Investigations and Accountability
Investigation Process
Initial Assessment
A victim submits a complaint and supportive documents, leading to a thorough evaluation of allegations and evidence to determine investigation scope and priority.
- Evidence review
- Witness identification
- Scope definition
Investigation
Comprehensive investigation process following international standards and best practices.
- Document analysis
- Witness interviews
- Expert consultation
Recommendations
Development of concrete recommendations for systemic reform and accountability.
- Reform proposals
- Accountability measures
- Implementation plans
Current Investigations
Identifying patterns in jurisprudence in the state and federal courts which constitute prohibited judicial acts.
Systemic Discrimination in Court Accommodations
Investigation into patterns of discrimination in providing court accommodations for persons with disabilities across multiple jurisdictions.
Systemic human rights violations by judges
Patterns of violations of human rights treaties, principles, and the jus cogens of customary international law by judges and courts.
Patterns of judicial intent to commit prohibited acts
Classification of judicial bias and judicial human rights violations and discrimination based on disability in the courts to derive common ways in which judges demonstrate intent to commit prohibited acts.
Access to Justice Barriers
Examining systematic barriers preventing individual access to justice, remedies, relief, and punishment of human rights violations.
Absence or failure of "alternative mechanisms" promised by Congress to justify non-self-executing human rights treaties: Available means of stopping and punishing systemic judicial prohibited acts, and their effectiveness
Examining ways and means to prevent, stop, and punish judicial human rights violations and discrimination in the courts, and comparison with prevention, abatement, and punishment directly under human rights treaties.
Judicial legalization of prohibited acts
Exanining the ways in which judges legalize ethics violations, discrimination, and violations of human rights of litigants.
Posner: Self-represented litigants are treated "like a kind of trash not worth the time" of a judge
Investigating the findings of a recognized legal scholar and federal appellate judge Richard Posner that pro se litigants are subjected to discrimination and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment by judges. Particular attention to the fates of self-represented litigants in family courts, and to disabled litigants throughout the United States.
Conflicts and deadlocks in the judicial process in the United States of America
Exanining design flaws and defects in government and in the judicial process.
Patterns of inequivalence of human rights treaties and domestic statutes
Examining the domestic implementation of human rights treaties and the domestic observance of absolute prohibitions of customary international law.
Need for reform of the judicial process required in the United States of America
Evidence gathering and analysis of the reform required for establishing Justice and delivering a judicial process that is consistent with human rights laws and principles.
Past Investigations
Federal Court ADA Compliance Study
Comprehensive review of ADA compliance across federal district courts, revealing systematic failures in accommodation provision.
State Court Disability Discrimination Patterns
Analysis of disability discrimination patterns in state court systems, documenting widespread violations of federal disability rights laws.
Judicial Ethics Enforcement Mechanisms
Investigation into the effectiveness of judicial ethics enforcement mechanisms in addressing human rights violations by judges.
Pro Se Litigant Treatment Analysis
Comprehensive study of how pro se litigants are treated in court systems, documenting patterns of discrimination and denial of due process.
Interaction with the Private Attorney General
The role of the Private Attorney General
Simplistically stated, individuals who qualify as a Private Attorney General may act based on the US Constitution and common law and historical recognitions by the judicial process in the United States to prevent, prohibit, and abate violations of laws and human rights which have been inflicted upon themselves, and being similarly inflicted upon others. These individuals must follow high ethical guidelines for service and integrity, uphold the US Constitution and the jus cogens of customary international law, and act in the public interest. They must not frivolously or carelessly take action and compromise the benefits that should be provided to the public. They command protection for their litigation work product against disclosure (like attorney-client privilege) and advocate for unenumerated rights and privileges, as well as rights and privileges not enforced by the branches of government. One Private Attorney General (PAG), Cyrus Hazari, identified as a victim of cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment and punishment, and torture, by 10 state and federal courts and over 40 judges, and a seven-year victim of judicial discrimination based on disability, takes a strong interest in the cases filed with this institute, and may take action permissible at law upon the presence of verified susbtantial grounds for the victim-reported prohibited acts. The PAG operates independently of the institute and provides information, research, and legal findings that the institute considers.
Learn MoreProposed cooperation with the US Supreme Court
Judges should not need to be trained or corrected on recognizing and respecting human rights, but should instead be the foremost proponents of human rights in every case and controvery. The personal obedience to (human rights) treaties is a personal obligation of every state judge under Article VI of the US Constitution ("... and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding"), and under the principle of uniformity of jurisprudence in the state and federal courts, and under Article III "good Behaviour", and Article II, and the principle that the federal government shall not be divided against itself. Thus the same duty of obedience to (human rights) treaties applies to the federal judiciary. However, human rights treaties are not recognized or respected according to the jus cogens of customary international law, and the common expectations of the People. The Private Atttorney General has proposed a cooperation with the US Supreme Court to establish an independent investigative body for human rights violations by all branches of government per the specification of the UN Istanbul Protocol. This has necessitated the establishment of the IAJ to fill the gap until all government branches commit to the recognition of the independent investigative mechanism. The need for the independent investigative body for human rights violations is demonstrated by the numerous filings by the Private Attorney General in the US Supreme Court since 2020 and his other writings filed in the records of the following courts since 2018: California Superior Court of Santa Clara County, California Sixth District Court of Appeals, California Supreme Court, District Court of Norther California, Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit Bankruptcy court of Northern California, Ninth Circuit Bankruptcy Appellate Panel, District Court of Denver, Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals. The cooperation would directly affect litigants whose evidence provides susbtantial ground for violations of prohibitations under human rights treaties and the pre-emptory norms of customary international law.
Learn MoreInvocation of international Human Rights mechanisms
The Private Attorney General has filed a complaint against the United States judiciary with the UN Special Procedures, and the Committee Against Torture. Further actions and communications by the Private Atorney General will be forthcoming.
Learn MoreSharing of analysis, research, and findings
The Private Attorney General, Cyrus Hazari, is a founding member of the institute. He is a lawyer, human rights defender, researcher and analyst. He takes an active role in the pursuits of the institute as well as performing a separate and independent prosecutorial role through all lawful avenues in the public interest and for the purpose of the elevation of human rights and judicial standards throughout the United States and through models that can benefit human rights throughout the World.
Contact the Private Attorney GeneralReport Violations
If you have witnessed or experienced violations of judicial standards or human rights within the court system, we encourage you to submit a report. All submissions will be thoroughly reviewed.