A New People for a New Era

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948 was a response to the catastrophes of the twentieth century and established the fundamental rights of the individual.

Today, humanity faces a different type of threat: ecological destabilisation, technological risks, growing interdependence among states, and the absence of adequate mechanisms for the direct expression of planetary-scale interests.

The Earthlings People is examined in this document as an attempt at a legal response to this new historical context: not to replace the existing system of international law, but to advance it — through the voluntary transnational self-organisation of individuals who recognise a shared responsibility for human life, the planet, and future generations.

INTRODUCTION

About This Document

Connection to the Founding Documents

This text sets out the legal justification for the principles and mechanisms articulated in the Earthlings Declaration. The Declaration formulates the values, objectives, and purpose of the initiative; this document examines its legal admissibility, logic, and possible characterisation within the system of international law.

Purpose of this document: to demonstrate that the idea of the Earthlings People is not an arbitrary utopia or journalistic metaphor, but may be considered a serious attempt to articulate a new legal form of voluntary transnational community in response to the planetary challenges of the twenty-first century.

Intended audience: lawyers, analysts, international law scholars, representatives of international organisations, and intellectually demanding or sceptical readers for whom it is important to see not a slogan but a coherent line of argument.

Methodological approach: we proceed from the premise that the formation of a new legal institution requires a triad of elements:

The Will of the Individual

Expressed in the Earthlings Declaration — a public act of voluntary self-determination and accession to the community.

Legal Justification

Set out in this document — through an analysis of applicable norms, doctrines, analogies, and legal constraints.

Technological Implementation

Described in the technical documentation — as a set of mechanisms for transparency, identification, accountability, and voluntary participation.

Core novelty: for the first time, a people is conceived not as a consequence of common origin, territory, or historically formed ethnocultural destiny, but as the result of the deliberate, open, and voluntary choice of individuals united by shared legal and civilisational principles.

SECTION 01

Conceptual Legal Foundations

Three Core Legal Foundations of the Earthlings People

Freedom from Systems of Domination

The right of individuals to create forms of association and infrastructure in which technology, economics, and governance serve the person rather than rendering them an object of control.

The Right to the Preservation of Life

Recognition of human life, the natural environment, and the conditions of existence of future generations as supreme values requiring legal protection.

Transnational Self-Determination

A contemporary form for the exercise of the right to self-determination in circumstances where a community arises by the will of individuals and is not defined by territory, ethnicity, or statehood.

The formation of the Earthlings People is proposed as an exercise of the fundamental right to collective self-determination in a globalised world. This initiative does not negate historical forms of peoplehood, but raises the question of the possibility of their further evolution.

Legal Characterisation

The Earthlings People is understood as a voluntary transnational community, founded on the free self-determination of individuals united by shared principles of planetary responsibility, human rights, intergenerational justice, and technological ethics.

Article 1 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights establishes that all peoples have the right to self-determination. This document does not assert that existing international law already directly describes this precise form of peoplehood; it demonstrates that its discussion does not contradict the basic logic of international law and may be reasoned within its framework.

An Important Clarification on Representation

The Earthlings People does not claim to represent all of humanity. The concepts of "humanity" and "civilisation" carry broad philosophical significance, but they do not possess a defined mechanism for the expression of collective will.

At this stage, the reference is exclusively to those individuals who:

freely acceded to the Earthlings Declaration;
completed the prescribed procedural verification of individual uniqueness;
consciously assumed the additional identity of a community member.

Accordingly, the task of the initiative is not the usurpation of the voice of humanity, but the creation of a legal mechanism and precedent capable of demonstrating how the transnational will of individuals on matters of planetary scale may be institutionally expressed.

Identification of a Systemic Gap

The contemporary international system is predominantly organised vertically:

the individual obtains political representation primarily through the state;
states are represented in international organisations;
international organisations operate primarily through the will of their member states.

What is absent is a stable horizontal level — a legally formalised bond among people of different states as a unified voluntary community capable of:

expressing a common will on planetary matters;
making collective decisions outside the framework of national representation;
bearing its own institutional accountability for such decisions.

The legal gap consists in the fact that the actual membership of every human being in a single planet and their dependence on shared risks is not accompanied by a commensurate legal mechanism for the collective expression of will at the transnational level.

