:
"If anyone does anything to get any of these organizations in bad
publicity, such as narcotics charges, drunk driving or other unsavory
data, I have a policy - I will beat their teeth in personally.
Sincerely - LRH"
On the background of atrocities done in the name of
'Military Justice' during World War II, the US Congress completely
revised the US military justice system
We first decided
upon a 'Constitution of Scientology'.
...the senior documents/laws, that sets the guide lines for all consecutive
laws
Since Scientology™ is
basically a humanitarian effort, constitutional points were not hard to find.
If we should pick just one Document, it would be The
Creed of the Church of Scientology.
The Goals of Scientology
The Creed of the Church of
Scientology
The Code of a Scientologist
We are not trying to write the constitution for Scientology™ here. But we
needed something to evaluate each point against.
We held each point of the
Justice Code up against our Scn. 'constitutional' points and asked
- Is this 'Constitutional in Scientology?'
You may want to read the tabulation
first. That is a summary and bottom line of doing the 160 plus rows
table, line by line.
it was like running out an engram (to old timers it may be
a whole engram chain). You
don't just skip the whole thing saying "Yeah, I pretty much know what
happened".
This article is intended to
run out the 'actual incident' or chain of incidents.
|
Ref. No |
Offense |
Consti tutional? |
Comments |
Compared
to |
Grading |
| |
MISDEMEANORS |
|
TECHNICAL MISDEMEANORS
|
Ref. No |
Offense |
Consti tutional? |
Comments |
Compared
to |
Grading |
| 1 |
Knowing and repeated departures from standard technology,
instructional procedures or policy. |
OK |
pass |
professional conduct |
Fair
|
| 2 |
Processing a known Potential Trouble Source or the family
or adherents of a Suppressive Person or Group. |
OK |
Based
on PTS tech. Since definition (determination) of SP is shaky
and can see used as a derogatory label, arbitraries are easily
let in. (precedent/ definitions needed). |
professional conduct
|
Generality Problematic (flunk) |
| 3 |
Auditor's Code breaks resulting in a disturbance of the
preclear. |
OK |
Good.
Vital to subject |
professional conduct
|
Fair |
| 4 |
Failure to follow the Supervisor's Code resulting in
disturbed students. |
OK |
Good |
professional conduct
|
Fair |
| 5 |
Issuing data or information to wrong grades or
unauthorized persons or groups or issuing data or information
broadly without authority. |
OK |
OK |
professional conduct
|
Fair |
| 6 |
Any
staff auditor turning in an illegible report. |
OK |
Good |
professional conduct
|
Fair |
| 7 |
Any
staff auditor attesting falsely to TA or falsely reporting the
flattening of a process. |
OK |
Good.
Vital |
professional conduct
|
Fair |
| 8 |
Any
staff auditor running any process on any organization preclear that
is not given in grade and level HCO Bulletins. |
OK |
Good.
Keep the tech straight. |
professional conduct
|
Fair |
| 9 |
Any
alteration or non-standard rendition of a process. |
OK |
As
long as it's not used to stop research: fine. |
professional conduct
|
Fair |
| 10 |
Any
staff auditor running a preclear above the preclear's grade instead
of for the next grade, or running processes out of sequence in a
grade. |
OK |
Good.
Qualified researchers excepted. |
professional conduct
|
Fair |
| 11 |
Any
student knowingly altering technology, applying processes
improperly, or using technology illegally on paying preclears, or
lower students or the public, while a student. |
OK |
Good. |
professional conduct
|
Fair |
| 12 |
Any
other answer to a student's demand for verbal technical or unusual
solutions than the permitted: „The material is in (HCO Bulletin,
Policy Letter or tape)." „What does your material state?" „What word
did you miss in the (Bulletin, Policy Letter or tape)?" and requests
for unusual auditing solutions: „What did you actually
do?" |
OK |
This
way of supervising is very robotic and harmful to understanding.
