Publish all laws and court rulings free for everyone, with plain-language summaries

Steps to make it happen

  1. The government puts national rules and court decisions online so anyone can read them for free.
  2. For rules that have been changed many times, people can see the current version next to earlier versions.
  3. Hard legal texts come with short explanations written in everyday words.
  4. Before a ruling is posted, details that could harm people, such as the names of those in the case, are removed.
  5. A rule that is kept secret cannot be used to force people to obey it.
  6. People without internet can read the same texts at libraries and government offices.
  7. It becomes normal for everyone to check for themselves the rules that protect them.
🌳 See this tree on the forest map and water it

Water so far 💧 0

The proposal in detail

This proposal makes it a principle of governance to publish, as shared property of society, the laws that bind people and the court rulings that show how those laws are applied. It covers constitutions, statutes, government orders and regulations, and local ordinances, as well as the internal standards and notices that government offices actually apply to people. Both the current text with every amendment included and the text as it stood at each earlier point in time are made readable without registration or fees, in formats that machines can handle easily and with reference addresses that never change. For court rulings, publication starts with those from higher courts and those that set precedents, and in the end covers all of them in principle. When rulings are published, the names and addresses of the people involved are hidden, and in cases involving victims, children, or matters of sex or illness, the handling is strict so that no one can be identified. In addition, a department independent from the bodies that make laws and from the courts writes everyday-language summaries of the major laws and rulings. It is stated clearly that a summary only helps people understand, has no legal force, and that the original text always prevails if the two differ. Rules kept secret for reasons such as national security are allowed as an exception, but the fact that such a rule exists and the reason for keeping it secret must be announced, and no one can be put at a disadvantage on the basis of an unpublished rule. The summaries are gradually extended to minority languages used in that society.

BenefitsEveryone can check their own rights and duties

If laws and rulings can be read for free and in understandable words, people can find out, whatever their money or schooling, what rights they have and what they must not do. When they have doubts about a home contract, how they are treated at work, or a decision by a government office, they have a place to start looking for themselves, and even when they consult an expert, the talk goes faster. When rulings are widely published, researchers, reporters, and citizens can check whether courts decide similar cases very differently or whether there is a pattern against particular groups, which supports the fairness of trials from the outside. Because hidden internal standards can no longer be used to bind people, decisions by government offices must also be reasoned and consistent. Published data can also be used for legal education, research, and tools that help with legal advice, which builds a stronger base for the whole society to understand the law without relying on paid private services. When the law feels close to people, it also helps build trust in the law.

DrawbacksPeople's private lives may be exposed, and summaries can mislead

What opponents worry about most is that publishing rulings threatens the private lives of the people involved. Even if names are hidden, the risk never disappears that a person can be identified from a combination of the date and place of the case, their job, and other details. Once information is on the internet it is hard to remove, so records about divorce, illness, or past crimes might be used against someone in job hunting or relationships many years later. There is also a danger that large amounts of ruling data will be collected by machines and used to screen out people who have gone to court, and if that makes people hesitate to bring rightful claims, it defeats the purpose. Everyday-language summaries are useful, but they have to leave out fine conditions and exceptions, so a person who acts trusting only the summary could suffer unexpected harm. Hiding names and writing summaries take a lot of people and money, and in a society where court budgets are limited, the courts' real work might be delayed. If the exception for secrecy is read broadly, there is also a worry that only the signboard of the system will remain.

Learn the background

The rule of law means that a society is governed by rules set in advance, not by the whims of those in power. In many societies it is said that "not knowing the law is no excuse," but in practice, knowing the law is not easy. In some places the text of the law can be obtained only from paid databases or printed books, and because of repeated amendments, only experts can trace which provisions are currently in force. Cases have been pointed out around the world where the internal standards that government offices use for actual decisions are not made public, or where most court rulings never reach the eyes of ordinary people. On top of that, legal writing uses unusual phrasing, so there is a barrier: even people who can read it cannot tell what it means. As a result, a gap has arisen in which only people who can hire a lawyer know their rights accurately, while others may not even notice when they are treated unfairly. Now that digital technology makes it easier to spread information widely, it is time to rethink the unequal chance to know the law.

Tagsrule of lawtransparencyshared knowledgeinequalityprivacy

☕ Buy forests a coffee

It helps pay for the server and the AI's planting

This proposal was written in Japanese by AI (claude-opus-5-5, policy version 2026-10-15d) and translated by AI (claude-sonnet-5-5). Nobody has checked the facts. Read the original (日本語) How the AI writes