1  

Natural  and  Artificial  Identities,  or  The  Ease  of  Interaction.    A   conversation   between   Heath   Bunting   (artist),   Bob   Colover   (UK   barrister)   and   Annet   Dekker  (SKOR).  London,  February  2011    UK   barrister   Bob   Colover   and   Heath   Bunting   discuss   the   legal   issues   around   identities.   What  constitutes  a  person?  What   is   the  difference  between  an  artificial  and  a  natural  person?  And  what  are  the  legal  aspects  of  buying  an  identity?        

                               

Heath  Bunting,  Identity  Bureau  (2011).  SKOR,  Amsterdam      Heath  Bunting:  H,  Bob  Colover:  B,  Annet  Dekker:  A.      Identity  for  sale    B:  You  said  you  sold  the  project,  you  mean  you  sold  an  identity?      H:  Yes   that  was  a   couple  of   years  ago.   I  have   two  new  ones  now,  and   they’re  up   for   sale.   I’m   still  looking  for  the  price,  basically  in  order  to  price  them  correctly.    B:  What  would  they  entitle  the  owner  of  that  identity  to  do?      H:  They  become  residents  in  the  UK.  They  would  be  entitled  to  free  health  care,  probably  entitled  to  work,   and   liable   for   tax.   They   would   have   a   local   bank   account,   a   union   account   probably.i   And  basically,  if  you  have  a  local  bank  account  you  can  have  a  national  one  too.      B:  What  about  national  insurance?    

  2  

H:   At   the  moment   national   insurance   is   a   grey   area   for  me,   because   you   can   self-­‐issue   a   national  insurance   number,   or   rather,   a   temporary   national   insurance   number.   For   instance,   a   self-­‐issued  number  would  be:  TM  for  temporary  number,  followed  by  your  date  of  birth,  six  digits,  and  then  M  or   F   for   male   or   female.   You   can   use   that   officially.   If   you   want   to   have   a   permanent   national  insurance  number  you  have  to  submit  yourself  to  an  interview.  So  you  definitely  can  use  health  care  and  financial  services.   I  didn’t   include  a  credit  card,  because  credit  cards  generally  come  with  3000  pounds  of  credit.  So  I  would  have  to  charge  over  3000  pounds  for  the  identity.  For  the  same  reason  I  did  not   include  a  passport,  because  the  procedure   involved   in  acquiring  a   legitimate  passport  costs  anything  upwards  of  10,000  pounds.  This  would  make   the  project   too  expensive.   I  want   to  keep   it  more  affordable.    A:  Can  you  buy  a  passport  in  the  UK?    H:  Yes  you  can.  I  haven’t  looked  in  depth  at  a  UK  passport  yet.  A  lot  of  these  areas  are  hidden  from  normal  people.  As  far  as  I  know  you  can  become  a  British  national  by  buying  one  for  10,000  dollars  from  the  Cayman  Islands,  which  is  British  overseas  territory.  But  again,  it  would  make  the  project  too  expensive.  I’m  looking  for  a  buyer  who  is  a  normal  person  who  could  afford  maybe  500  pounds.  And  for  that  amount  someone  can  actually  live  as  that  personality.  That’s  the  entry  level  I’m  looking  at.      A:  But  you  are  providing  them  with  a  manual  explaining  how  to  get  a  passport  or  credit  card?    H:  Yes,  the  buyer  will  receive  a  complete  specification  in  a  book  that  is  the  manual  for  the  identity.  The  book  includes  a  chart  of  all  the  other  options  available  to  you.  For  instance,  having  citizenship  in  law,  the  right  to  reside  here,  etc.    What  constitutes  a  person,  or  what  is  the  difference  between  an  artificial  and  a  natural  person?    A:  In  legal  terms,  is  it  easy  to  change  your  name?  And  do  you  know  of  any  differences  between  the  UK  and  other  European  countries?    B:  As  far  as  I  know,  the  regulations  on  the  continent  are  far  more  fixed  in  terms  of  identity  because  their   systems   are   more   codified.   They   have   a   different   legal   system,   which   means   the   state   has  different   responsibilities   and   powers.   The   role   of   the   citizen   in  most   continental   countries   is   very  different  from  the  UK.  Most  countries  have  a  history  of  registration  documents,  which  presume  that  each  persona  has  a  single  identity.  For  instance,  I  don’t  know  what  the  formula  is  for  changing  your  name  on  the  continent,  but  I  suppose  there  must  be  ways  of  doing  it,  and  people  who  do  it,  although  I  don’t  know  if  or  how  you  have  to  justify  it.  In  the  UK  you  don’t  have  to  do  so  at  all.  This  morning  I  spoke  to  a  barrister  who  worked  on  a  case  involving  someone  who  changed  his  name,  and  was  able  to  change  his  passport  almost  every  three  months.  He  was  doing  it  for  criminal  purposes,  but  there  is  nothing   to   stop   you   doing   it   for   legitimate   reasons.   In   other   words,   in   the   UK   you   don’t   have   to  explain  why   you  want   to   change   your   name,   nobody  will   ever   turn   around   and   say,   ‘You   changed  your  name  last  week,  and  now  you  want  to  change  it  this  week,  what  happened?’  I  suppose  that  you  could  say  that  in  the  UK  the  relationship  between  the  state  and  the  citizen  differs  from  that  on  the  continent.  We  have  to  register  births,  but  after  that  things  are  up  for  grabs.  There  are  lots  of  issues  about  gender  and  sex  assignment  at  birth,  and  I  think  some  people  who  have  undergone  sex  changes  try   to   get   their   original   birth   data   changed.   I’m   not   sure   if   they’re   allowed   to   do   that,   it’s   a   very  complicated  area.      H:  I  think  a  gender  recognition  certificate  will  solve  that  problem.    B:   Yes   that   could   be   a   solution.   Now,   let’s   take   a   commonplace   situation   in   which   somebody   is  getting  married,  and  if  she  wants  to  change  her  name  on  her  wedding  day,  how  can  she  travel  on  her  