Makes course rooms into boot camps. Not a place of learning
and gaining understanding (=ARC). Other ways to protect the
tech from alter-is needed. |
Military law |
Games Condition (flunk) |
|
GENERAL MISDEMEANORS
|
Ref. No |
Offense |
Consti tutional? |
Comments |
Compared
to |
Grading |
| 13 |
Non-compliance. |
OK |
Inspires militarism |
Military
law. Employment |
Harsh |
| 14 |
Discourtesy. |
OK |
Inspires militarism |
Military
law. Employment |
Harsh |
| 15 |
Insubordination. |
OK |
Same.
The 3 Impede ARC, self determinism, but can be needed at
times |
Military
law. Employment |
Harsh |
| 16 |
Mistakes resulting in financial or traffic
loss. |
OK |
Valid
in any job/employment contract |
Employment |
Fair |
| 17 |
Commissions or omissions resulting in loss of status or
the punishment of a senior. |
OK |
Very
vague and subjective. Since precedent is not used in Scn
Justice, proper definitions are needed. (precedent/
definitions needed). |
Military law |
Generality (flunk) |
| 18 |
Neglect or gross errors resulting in the need to apply the
Emergency Formula to their person, section, unit, department,
organization, zone, or Division. |
OK |
Same
as above. But here you can at least look at statistics |
employment |
Fair Generality |
| 19 |
Continued association with squirrels. |
violates
creed |
A
violation of Creed of CoS. This makes it Military law's:
'Fraternizing with the enemy'. |
Military law
|
Harsh |
| 20 |
Abuse
or loss or damage of organization material. |
OK |
Valid
in any job/employment contract |
Employment |
Fair |
| 21 |
Waste
of organization material. |
OK |
Valid
in any job |
Employment |
Fair |
| 22 |
Waste
of funds. |
OK |
Valid
in any job |
Employment |
Fair |
| 23 |
Alteration of senior policy or continued ignorance
of. |
OK |
Valid
in any job |
Employment |
Fair |
| 24 |
Consistent and repeated failures to wear their hat
regarding Dev-T. |
OK |
Can
you feel LRH's despair? Rule fair, but too open to
interpretation |
Employment |
Fair Generality |
| 25 |
Refusing an E-Meter Check. |
Violates Creed |
Is
open to misuse and oppressive use of sec checks 'Constitution'
violated = Martial law |
Military law Martial
|
Games Condition (flunk) |
| 26 |
Refusing auditing when ordered by a higher
authority. |
Violates Creed aud Code |
Is
open to misuse and oppressive use of sec checks. Creed
violated=Martial law Violates Aud. Code |
Military law Martial
|
Games Condition (flunk) |
Ref. No |
Offense |
Consti tutional? |
Comments |
Compared
to |
Grading |
| 27 |
Disturbing a course or class. |
OK |
Needs
hardly saying nor a law |
Employment |
Fair Generality |
| 28 |
Disrupting a meeting. |
OK |
Needs
hardly saying nor a law |
Employment |
Fair Generality |
| 29 |
The
discovery of their having an undisclosed criminal background in this
lifetime. |
OK |
Background check. Widely accepted. |
Employment |
Fair |
| 30 |
The
discovery of an undisclosed tenure in a mental
hospital. |
OK |
Borderline, but since this is a central point in PTS
tech we can live with it |
Employment PTS Policy
|
Harsh |
| 31 |
Omissions resulting in disrepute or financial
loss. |
OK |
Needs
to be defined. 'Generalities won't do'. |
Employment |
Fair Generality |
| 32 |
Assisting the inadequacy or decline of income or traffic
in a section, unit, department, organization, zone, or
Division. |
OK |
If
things are not going well nobody is safe under this one. Needs
defining. (precedent/ definitions needed). |
Military
law Employment |
Generality (flunk) |
| 33 |
Failure to acknowledge, relay or comply with a direct and
legal order from an executive staff member. |
OK |
Basically fine. Should be defined better. |
Military law |
Fair Generality |
| 34 |
Misconduct. |
OK |
Whoops. Opens the door to a world of Ethics
abuse. (precedent/ definitions needed). |
Military law |
generality (flunk) |
| 35 |
„Unauthorized issue"; issuing material that does not have
an authority for that purpose. |
Violates
Code |
There
is such a thing as I.A. even on public statements. Just doesn't work
in that formulation. (precedent/ definitions
needed). |
Military
law Employment |
Generality What
material? (flunk) |
| 36 |
Contributing to a crime. |
OK |
Basically fine. Should be defined better. |
criminal law |
Fair Generality |
| 37 |
Any
staff member in a senior organization having vital data concerning
an organization, department, unit or section that is IN AN EMERGENCY
STATUS, or information clearly indicating that it should be, not
bringing the matter effectively to the attention of superiors in his
own organization. |
OK |
Sounds
fair if you have the right team spirit. 'Not bringing the matter
effectively to the attention of superiors' makes it
shaky. |
Military
law Employment |
Fair Harsh |
|
ETHICS MISDEMEANORS
|
Ref. No |
Offense |
Consti tutional? |
Comments |
Compared
to |
Grading |
| 38 |
Failure to appear before a Committee of Evidence as a
Witness or Interested Party when personally given summons or
receiving summons by registered post. |
OK |
Fine.