SECTION 02

Doctrinal Foundations in International Law

Justice as a Source of Legal Evolution

In international law, justice carries not only moral but also legal significance as part of the general principles of law referred to in Article 38(1)(c) of the Statute of the International Court of Justice.

Statute of the International Court of Justice, Article 38(1)(c)

"The Court shall apply… general principles of law recognised by civilised nations."

In the planetary dimension, justice encompasses at least four interrelated elements: intergenerational justice, environmental justice, justice of participation in global governance, and the equitable distribution of the risks and benefits of technological development.

Evolution of the Concept of "a People"

Contemporary international law does not reduce the concept of a people exclusively to ethnic origin or full state independence. The practice of decolonisation, the development of indigenous peoples' rights, and the expansion of forms of collective identity demonstrate that the legal category of "a people" has historically evolved and acquired new content.

In the case of East Timor (Portugal v. Australia), the International Court of Justice affirmed the erga omnes character of the right of peoples to self-determination. This is significant not because it automatically validates any new project of peoplehood, but because it illustrates the fundamental place of self-determination within the international legal order.

For the legal assessment of the Earthlings People, what is relevant is not ethnic characteristics, but the combination of the following criteria:

a shared historical situation — the recognition by individuals of common vulnerability to planetary threats;
unity of principles — agreement on fundamental values and objectives as set out in the Declaration;
self-identification — the formal and voluntary accession to the community;
will toward institutional organisation — the creation of procedures, bodies, rules of participation, and accountability.

The Common Heritage of Mankind and Structural Limitations of the Existing System

The doctrine of the common heritage of mankind has already been recognised in relation to a number of domains beyond national jurisdiction: the seabed, outer space, and other objects of common significance. At the same time, international climate, environmental, and technological regimes demonstrate that global risks affect individuals directly, yet the mechanisms for their representation remain predominantly state-mediated.

Within this logic, the Earthlings People does not claim ownership of the common heritage and does not propose to circumvent existing institutions. It is conceived as a supplementary mechanism for expressing the interests of individuals affected directly by planetary matters and outside the framework of any single national jurisdiction.

SECTION 03

International Precedents and Legal Analogies

Rights of Indigenous Peoples

The development of international standards on indigenous peoples' rights demonstrates that a people may possess the right to self-determination and collective legal personality without necessarily coinciding with the form of a sovereign state.

Supranational Additional Identity

European citizenship has demonstrated that supranational belonging can supplement rather than supplant national citizenship. For the Earthlings People, this matters as an analogy of additional, rather than competing, identity.

Graduated Forms of International Participation

Observer status, consultative participation, and other intermediate forms of engagement confirm that international law recognises not only the rigid dichotomy of "state / no status," but a more complex spectrum of participation.

Legal Personality Beyond the Classical Model

The recognition of the rights of nature, the international legal personality of certain organisations, and the development of common heritage regimes demonstrate that law is already capable of expanding the circle of subjects and interest-holders when the protection of significant goods so requires.

The Growing Role of Transnational Civil Society

Non-governmental organisations, expert networks, and global coalitions have long participated in international processes. The Earthlings People differs from them in that it proposes not only thematic advocacy, but also a form of voluntary collective belonging with an internal legitimation procedure.

Digital Forms of Association

The digital environment has become a stable space for association, coordination, and participation. This does not supersede law, but transforms the factual conditions under which individuals are capable of creating enduring transnational communities.

Section conclusion: international law already acknowledges evolution through new forms of collectivity, new levels of belonging, and new formats of participation. The Earthlings People is proposed not as a break from this logic, but as its further development in response to the planetary challenges of the twenty-first century.

SECTION 04

Specific Legal Foundations

Core Norms of International Law

UN Charter (1945), Article 1(2)

Recognises respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples as one of the purposes of the United Nations.

Declaration on Principles of International Law (1970)

Affirms the right of peoples to freely determine their political status without external interference.

Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action (1993)

Clarifies that self-determination must not be construed as authorising the dismemberment of the territorial integrity of states that comply with the principle of equal rights and represent the whole population without discrimination.

