Menu

Legal and Political Writings and [Audit, Documental,

Non-mythical Freemasonic, Removal of Cover, and
Declassification] Reports presented by the
respective author Shawn Dexter John, the sole
author of all presented publications on this
professional blog (website), now the Yale Law
Journal [writing, editorship, and executive
management] competition Winner
The following works were written, typed, published, and edited solely by Shawn Dexter John, also known by his operative
alias Khaled Hassan, the sole author of the published book sketch "The New Societies: Concepts and Apperceptions of an
Eastern Caribbean model of Commonality" (published with iUniverse); where not expressly stated as an excerpt or a
promotion, the presented [conventional] intellectual/intelligence Work Papers, political commentary Work Papers, and
related notes) are essentially completed [whole] drafts of related but independent material. All rights to the presented
material are held solely by Shawn Dexter John; the works are reserved for use by Shawn Dexter John solely. There is no
plagiarized content in The New Societies: Concepts and Apperceptions of an Eastern Caribbean model of Commonality
and there is no plagiarized content in the following material; there is no lack of [necessary] citation; none of the works is of
a deceitful nature. The contents of the following material of presentation have not been and are not products of any non-
Agency assigned work from any university, employer, or any other entity, or any person; it should also be noted that The
New Societies was not the result of any such assignment(s) or task(s). No person or entity has directed or forced the
author into the presentation of the following material. Shawn Dexter John isn't contractually employed (and has never been
contractually employed) by any foreign government or system of related Caribbean governance. Also, he is not a licensed
attorney (yet), law professor (yet), instructor, college professor (yet), or a current law student. He is not and was never
compensated for the development of the following works. The author has taken and completed United States accredited
doctoral courses, which are inclusive of American Bar Association (ABA) accredited law courses. The level and the quality
of the following works are intended for a graduate-level (doctoral and post-doctoral) university audience and the related
professional community. The following are not meant to perpetuate any racial or ethnic agenda and are not of any
professional or other recruitment ideology; the following are primarily scholarly and Central Intelligence Agency related. The
primary law school of his legal education was St. Thomas University School of Law – Miami Gardens. The author is an
official, undisputed, and authentic citizen of the United States of America (USA). (Importantly, the author's partial education
at Southern University and A&M College, as a doctoral student in Public Policy [at the Nelson Mandela School of Public
Policy and Urban Affairs], served well in writing significant parts of the overall material. Both degrees awarded to the author
were received from Howard University, however.) (The author did complete a course-required research [unpaid] internship
with the Embassy of the Commonwealth of Dominica over a short period of time. The author's brief employment with USA
for UNHCR, as a paid fundraiser, never required or initiated the development of any presented material). The majority of the
following works have been written on personal computers (on private laptops of Shawn Dexter John by Shawn Dexter John
[solely] and, at times, on library desktops and/or on a personal and exclusionarily owned smartphone by Shawn Dexter
John [solely]). The author is sincere and honest in his postulation. *Shawn Dexter John isn't in representation of any other
individual as a cover – there is no other operative recognized as Khaled Hassan in the United States.*

Commentary Twenty-five: Article Five of the Universal

Declaration and the right against Torture and inhuman
treatment
—————-

I, Shawn Dexter John, am the only individual editing the manuscript (aside being its sole author).

I will provide any update to the [edited and completed] manuscript, if any – [EDITED AND
COMPLETED] The New Societies – Concepts and Apperceptions of an Eastern Caribbean model of
Commonality.

The version published as a book was simply a covert and humble sketch, published in that manner to
provide a template to government affiliates working across distance preceding its expected completion
at a then later date (corresponding with me editing work today) – quite a humble act. Tampering might
have devalued the book material but the model and intent were communicated well preceding the
publication of the [completed] edited version (here) – the completed version consists of slightly over
200 pages. (The edited version is presented as a bonafide law article.)

——————-

———————

Author: Shawn Dexter John

My highest level of attained university academic degree: Master of Arts in History (along with a
Graduate Certificate special minor in International Studies) from Howard University in Washington,
District of Columbia, the United States of America.

Lower level of attained university academic degree: Bachelor of Arts in History (along with a minor
in Economics) from Howard University in Washington, District of Columbia, the United States of
America.

———————————-

Article five of the Universal Declaration provides correctly that torture should be abolished. Every
other form of cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment should be prohibited as well.

The application of torture, since it clearly can induce false and inexact confessions, should not find
comfort in any legal system. Legal systems ought to depend on authentic and indisputable
information in measuring testimonies and in determining liability. Second, this abusive act, when
practiced by government, is generally perceived as eroding the faith held in the government, as
promoting violence, and as supporting over-zealous government activities. It is rational to reject its
use. It is also sensible to explicitly denounce its lawfulness in every untamed system harboring its
practice. Member States ought to strictly ensure that individuals don’t succumb to maltreatment,
oppression, or excessive punishment throughout. Protecting the dignity of all individuals requires
jurisprudential assertiveness, requires the firm rejection of all possible abuses precisely. Yes, it is
understood that legal punishment requires some discomfort and/or restriction. The Universal
Declaration does not serve to remove reasonable deterrence techniques and rehabilitation methods.
However, our system of government and our laws should reflect modernity, positive sensibilities,
ethics, and caution. (This commentary serves to promote supranationalism simultaneously.)

Note(s):
1. The United States has re-established that torture is unlawful domestically. Inhumane treatment
cannot be supported. This article also brings to mind a certain constitutional issue which is
directly related to the context of the article. Article 1, Section 9 of the Constitution provides that
the writ of habeas corpus may not be removed or suspended unless rebellion or invasion serving
to harm public safety “require[s]” it. The article gives Congress the power to act within reason,
when no other law passed or safely confirmed by Congress provides otherwise, to limit the right
to imminent release or a customary speedy trial concerning labeled prisoners of war. Congress
has authenticated binding and sound international law which restricts the United States
government or any affiliate party from breaching human rights, as conceived in modern
international jurisprudence, within its borders and within the reaches of the government’s
apparatus. This is what is today genuinely understood by most jurists. Also understood in
modern jurisprudence is that the practice of due process, regarding all detainee types, is
required in evading the breach of human rights. Additionally, establishing sound public relations
and nurturing diplomatic relations are imperative. Preventing prisoners of war from re-engaging
in war activities may be a logical pursuit but this perceived prerogative cannot serve to deny or
abridge the sanity of our judicial system(s) or the human rights of any segment of any
population or civility. (It is the obligation of the international community to create reasonable
penal codes concerning prisoners of war and it is the duty of governments to respect those
uniform international standards.)
2. Member States ought to be assertive as effectual international activists in addressing the safety
of people throughout. The security of global citizens ought to be addressed by member
countries profoundly, consistently, and constitutionally. Potential abuses, outside immediate
jurisdictions, serve as a top concern within the most progressive societies and their
governments. (Supranationalism serves as the best tool for responding to the presented
concerns. Internationalism provides constitutional protection and can nurture consensus
efficiently.)

Reference:

1. U.S. Const. art. I, section 9.

———————————–
My contact information (email addresses) for potential employers (including professional
fellowships and United States federal or state government offices): carindian1@gmail.com or
sdexterjohn@gmail.com.