True in any court system |
Civil law |
Fair |
| 39 |
Refusing to testify before a Committee of
Evidence. |
OK |
Fine.
True in any court system |
Civil law |
Fair |
| 40 |
Showing contempt or disrespect to a Committee of Evidence
when before it. |
OK |
Fine.
True in any court system |
Civil law |
Fair |
| 41 |
Destroying documents required by a Committee of Evidence
or refusing to produce them. |
OK |
Fine.
True in any court system |
Criminal law |
Fair |
| 42 |
Withholding evidence. |
OK |
Who?
the suspect? |
Civil law |
Generality (flunk) |
| 43 |
False
swearing on a signed statement or form. |
OK |
Fine.
True in any court system |
Criminal law |
Fair |
| 44 |
Impeding Ethics. |
OK? |
This
is declaring open season on anybody not watching
out. (precedent/ definitions needed). |
Military law |
Generality (flunk) |
| 45 |
Refusing to serve on a Committee of
Evidence. |
OK |
There
can be reasons |
Civil law |
Unfair (flunk) |
| 46 |
Refusing to vote while a member of a Committee of
Evidence. |
OK |
Fair |
Civil law |
Fair |
|
CRIMES |
| |
|
|
NON-COMPLIANCE AND
NEGLECT |
Ref. No |
Offense |
Consti tutional? |
Comments |
Compared
to |
Grading |
| 47 |
Non-compliance with urgent and vital orders resulting in
public disrepute. |
OK |
Open
to interpretation and misuse. Used a lot to bust people |
Military law |
Fair Harsh |
| 48 |
Placing Scientology™ or Scientologists at
risk. |
OK |
Very
common generality in Findings from ComEv's. (precedent/
definitions needed). |
Military law |
Generality |
| 49 |
Omissions or non-compliance requiring heavy intervention
by seniors, consuming time and money, with Dev-T. |
OK |
Too
open to interpretation - as many other points are. Makes you
think, there is something unsaid or missing definitions. |
Employment |
Harsh Generality |
| 50 |
Failure or refusal to acknowledge, relay or execute a
direct legal order from an International Board Member, or an
assistant Board Member. |
OK |
Fair,
but with an air of Military organization. |
Employment Military
law |
Fair |
| 51 |
Following illegal orders or illegal local policies or
alter-is, knowing them to be different or contrary to those issued
by the Int. Board. Following illegal orders or illegal local
policies or alter-is, knowing them to be different or contrary to
those issued by the International Board. |
OK |
Fair,
but with an air of military organization. |
Military law |
Fair |
| 52 |
Not
directly reporting flagrant departures from International Board
policy in a section, unit, department, organization, zone, or
Division. |
OK |
Fair,
but with an air of military organization. |
Military law |
Fair Harsh |
| 53 |
Being
long absent from post while a senior executive without advising the
Board Member of his or her Division. |
OK |
Too
little data to make good sense. (precedent/ definitions
needed). |
Employment |
Generality (flunk) |
| 54 |
Permitting a section, unit, department, organization, zone
or Division to collapse |
OK |
Very
common generality in Findings from ComEv's. (precedent/
definitions needed). |
Military law |
Generality (flunk) |
| 55 |
Not
taking over as a deputy in a crisis not otherwise being
handled. |
OK |
You should. Making it a crime not to, is military
style. |
Military law |
Fair Harsh |
Ref. No |
Offense |
Consti tutional? |
Comments |
Compared
to |
Grading |
| 56 |
Not
reporting the discovery of a Crime or High Crime to World Wide while
in authority or as a member of a Committee of Evidence or as a
witness before a Committee of Evidence. |
OK |
Fair,
but with an air of military organization, when made a
crime. |
Military law |
Fair Generality |
| 57 |
Refusal to accept penalties assigned in a recourse
action. |
OK |
OK |
civil law |
Fair |
| 58 |
Overworking an executive by ignoring one's
duties. |
OK |
Common
generality in Findings of ComEv's. (precedent/
definitions needed). |
Military law |
Generality (flunk) |