Declaration on the Right to Development (1986)

Links the development of peoples to the full realisation of human rights and underscores the collective dimension of participation in historical development.

Legal Construction of the Initiative

The Earthlings People is formed within the logic of internal, non-territorial, and voluntary self-determination. It does not require secession, makes no territorial claims, and does not assert coercive jurisdiction over persons or territories.

Its intended function is to create a legitimate mechanism for coordination and the expression of will on matters that:

by their nature transcend any single jurisdiction;
affect the shared conditions of life on the planet;
do not receive adequate representation owing to the structural limitations of existing institutions.

Typology of the Legal Gap

The gap to which the Earthlings initiative responds is manifest with particular clarity in several domains:

Pandemics and Biological Risks

International norms primarily regulate state action, while transnational civil coordination and long-term public alert mechanisms remain underdeveloped.

Artificial Intelligence

Decisions with planetary consequences are made by a limited number of states and corporations, while the affected population lacks a commensurate mechanism for the collective expression of a position.

Climate and Future Generations

The consequences of current decisions extend decades into the future, yet future generations themselves do not possess procedural representation within existing institutions.

Common pattern: existing subjects of international law remain necessary, but are not always sufficient for the representation of the long-term and transnational interests of individuals as a shared planetary community.

The Principle of Good Faith (Bona Fides)

The Earthlings People must be assessed from the standpoint of the good faith of its declared objectives and procedures. This entails the open acknowledgement of its own limitations:

representation concerns only voluntary participants, not all of humanity;
the initiative does not claim a monopoly on the expression of planetary interests;
its legitimacy must be confirmed through growth in participation, transparency of procedures, and external good-faith verifiability;
it must act as a complement to the existing legal order, not as its negation.

SECTION 06

Technological Implementation of Legal Principles

The technological layer of the initiative is meaningful only insofar as it reinforces the legal principles of voluntariness, accountability, and verifiability. Technology is considered here not as a source of legitimacy in itself, but as an instrument of discipline and demonstrability.

From Declarations to Procedural Guarantees

Law has traditionally relied on commitments, procedures, and institutional oversight. The Earthlings People proposes to supplement this with technological guarantees where they genuinely enhance confidence:

transparency: key decisions are recorded in a publicly verifiable system;
immutability of procedures: fundamental rules cannot be silently rewritten retroactively;
verifiability: compliance with procedures may be independently verified;
right of exit: participation does not become irrevocable or coerced.

Correspondence Between Technical Solutions and Legal Principles

Voluntariness

Legal norm: freedom of association includes the freedom not to participate in an association. Technological implication: there must be a genuine, not merely nominal, mechanism for a participant to exit the community.

Equality of Participation

Legal principle: one person must not possess multiple units of political weight through technical manipulation alone. Technological implication: a procedure for confirming individual uniqueness is required, precluding multiple accounts and the purchase of voting rights.

Non-Commercial Character of Collective Will

Legal principle: representation must not become a tradeable asset. Technological implication: governance mechanisms cannot reduce to financial control over votes.

Stability of Core Principles

Legal principle: fundamental norms are not altered by a casual majority. Technological implication: modification of the core principles must require an enhanced procedure and an elevated threshold of consent.

Key thesis: blockchain, digital identity, and other instruments matter here not as fashionable attributes of Web3, but as means of reinforcing legally significant qualities — verifiability, the limitation of arbitrariness, equality of procedure, and ongoing accountability.

SECTION 07

Mechanism of Legal Implementation and Accountability

From the standpoint of this document, the Earthlings People should be considered not as an already recognised subject of international law, but as an emerging collectivity sui generis, claiming functional legitimacy within the bounds of its own voluntarily adopted objectives and procedures.

Institutional Accountability

The legitimacy of the initiative depends directly on its capacity to ensure accountability at three levels:

To Its Members

Public decision-making procedures, the possibility of recalling delegates, budget transparency, and regular reporting.

To the External Community

Openness to legal assessment, publication of relevant information, and readiness to respond to justified questions from states, organisations, and experts.

To Future Generations

Recording the long-term consequences of major decisions, maintaining an archive, and the impermissibility of arbitrary abandonment of core principles.

