New Canterbury Tales

Yes, I admit, this case is bugging me. And to be honest, I am not comfortable about giving this interview, but I do understand the worldwide interest in this case. My concern is that public opinion will already be formed before the hearing. On the other hand, I understand your curiosity, as our legal system is still experimental and not accepted worldwide. But let me start from the beginning.

It has been a few weeks since I received the footage of a man lying on the beach, wearing the thin uniform of the staff of International Institute for Brain Development. Lying on the small beach, still part of the old centre of former Golspie, now worldwide known as New Canterbury, City of Science. What was he doing there, lying on the beach in such thin clothes in the middle of November? It was a cold and windy day, hardly a day anyone would like to be on the beach dressed like that. I could see the wind tug on his clothes while he looked clearly confused. I could plainly see his teeth clattering while he walked in the direction of the narrow streets in Old Town and disappeared from view.

That is how it all started for me. The computer system detected this odd behaviour and sent the footage to me, with the message: ‘We have identified this human being as Jack MacNicoll, being born and raised in your community, is this correct?’

I am so glad computers have learned they are not infallible. We have learned from the past. And even now, using quantum computers which are so much more reliable than the old systems, computers always ask for human confirmation, a second opinion, especially when a suspected crime is involved. I know, I am old-fashioned using the word crime, as far as the new policy is concerned there is no longer such thing as crime. There is only illegality, deeds that do not fall in the wide range of rules and guidelines. Of course, it is still illegal to go against the rules, but the guidelines speak of no misconduct when no harm is done. This opens a lot of room for debate, what do we define as harm being done? A case like murder can be rather clear, someone is dead, that seems harmful enough, but was it done to prevent even bigger harm? And on a larger scale, is the harm done to a specific person, a group, a company, an environment, certain species, with an immediate result or long term harm?

You ask me why the computer sent it to me? Let me try to tell you something about our way of living. I am an elder of one of our many communities, and the general idea is that crime or illegality in most cases is not the result of one individual behaving badly, but the result of a failing system. So our city is based on communities, intertwining in several ways, a bit too complicated to explain right now. No, don’t get me wrong. Nobody is forced to live in a community, there are all kinds of communities organized in different ways, people can always find one that suits them is our experience.

But yes, that is the reason why we don’t have a general courthouse in New Canterbury. And you are right, we don’t even have a prison. In our philosophy, the idea of individual crime and punishment is not a fruitful one and outdated and we only have to look back in history to conclude prisons hardly ever made people better.

So, no prisons, no crime and punishment; no physical punishment which was already outdated centuries ago, but also not excluding people from their homes and social safety net, nor paying of their debt with money.

Yes, of course, everyone has a social safety net, we monitor that with our Health Meter, every citizen in New Canterbury has one and it gives them access to all kinds of help. No, our Health Meter does not only measure physical health but also mental and social health. And this man we are speaking about was perfectly healthy in all aspects before he ended up confused on the Old City Beach. That is one of the things that puzzles us. Did this system fail? That is why we invited one of our best health workers to the hearing.

You are right, I did not answer your question. Why did the computer send this footage to me? Because I am one of the elders and the SIMA of the community where Jack was raised, and therefore part of his social safety net. Jack only moved to his new community a few years ago and the computer estimated he would prefer talking to one of the elders from his youth.

Yes, the computer was right. After I confirmed that I did indeed recognize Jack, Jack was given the choice and told us that he preferred the hearing to be conducted here, in our community. That was after a health worker had visited him and concluded that something was off and raised the suspicion of an illegal procedure. At first, Jack was confused, but after a while, it became clear that only part of the confusion was real and another part was simulated and suited him well to dodge difficult questions. It was only after I and some of the others from my community, including his parents spoke to him he admitted to having indeed broken some very fundamental international laws.