| 59 |
Protecting a staff member guilty of a Crime or High Crime
listed in this code. |
OK |
Commonly known as 'aiding and abetting'. OK |
civil law |
Fair |
| 60 |
Committing offenses or omissions that bring one's senior
staff member, unit, department, organization or zone official to
personal risk and/or a Committee of Evidence, civil, criminal or
court. |
OK |
If
there is a rule here, we demand to know. Otherwise it's too easy to
misuse. (precedent/ definitions needed). |
Military
law Employment |
Generality (flunk) |
| 61 |
Condoning circumstances or offenses capable of bringing a
course, section, unit, department, organization, zone or Division to
a state of collapse. |
OK |
If
there is a rule here, we demand to know. Otherwise it's too easy to
misuse. Often seen used in ComEv's. (precedent/ definitions
needed). |
Military
law Employment |
Generality (flunk) |
| 62 |
Neglect or omission in safeguarding the copyrights,
registered marks, trade marks, registered names of
Scientology. |
OK |
CoS
are very protective of copyrights and TM's. Would be fine if they
didn't resent selling the materials freely. |
Copyright law |
Fair |
| 63 |
Neglect of responsibilities resulting in catastrophe even
when another manages to avert the final consequences. |
OK |
If
there is a rule here, we demand to know. Otherwise it's too easy to
misuse. A favorite in Findings. |
Military
law Employment |
Generality |
|
FINANCIAL
CRIMES |
Ref. No |
Offense |
Consti tutional? |
Comments |
Compared
to |
Grading |
| 64 |
Passing Organization students or preclears to outside
auditors for private commission. |
OK |
Would
be part of any reasonable employment agreement. |
Employment |
Fair |
| 65 |
Taking
an organization position to build up a private
practice. |
OK? |
Speaks
to intent, which is not evidence nor punishable. |
Employment |
Unfair (flunk) |
| 66 |
Taking
private fees while on staff to audit outside preclears, run private
courses, coach or audit students or organization
preclears. |
OK |
This
is an old problem in many professions. Can easily be twisted into a
games condition |
Employment |
Fair |
| 67 |
Embezzlement. |
OK |
Agree |
Criminal law |
Fair |
| 68 |
Taking commission from
merchants |
OK |
Agree |
Criminal
law Employment |
Fair |
| 69 |
Reselling organization material for private
gain. |
OK |
Agree |
Criminal law |
Fair |
| 70 |
Using
an organization position to procure personal or non-Scientology™ funds or unusual favors from the public, a firm, student or
preclear. |
OK |
Too
general to make it a clear crime. Can think of many examples where
it isn't. (precedent/ definitions needed). |
Employment |
Generality (flunk) |
| 71 |
Making
out or submitting or accepting false purchase orders. |
OK |
Agree |
Criminal law |
Fair |
| 72 |
Juggling accounts. |
OK |
Agree |
Criminal law |
Fair |
| 73 |
Illegally taking or possessing organization
property. |
OK |
Agree |
Criminal law |
Fair |
| 74 |
Obtaining loans or money under false
pretenses. |
OK |
Orgs,
registrars and their FSM's do that all the time. Should be
enforced. |
Criminal law |
Fair - often violated |
| 75 |
Pretending Scientology™ certificates, classifications or
awards not actually held to obtain money or credit. |
OK |
Agree |
Employment professional conduct |
Fair |
| 76 |
Selling auditing hours or training courses for advance
which are not then delivered as to hours and time in training (but
not results or subject matter). (Flag and Orgs) |
OK |
Orgs,
registrars and their FSM's do that all the time. Should be
enforced. |
Civil law |
Fair - often violated |
| 77 |
Theft. |
OK |
Agree |
Criminal law |
Fair |
|
TECHNICAL
CRIMES |
Ref. No |
Offense |
Consti tutional? |
Comments |
Compared
to |
Grading |
| 78 |
Being
or becoming a Potential Trouble Source without reporting it or
taking action. |
OK |
As
it's formulated you can charge, pc's students and staff with this.