The Principle of Subsidiarity and Complementarity

The Earthlings People may act legitimately only where it does not substitute for the state and does not encroach upon its core competences. Its domain is justified only in relation to matters that by their nature:

are transnational;
cannot be adequately resolved at the level of a single state;
require a planning horizon extending beyond ordinary political cycles;
affect persons who lack full current representation, including future generations.

Within Permissible Competence

Environmental and climate coordination, ethical frameworks for technology, intergenerational justice, protection of shared conditions of life.

Beyond Permissible Competence

National security, criminal jurisdiction, taxation of populations, territorial disputes, and questions of internal state governance.

Legal meaning of this section: the Earthlings initiative may claim credibility only on the condition of institutional modesty: it must not expand power at any cost, but rather pre-emptively delimit its own claims and demonstrate its utility precisely where a genuine representative and procedural deficit exists.

SECTION 08

Correspondence of Key Provisions of the Earthlings Declaration to Legal Norms

What follows is not an attempt to prove that every provision of the Declaration is already directly enshrined in international law, but rather a demonstration of legal coherence: the key provisions of the Declaration may be related to recognised norms, principles, or legal trajectories of development.

Declaration Provision	Legal Logic	Normative Foundation
Voluntary formation of a people by choice	Freedom of association and collective self-determination permit the creation of new forms of community in the absence of coercion and territorial claims.	UN Charter; Art. 1 ICCPR/ICESCR; Art. 20 UDHR
Filling the gap of horizontal connection between people of different countries	International law recognises the growing role of non-state actors, but does not yet create a complete procedure for the transnational collective will of individuals as a community.	NGO and civil society participation practice; global governance doctrine
Principle of voluntariness and the right of exit	The right to participate in an association implies the right to cease participation without sanction from the community itself.	Art. 20 UDHR; general principles of freedom of association
Technology must augment, not replace, the human being	Technological infrastructure is permissible only as an instrument for the protection of rights, accountability, and fair procedure.	UNESCO Recommendation on the Ethics of AI (2021); general principles of human rights in the digital environment
One person — one vote	Equality of participation requires procedural guarantees against multiple or purchased voting.	Art. 25 ICCPR; democratic principles of equal participation
Non-commercial character of the community	Collective will must not be convertible into corporate control or financial dominance.	General principles of the protection of associations and the non-commercial nature of representation
Immutability of core values	The fundamental principles of the community must be protected by an enhanced amendment procedure.	Constitutional logic of qualified majorities; doctrine of the stability of foundational norms
Subsidiarity	Action is permissible only where tasks cannot be effectively resolved at a lower level.	Principle of subsidiarity in supranational and doctrinal legal constructs

Methodological Conclusion

The table demonstrates that the Earthlings People is not derived from a single source. Its legal argument is constructed as a convergence of norms, principles, analogies, and developmental trajectories which together render such an initiative plausible and legally discussable.

SECTION 09

Legitimation Benchmarks and Development Trajectory

The legitimacy of the Earthlings People cannot be established by declaration. It depends on a combination of four factors: the scale of participation, the quality of procedures, the transparency of governance, and external good-faith verifiability.

What Creates Legitimacy

Scale and geographic distribution — the community must extend beyond a local circle of like-minded individuals.
Genuine participation — the presence of not only signatories, but of engaged members capable of influencing decisions.
Quality of procedures — honest identification, transparent voting, and protection against governance capture.
Public accountability — open data on rules, finances, demographics, and governance practice.

Stages of Development as Benchmarks, Not Legal Thresholds

No quantitative indicator by itself creates international legal status. However, for the purpose of a good-faith assessment of the initiative's development, several stages may be distinguished:

Stage	Character of Legitimacy	Practical Significance
Initial	Legitimacy of the idea and procedure	Testing the viability of the principles of voluntariness, transparency, and internal democracy.
Developing	Legitimacy of a stable transnational community	Emergence of a significant and geographically distributed membership, regular decision-making practice, and external observability.
Functional	Legitimacy of limited representation on specific topics	The possibility of participating in expert, advisory, and partnership formats on matters where the community has genuinely accumulated experience and a mandate.
Expanded	Legitimacy of a recognised non-state participant in international dialogue	The potential acquisition of forms of external status, contingent on mature practice, a broad social base, and trust in procedures.

