Founding Charter and Procedural Rules of the Specialised People's Court

Founding Charter and Procedural Rules of the Specialised People's Court for Addressing Violations in Saudi Arabia

Driven by the free will of the people, rejection of injustice and tyranny, and in response to a collective need to hold authority accountable for the grave violations it has committed against human beings, dignity, and identity, this Popular Court announces its establishment as an independent symbolic judicial body. Its legitimacy is derived from the collective conscience, universal principles of justice, and the religious, legal, and human rights frameworks that affirm the peoples’ right to defend themselves and restore their sovereignty.

This court is established on the basis that the people are the source of authority, and that the absence of transparency and accountability constitutes, by itself, an indication of violation. Authority that hides behind secrecy and accumulates repressive behaviors becomes responsible for all accusations directed at it, unless proven otherwise with honesty, integrity, and clarity.

Since the court is popular in its composition and function, it relies in its procedures on the principle of reversed burden of proof, which places the obligation on the authority to prove its innocence regarding the accusations directed at it, rather than requiring the people to prove the oppression and marginalization they suffer. In the absence of explicit evidence from the authority, or if it refuses to provide evidence disproving the accusations, these accusations are considered valid, particularly if reinforced by documented behaviors and recurring indicators.

The court believes that justice is not built on balancing unequal parties but on a clear bias toward truth, empowering the oppressed with tools for accountability, and holding authority accountable as the stronger party with the greater capacity to conceal or falsify the truth.

Accordingly, this charter is the reference document that organizes the court’s work, defines its jurisdiction, establishes its principles, and declares its full commitment to symbolic justice, popular representation, and the right to ethical trials for anyone who dares to insult the people or usurp their will.

---

Procedural Rules

Article One: Judicial Composition
The court consists of three levels:
A. Primary Court, which includes specialized chambers according to the type of case.
B. Popular Court, which acts as a voting body after the Primary Court issues its judgment.
C. Court of Cassation, which reviews judgments issued by the Primary Court.

The court includes an independent judiciary, public prosecutors, legal committees, research teams, and fact-finding units.
The public, during the first stage of litigation, acts as a jury issuing the initial judgment in the case through open or secret voting to ensure fairness and prevent manipulation by tools of authority.

Article Two: Judicial References
The Specialized Popular Court bases its work on the founding charter and approved procedural rules, as well as general principles of justice and fairness and universally recognized human rights, as detailed in this article and Article Three. Sacred scriptures, international covenants, and agreements are also considered complementary references in defining violations and determining rights, within a framework that includes but is not limited to:

• Islamic Sharia.
• The laws in force in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
• International human rights covenants and treaties.
• International judicial principles and precedents.
• The Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.

The principle of reversed burden of proof applies in cases where the government withholds information or provides data and statistics that are unreliable or inconsistent with reality.

Article Three: Conflicting References
This article is interpreted and applied in light of the founding charter of the Popular Court and complements it; it must not be construed in a way that restricts or contradicts its principles. The court encourages moving beyond the narrow pattern followed in Saudi judiciary, which has not achieved the purposes of Sharia’s leniency, diversity, and mercy.

Judicial references are hierarchically arranged as follows:
A. Religious reference derived from the Quran and authentic Sunnah, prioritizing interpretations closest to the texts and their objectives.
B. Legal reference derived from general principles of justice, international law, and binding human rights treaties.
C. Human rights reference derived from universal principles of human rights and the dignity of peoples.

In the event of conflict between references:

1.     Islamic Sharia rulings, particularly those of definitive proof and meaning, take precedence over all other references.

2.     After considering the priority of Sharia, the definitive ruling from the highest reference among the remaining sources is applied.

3.     Reconciliation between references is sought as much as possible; none is discarded except to resolve the conflict.

4.     The court encourages citing evidence, texts, and international judicial precedents mentioned in Article Two, regardless of their rank, to enrich the legal library and establish rulings compatible with Islamic Sharia and relevant international legal references.