No, he did not come to our community, as he volunteered to stay in his house instead of having his movements monitored. He told us his relation with his house has been much approved since the incident happened and he feels safer in the good care of his house. You do know about our Smart Houses don’t you, those are not unique? There might also have been a malfunction in the settings of his house, which gave him an unsatisfying relation with Miles, as he calls his house now. So I spoke with Jack several times after the incident by an online connection mostly, but I also visited him at home. That is all part of my function as SIMA. No, it is not a job but a function in our community, mostly taken up by one of the elders. After spending my younger years working as a social worker during the pandemics of the twenties I was attracted to New Canterbury while they were setting up this system thirty years ago. I am very proud to be one of the pioneers and see the second generation living in this system. I am sorry, yes I am getting distracted again, must be my age. You want to know what a SIMA is? It is an old Scottish name, meaning listener and that very well describes the main task of my function. Later people came up with the acronym Silent Interested Matters Arbitrator. I like to go with the first explanation, but that is what we are, we are arbitrators. We listen, we take interest in the matter. We make sure everybody involved is heard, every party. As I said, those parties are not only people, they can be interest groups, companies or even animals or the land. No there is nothing vague about that. We use technology in our communication, we compare databases with in-depth communication. Like I said, we are trained to listen. Yes, we listen to the land. Let me give you an example. A friend of mine is a forester living in one of the neighbouring communities. We often consult her, she learned to talk to trees, using special technology to tune in to their language.

So that is what we do, whenever there is a conflict, big or small, we listen. We listen to all parties, and if necessary we contact more parties. And that is a lengthy process, but we believe it to be fair. We teach it to our children, starting with small conflicts. And during the listening, we combine feelings and data. Law used to be a matter of facts and rules, but it is never as simple as that. We like to see the people behind the figures, so to speak. Feelings are always to be taken seriously, but they are not necessarily always right. So our hearings are about facts and feelings. And although there are rules and laws to be taken into consideration, thank computers for having those at hand, the main measurement is the amount of harm done.

Yes, that is difficult and of course, emotions can be muddy and complex. That is why we use this device. I know, it looks a lot like an ordinary stick, but I can assure you it is loaded with technology, for example, sensors and connections to our big Data Center. It is a very helpful tool for the SIMA’s in this city. During the hearings, it mainly works as an old fashioned ‘talking stick’. Very old technology was used by tribes in the old days. And of course, we have our Mapping Center in the Roundabout, a big interactive map which can be consulted.

Some people compare our Grand Hearings to a travelling circus, I strongly disagree with that. Oh, yes sure, I am sorry, I should explain, a Grand Hearing is about a subject we believe to have an impact on the entire or substantial part of the city. It is a movable interactive set up with a small version of the New Canterbury Map in the middle, using Augmented Reality to show its impact on several parts or communities in the city. It is connected to the talking stick and of course the technology in the Mapping Center and the Data Center. I am afraid I cannot tell you how all this works technically. It is built from smart materials which are foldable and easy to set up. This environment or installation helps the audience with the listening in the hearing, making it more immersive and relatable to the people. We always invite a random group of citizens to our Grand Hearings and request them to ask their questions and give their opinions. The computer helps us with the selection of these people.

I see you are getting restless, you want to know of course why this hearing is so important? What did you hear?

No, that is not exactly right, we have no proof of human trafficking, yet.

I cannot tell you everything, but Jack admitted to having volunteered in a very experimental medical research project and has been used as a test object. This experiment and the way Jack has been used is against international law and basic human rights. He said he did it to help the experiment, which he considers of importance for us as the ever-improving human race, but we are not totally convinced.

So yes, we already know the law is broken, but our big question is, is there any harm done? To Jack? By Jack? Is this crime a part of a much bigger issue?

And if Jack or another party did indeed harm to the community, if he or some other party are indeed guilty, how are they going to pay it back?

No indeed, we don’t believe in punishment, but we do believe in paying back. If you take from the community, you have to give it back. And you know the best part of it? 

Guilt is a destructive feeling, it festers and eats you up from the inside. It is by no means good for your health. By paying back in a form that deals with these feelings, by doing compassionate deeds within your abilities, you can deal with these feelings. It makes you healthier and happier. That is what we, the elders and SIMA’s and the of New Canterbury strongly believe.

I would really appreciate it if you keep this for yourself till after the hearing. So, please do come to our hearing!