Principle of honesty: the Earthlings People does not assert that its mere existence already confers the right to speak on behalf of humanity. The concern is the creation of a verifiable institutional form that may, as it grows and confirms its good faith, receive increasingly serious attention and limited forms of participation in international dialogue.

SECTION 10

Legal Legitimacy of the Earthlings People

Final Legal Justification

1. Lawful Evolution of Legal Form

The Earthlings initiative may be regarded as one of the possible contemporary forms of the development of collective self-determination, consistent with the basic principles of international law when voluntariness, non-violence, and the absence of territorial claims are observed.

2. Response to a Structural Gap

This document identifies the deficit of horizontal representation of individuals from different states on matters of planetary scale and proposes an institutional means of addressing this gap.

3. Good Faith as a Condition of Admissibility

The legitimacy of the initiative depends not on the forcefulness of self-designation, but on the honest acknowledgement of limits, transparency of procedures, openness to criticism, and the capacity to act as a complement to, rather than a replacement for, the existing international order.

4. Complementarity, Not Substitution

The Earthlings People does not abolish the state, does not duplicate the classical functions of public authority, and does not require renunciation of citizenship. Its legal purpose lies in limited representation where existing institutions structurally fail to encompass the long-term and transnational interests of individuals.

5. Technology as a Mechanism of Demonstrability

The use of digital instruments is justified insofar as they reinforce the legal qualities of the initiative: accountability, verifiability, protection against arbitrariness, and equality of procedure.

Primary conclusion: the Earthlings People does not request that its international legal characterisation be treated as already settled. It proposes to be regarded as a serious, law-abiding, and good-faith attempt to articulate a new form of voluntary transnational community, responding to the challenges of an era that cannot be addressed within the framework of exclusively national representation.

Practical Purpose of This Document

This legal justification does not replace future legal memoranda, procedural submissions, or expert opinions. Its purpose is to demonstrate that the Earthlings project possesses an internally coherent and serious legal logic, worthy of professional consideration rather than superficial dismissal as utopia.

SECTION 11

International Legal Personality and Representation

The question of the legal personality of the Earthlings People requires a fundamental distinction between the philosophical category of "humanity" and a legally formalised collectivity with a limited, voluntary, and procedurally verifiable mandate.

Whom the Earthlings People Represents

The Earthlings People may claim to represent exclusively those individuals who voluntarily acceded to the Declaration, completed the prescribed identity confirmation procedure, and participate in the institutions of the community.

This renders the representation:

voluntary — without the automatic inclusion of anyone;
supplementary — without the abrogation of national citizenship or other identities;
limited — without a claim to a universal mandate.

Additional, Not Exclusive, Identity

Membership in the Earthlings People must be understood as an additional level of civil-legal and political-ethical belonging. By analogy with supranational forms of identity, it does not sever the individual's connection to the state of origin, residence, culture, or citizenship, but creates yet another level of participation.

Three Levels of Legitimation

Level	Mechanism	Legal Function
Primary	Signing the Declaration and confirming identity	Formation of the initial mandate to participate in the community
Ongoing	Regular participation in votes and procedures	Transformation of membership into genuine, rather than nominal, legitimacy
External	Recognition of procedural good faith by external actors	Basis for possible forms of advisory or other limited participation

Key distinction: humanity as a philosophical category encompasses all, but does not possess a procedure for collective expression of will. The Earthlings People does not substitute for humanity; it seeks to create a limited legal form within which the collective will of a particular transnational community may be expressed, verified, and institutionally formalised.

SECTION 12

Mechanisms of Accountability and Democratic Legitimacy

Accountability is not an additional advantage but a central condition of the admissibility of the very idea of the Earthlings People. If the community claims credibility, it must be more transparent and verifiable than many traditional forms of collective action.

A Five-Level System of Control

1. Internal Democratic Control

Every significant decision must be linked to a member participation procedure, including the possibility of discussion, challenge, and revocation of delegated authority.

2. Technological Control

Key procedures must be publicly verifiable, and rule changes must be traceable and protected against covert interference.