Article Four: Jurisdiction
Subject-matter jurisdiction: The court addresses all matters within its scope, including but not limited to:
A. Serious crimes and violations against the people.
B. Financial and administrative corruption and conflicts of interest.
C. Fundamental human rights not conflicting with Islamic Sharia.
D. Review of economic policies for social justice compliance.
E. Decisions harming the country’s or citizens’ interests.
F. Policies endangering the environment or public health.
G. Cases of surrendering sovereignty or religious/cultural symbols.
H. Authority’s respect for international agreements and human rights principles.

Territorial jurisdiction: The court has authority over Saudi affairs, including any case where Saudi Arabia is a party, whether involving the government, institutions, individuals, public policies, or community rights. Anything officially published or publicly circulated regarding Saudi affairs falls within the court’s jurisdiction unless it exceeds its symbolic or documentation capacity.

---

Article Five: Procedures for Filing a Lawsuit
Lawsuits are filed via an approved electronic form and referred to the competent chamber for a decision on acceptance or rejection.

Article Six: Forms and Case Registry
Lawsuits are submitted exclusively through the court’s approved forms, whether electronic or otherwise.
Forms are part of the procedural system, and the court may modify or update them as needed, provided the approved versions are published on its official platforms.
The court updates the case registry and its status at least once every calendar month and may make additional updates according to case developments, issuance of judgments, or objections.
The case registry includes: case number, type, review status, names of parties, date of last session, and voting result, if applicable. It is accessible to the public via official platforms.

Article Seven: Popular Public Prosecution Department
A department called the Popular Public Prosecution is established within the court, responsible for initiating lawsuits and pursuing accusations against the ruling family or their government. It operates as follows:

1.     Popular Public Prosecutor: The head of this department, appointed by the Popular Court, must be of integrity, ethical commitment, and symbolic representation of the people’s will.

2.     Powers of the Prosecutor: The Popular Public Prosecutor has the authority to:

o   Initiate lawsuits independently if there is evidence or indicators of a grave violation.

o   Accept referrals from the court or any popular oversight body.

o   Receive complaints and reports from citizens or affected parties, whether individual or collective, and verify them to convert them into official lawsuits if appropriate.

3.     Popular Nature of the Procedure: Every lawsuit initiated by the Popular Public Prosecutor expresses collective will, and each complaint is treated as a popular document contributing to the symbolic justice record.

Article Eight: Written Pleadings and Session Formats
Pleadings are primarily written and based on memoranda submitted by the parties, which serve as the main reference for formulating judgments and are preserved in the court’s archives, whether or not an oral debate occurs.
Sessions may be fully written or conducted via virtual platforms. Efforts are made to record them, and all submitted memoranda are preserved. Virtual platforms and audio spaces are supplementary tools to facilitate sessions without undermining the written reference.

Article Nine: Public Sessions and Organization
Sessions are conducted publicly unless decided otherwise or hindered by material or technical constraints.
Multiple Popular Public Prosecutors and defense attorneys may participate in a single case.
The court allocates equal time for each party to present, granting equal opportunity to those authorized to intervene. Interveners may be considered witnesses for either side.

Article Ten: Audio Debates
Audio debates are a complementary tool to written pleadings, not mandatory, and are illustrative rather than an independent reference for judicial rulings.
After submitting written memoranda, the court may convert the pleading into an AI-managed audio debate, faithfully fed with relevant prosecution and defense arguments without requiring approval from either party.
Audio debates are assessed according to:

• Clarity and logical structure of arguments
• Adherence to the case’s direct subject
• Respect for opposing parties, avoiding defamation
• Reliance on relevant religious, legal, or factual evidence
  A written summary highlighting main points and alignment or conflict with official memoranda accompanies each debate. All audio debates are archived and may serve as interpretative reference for similar cases.