Made a crime it's Military law style. (precedent/
definitions needed). |
Military Employment
|
Unfair to pc's (flunk) |
| 79 |
Receiving routine auditing other than that intended for
the handling of a Potential Trouble Source, while being
PTS. |
OK |
As
it's formulated you can charge pc's with this. Made a crime
it's military style. (precedent/ definitions
needed). |
Military law PTS tech
|
Unfair to pc's (flunk) |
| 80 |
Withholding from local Scientology™ executives that he or
she is a Potential Trouble Source. |
OK |
As
it's formulated you can charge, pc's students and staff with this.
Made a crime it's military style. (precedent/
definitions needed). |
Military law PTS tech
|
Fair Harsh |
| 81 |
Failing to report a Potential Trouble
Source to local HCO. |
OK |
Open
the door to a police state. Generality. |
Military law PTS tech
|
Generality Harsh (flunk) |
| 82 |
Using Scientology™ harmfully. |
OK |
This
is too open to interpretation. Other points should cover. |
Professional conduct |
Generality |
| 83 |
Not bringing a preclear up through
the grades but overwhelming the preclear with high
grades. |
OK |
Agree |
Professional conduct |
Fair |
| 84 |
Processing or giving aid or comfort to a Suppressive
Person or Group. |
OK |
The
lack of compassion is legendary in CoS. Showing it can even be a
crime. |
Military
law Professional conduct |
Games Condition (flunk) |
| 85 |
Issuing the data or information or instructional or
administrative procedures without credit or falsely assigning credit
for them to another. |
OK |
This
seems to be an LRH special. Would hardly pass any legislative
process as a crime. |
copyright law PR |
Fair - If they will make it avail. |
| 86 |
Allying Scientology™ to a disrelated
practice.
|
OK |
This
is another LRH special. Would hardly pass any legislative process as
a crime. It seems to seed many controversies. |
Professional conduct? |
Games condition (flunk) |
| 87 |
Harmful flagrant and continued Code Breaks resulting in
important upsets. |
OK |
Agree |
Professional conduct |
Fair |
| 88 |
Issuing any Scientology™ data under another
name. |
Conflict
with Creed |
This
is another LRH special. It seems to seed many
controversies. 'Fair use' quotes and rewrites are perfectly
legal and common. |
Professional conduct Employment Copyright |
Games
condition internally Fair |
| 89 |
A
student damaging another by willful application of incorrect
technology may be charged by his Supervisors with a Crime and a
Court of Ethics action must be requested by his
Supervisors. |
OK |
OK |
Professional conduct |
Fair |
Ref. No |
Offense |
Consti tutional? |
Comments |
Compared
to |
Grading |
| 90 |
Any
Supervisor teaching or advising any method not contained in HCO
Bulletins or on tapes, or slighting existing HCO Bulletins, Policy
Letters or tapes. |
Against
Creed Freedom of Speech. |
The
evaluating of importances is an essential part of learning. You can
misuse this to make it illegal. To make it a Crime is
wrong. |
Professional conduct |
Unfair (flunk) |
| 91 |
Any
staff auditor reporting falsely verbally or in writing on an
auditor's report. |
OK |
Agree |
Professional conduct |
Fair |
| 92 |
A
student falsely enrolling. |
OK |
Agree |
Civil law |
Fair |
| 93 |
Putting HCO at risk of reputation by false attestation as
a student or preclear. |
OK |
It
should be tech's responsibility to catch this. To declare pc a
'criminal' is silly. Yet 'False Attestation' needs to be
covered. |
Military law? |
Harsh |
| 94 |
Running a course without a checksheet. |
OK |
Agree |
Professional conduct |
Fair |
| 95 |
Changing a checksheet on a student after it's issued to
him. |
OK |
Agree |
Professional conduct |
Fair |
| 96 |
A