3. Legal Control

The community is obliged to operate within the framework of applicable law, not to encourage violations of national legislation, and to remain open to legal critique and external expert review.

4. Public Control

Researchers, journalists, partners, and critics must have access to sufficient information for independent assessment of procedures and practices.

5. Long-Term Control

Decisions capable of affecting future generations require a separate impact assessment and the public archiving of the grounds on which they were made.

Comparative Advantage of Accountability

Actor	Frequency of Civic Influence	Transparency of Decisions
National States	Periodic	Partial
International Organisations	Mediated through states	Moderate
Earthlings People (projected model)	Ongoing or regular on key matters	Maximally open with respect to procedures, budget, and governance decisions

Requirement on the initiative itself: if the Earthlings People proves less transparent, less verifiable, and less accountable than it claims, its legal justification will be weakened. Accountability is therefore not an external ornament, but a condition for the survival of the entire construct.

SECTION 13

The Principle of Respect for State Sovereignty

The formation of the Earthlings People must be assessed within the framework of internal and non-territorial self-determination. It is not directed at the undermining of state sovereignty and is admissible only insofar as it does not encroach upon states' core functions or territorial integrity.

Four Legal Guarantees of Compatibility

1. Absence of Territorial Claims

The Earthlings People does not require its own territory and makes no claim to jurisdiction over physical space, natural resources, or the populations of states.

2. Renunciation of Coercion and the Monopoly on Force

The initiative excludes armed formations, security structures, and any forms of coercive enforcement of decisions characteristic of statehood.

3. Complementarity, Not Replacement of State Functions

The Earthlings People makes no claim to the taxation of populations, criminal jurisdiction, regulation of the domestic economy, or other classical functions of public authority.

4. Compatibility with National Citizenship

Membership in the Earthlings People does not abrogate the rights and duties of individuals with respect to their state. In the event of a conflict of applicable law, the mandatory norms of the relevant national jurisdiction take precedence.

Principle of Legal Restraint

The right to self-determination must not be construed as a licence to disrupt the international order. The Earthlings initiative is lawful only as an additional, non-violent, and non-territorial format of collective self-organisation.

Corollary: the more clearly the Earthlings People itself delimits its claims, the more seriously its legal justification may be taken. Institutional restraint in this case strengthens, rather than weakens, legitimacy.

SECTION 14

Practical Feasibility and Phased Development

The Earthlings People makes sense only as a practically verifiable initiative — that is, as one capable of demonstrating not an abstract dream, but working procedures, limited objectives, and institutional sobriety.

Three Indicators of Practical Feasibility

The Technological Base Already Exists

Launch does not require science-fiction infrastructure: instruments of digital identity, distributed recording of decisions, and open audit are already available in various forms.

Objectives Are Limited and Verifiable

The initiative is not obliged to "solve all the world's problems." Its realistic task is to demonstrate the possibility of responsible transnational coordination in several specific domains.

Evolution Is Possible in Stages

Legitimacy is not declared in advance, but accumulated through practice, trust, procedural stability, and external recognition of good faith.

Phased Development Trajectory

Phase	Content	Criterion of Credibility
I. Formation	Creation of the Declaration, accession procedures, governance rules, and basic accountability mechanisms.	Internal coherence and transparency of the model.
II. Proof of Viability	Emergence of a stable community, regular decision-making practice, public reporting, and a verifiable participation procedure.	Absence of a gap between declared principles and actual practice.
III. Thematic Utility	Participation in specific transnational initiatives on ecology, technology, the rights of future generations, and related matters.	Emergence of externally observable public benefit.
IV. Limited External Recognition	Potential entry into expert, advisory, partnership, or other non-state formats of international dialogue.	Trust in the procedures and social base of the initiative.

Key Caveat

This document does not assert the inevitability of international recognition and does not promise a predetermined status. It asserts only that, upon fulfilment of the stated conditions, the Earthlings project may be the subject of serious legal and institutional consideration.

Section conclusion: the practicality of the initiative is measured not by the scale of its declarations, but by its capacity to consistently demonstrate its good faith, the limitation of its objectives, the quality of its procedures, and its genuine utility in those domains where existing institutions experience a representative deficit.