Article Eleven: Broadcasting, Recording, and Publication
Acceptance of audio debates by parties constitutes full authorization for the court to:

• Broadcast the session live on official channels
• Record and archive the debate
• Publish the full debate or selected parts, excluding irrelevant material or personal insults
  This authorization is valid only if this clause is read at the beginning of the session; continuing the debate signifies explicit acceptance.
  Audio debates may not be used for promotion or advertising by any party; violation may lead to prohibition from future participation.

Article Twelve: Defense Conditions
While the Saudi system denies opinion prisoners and opposition figures the right to defense and directs accusations through fake accounts, the Popular Court adopts a fair approach, giving the ruling family and government a full opportunity to respond to accusations.
Defense requests are accepted only from qualified religious or legal persons, who must defend under their real names. Exceptions may be made for procedural necessity, including symbolic or AI-based representation, as stipulated in Article Thirteen. Defense attorneys must be Saudi nationals unless replaced by AI.

Article Thirteen: Notification
Selecting a case publicly and publishing the prosecution memorandum constitutes proper notification to the government. Qualified defense parties must respond within five (5) days, with an additional ten (10) days for filing the defense memorandum. If no qualified human defense presents itself, a free AI program is appointed to provide defense using available memoranda. AI defense is explicitly noted in session records and judgments.

Article Fourteen: Role of the Judge
The judge manages sessions and allocates speaking time as outlined in Article Nine.
The judge must remain neutral and impartial, granting equal opportunity to main parties. Speakers may be interrupted if they deviate or misuse the platform.
After closing pleadings, the court prepares a written judgment detailing facts, evidence, and responses to defense points.

Article Fifteen: Popular Voting
The public acts as a second-stage jury after the initial court judgment. Voting occurs post-judgment and is added to the court’s record.
Voting options: Conviction – Acquittal – Insufficient Evidence, with a “view result” option.
If the primary judgment and public vote coincide, the judgment becomes final after the objection period.
Discrepancies are reviewed by the Court of Cassation, whose decision is final.

Article Sixteen: Judgment and Objection
Judgments must include:
A. Key points from session minutes
B. Submitted evidence
C. Facts and justifications
D. Legal and religious reasoning
E. Adopted legal and religious references
Publication is on official platforms; objections may be filed within thirty (30) days. Final judgments are archived and may serve as precedent.

Article Seventeen: Procedural Guarantees
All parties have access to case files, including opposing evidence. Minimum response time is two minutes per intervention, maximum as decided by the judge. Equal speaking time is guaranteed for both prosecution and defense. Records and documents are archived and published on the court’s platforms.

Article Eighteen: Prior Adjudication
If a duplicate case is filed, a “previous adjudication” judgment is issued, citing previous case number, summary, and links to similar cases.

Article Nineteen: Rejection of Invalid Cases
The court may reject cases outside its jurisdiction, including:

• Personal disputes without evidence of corruption or favoritism
• Violations of local laws
• Attempts to exploit the court for propaganda or personal purposes

Article Twenty: Official Court Platforms
Two main platforms for announcements, judgments, and procedures:
A. Official Twitter: @court_spc
B. Official blog: https://courtpsc.blogspot.com/

Two channels for broadcasting court sessions:
A. Rumble: https://rumble.com/user/PSC_Court
B. YouTube: www.youtube.com/@PSCcourt

Article Twenty-One: Rights of Volunteers and Participants
Recognizing individual and collective efforts and promoting transparency, participants in case studies, preparation, and judgment are credited publicly.

• Recognition: Names and roles are cited in official case documents
• Official Certificate: Volunteers may request certificates detailing contributions
• Moral Rights Protection: Contributions cannot be removed without valid reason; grievance procedures exist
• Inclusion in Judgments: All judgments include a section for participant names and roles, respecting privacy wishes
• Voluntary Participation: All contributions are voluntary, without monetary compensation

Article Twenty-Two: Amendment of Charter and Procedural Rules
The court may amend, delete, or add to the charter or procedural rules as needed. Changes apply only after publication on official platforms and affect only cases heard after publication, not retroactively.