Power Auditor seeking or accepting advice verbally or in writing on
how to run Power Processes from a person not doing the
folder. |
OK |
Agree |
Professional conduct |
Fair |
| 97 |
Any
auditor accepting an unusual solution without filing a job
endangerment chit or found using an unusual solution must be charged
with a Crime and given an Ethics Hearing. Failing to report an
unusual solution advised or used is also so handled. An „unusual
solution" is one evolved to remedy an abuse of existing
technology. |
OK |
Agree
basically. Can be misused to make the system very rigid, prevent
research etc. But OK in a delivery Org. |
Professional conduct Authoritarian |
Fair |
| 98 |
A
Potential Trouble Source knowingly permitting the Suppressive Person
to be processed without advising the auditor or Scientology™
authorities. |
OK |
There
is a lot of opinion in PTS SP tech. Until that is resolved this
clause shouldn't be law. Kids have their parents labeled 'SP's' for
their own case reasons, for instance. |
Professional conduct Authoritarian |
Generality |
|
GENERAL CRIMES |
| 99 |
Organizing or allowing a gathering or meeting of staff
members or field auditors or the public to protest the orders of a
senior. |
Against: free speech, organize. |
Only
what we call Martial law can justify to set aside Creed; and only
temporarily. Yet many such 'crimes' and 'high crimes' are listed
here. Need to be resolved by other means. |
Military law Martial
Law |
Games condition (flunk) |
| 100 |
Using
a local Scientology™ title to set aside the orders or policies from
the International Board. |
OK |
OK.
But system needs a little more flexibility for local managers.
Simplified Operating Policies would do it. |
Military law |
Fair |
| 101 |
Impersonating a Scientologist or staff member when not
authorized. |
OK |
Agree |
employment |
Fair |
| 102 |
Inciting to insubordination. |
OK |
'Insubordination' is a Military term. Another flavor of
military rule. |
Military law |
Fair Harsh |
Ref. No |
Offense |
Consti tutional? |
Comments |
Compared
to |
Grading |
| 103 |
Instigating a local power push against a
senior. |
OK |
This
could be used with good cause, but also misused. |
Military law |
Generality |
| 104 |
Spreading destructive rumors about senior
Scientologists. |
Creed:
Free Speech. |
Nobody
likes it; but there are better ways to deal with this than making it
a crime |
Martial law civil
law |
Games condition |
| 105 |
Pretending to express a multiple opinion (use of
„everybody") in vital reports, which could influence assistant board
or board decisions. (Board should know better - freedom of
speech) |
Creed:
Free Speech. |
Nobody
likes it; but there are better ways to deal with this than making it
a crime. Board should know better than believe such reports
too. |
employment |
Harsh |
| 106 |
Refusal to uphold discipline. |
OK |
'Uphold discipline' is a military term. Flavor of military
rule. |
Military law |
Harsh Generality |
| 107 |
Getting another staff member disciplined by giving false
reports about him or her. |
OK |
Agree |
Civil law |
Fair |
| 108 |
Falsifying a communication from higher
authority. |
OK |
Seems
OK on surface. It has a Military law flavor, however. |
Military law Employment
|
Harsh |
| 109 |
Falsifying a telex message or cable. |
OK |
Agree |
civil law |
Fair |
| 110 |
Causing a staff member to lose prestige or be disciplined
by giving false reports. |
OK |
Ethics
seems to do this as the way to conduct business. It is too tricky to
deal with as a crime |
Military law Employment
|
Harsh |
Ref. No |
Offense |
Consti tutional? |
Comments |
Compared
to |
Grading |
| 111 |
Seeking to shift the blame to an innocent staff member for
the consequences of one's own offenses. |
OK |
It is
too tric | |