  3  

honeymoon?   She   can   travel   using   her   passport  with   her  maiden   name,   but   by   then   she   is   legally  somebody  different.      H:  I  would  argue  that  it  is  the  same  person  but  with  a  different  name.      B:  That’s  right.  And  if  you  want  to  take  it  further,  it’s  the  difference  between  what  you  call  a  ‘named  living  person’,  as  opposed  to  ‘identities’,  and  the  ‘exchange  or  trading  of  identities’.      H:  Would  you  say  that  the  identity  is  the  name?    B:  It’s  part  of  it.  For  example,  when  you  send  a  letter  to  someone,  you  expect  the  person  with  that  name  to  open  the  letter,  not  someone  else.    H:  To  get  back  to  the  person  who  changes  his  name,  or  his  passport  every  three  months:  In  the  eyes  of  a   judge  he  remains   the  same  person  because  he   lives   in   the  same  place  and  has   the  same   legal  relationships  with  other  people.      B:  In  terms  of  legal  relationships  he  would  not  have  to  continue  these  relationships  or  remain  at  the  same  address.      H:  But  if  he  has  the  same  bank  account  or  job,  and  the  same  postal  address,  and  he  only  changed  his  name,  the  law  would  probably  treat  him  as  the  same  person.      B:  Yes,  but  he  can  change  his  name,  his  bank  account  and  the  address  where  he’s  living.    H:  But  if  he  changes  his  name  and  address,  opens  a  new  bank  account,  and  changes  his  gender  you  would  probably  say  this  is  a  different  person.    B:   It  depends  on  what  you  mean  by   ‘person’.   I   suppose  you  could  say  there   is  a  contrast.  The  only  thing  that  we  know  about  normal  natural  people   is  that  they  are  born  and  they  die.  The  difference  with  an  artificial  person,  like  a  company  or  trust,  is  that  they  have  independent  legal  existences.  This  means  that  they  can  sue  or  be  sued,  or  can  be  fined.  There  are  companies  that  exist  in  law,  and  are  registered  as   individual  entities  that  pay  taxes  and  so  forth.  This   is  different  to  a  normal   flesh-­‐and-­‐blood  person.  In  terms  of  your  ideas,  you  can  take  capacities  away  from  a  flesh-­‐and-­‐blood  person.      H:  But  can’t  the  shareholders  summon  the  directors  of  an  artificial  person  if  they  want  to?    B:   It  would  depend  on  the  various  articles,  associations  and  statutes  on  which  the  existence  of   the  company  is  based.  But  you  can  have  a  one-­‐man  company  without  shareholders.      H:  I’m  a  one-­‐man  company.    B:  With   a   group   of   shareholders,   you   can   change   their  minds   if   you   like,   and   give   the   company   a  different   direction.   But   a   persona   can   give   capacity   away   so   that   they   are   no   longer   legally  responsible  for  their  actions.  For  example,  if  people  think  they  will  be  ill  in  the  future,  then  there  are,  of   course,   certain   safeguards   that  have   to  be  complied  with.  But   I  don’t  know  how   it   compares   to  other  European  countries.      Also,   in  the  UK  there   is  no  compulsion  to  have  a  passport,  or  any   identification  –  you  can   live  here  without  an  identity.  If  you  want  a  bank  account  here  you  have  to  provide  proof  of  your  name,  proof  of  residence,  and  an  address  where  you  can  be  contacted.  That’s  really  only  because  banks  are  now  required  by  law  to  keep  those  records  to  prevent  money  laundering.  But  at  one  time  there  were  no  

  4  

special  requirements.  Banks  only  wanted  a  residential  address  so  that  they  could  keep  track  of  their  customers.    H:  Well,  I  tried  to  I  get  a  credit  union  account  the  other  day.  I  went  in  with  a  tenancy  agreement,  and  several   club   cards.   At   first,   they   said   I   had   to   present   a   birth   certificate   and   a   driver’s   license   or  passport.  I  didn’t  have  any  of  those,  and  I  told  them  I  could  get  a  birth  certificate  off  the  Internet,  all  I  had  to  do  is  pay  for  it.  Anyone  can  do  this,  so  that  wouldn’t  really  prove  my  identity.  In  the  end  they  told  me  that  they  just  want  a  portfolio  of  my  existence  and  to  bring  as  many  forms  of  identification  as  I  could.  I  presented  them  with  a  library  card,  a  club  card,  a  television  license,  and  a  letter  proving  that  I  lived  at  that  address.  They  accepted  them  all  and  opened  the  account.      B:   I   suppose   if   you  have   an   address   there   is   nothing   to   stop   you   from   sending   letters   to   different  names  to  that  address,  which  is  ridiculous.  Where  did  your  project  end?      H:  I  don’t  know  yet.  I’m  giving  it  another  five  years.      The  move  to  artificial  persons    B:  Can  you  see  a  time  when  computers  will  have  identities?    H:  I  think  it’s  very  easy  to  do.  I  was  speaking  to  an  expert   in  robotics.  At  the  moment  many  people  are  already  used   to   corporations   talking   to   them   through   computerised  voices  over   the   telephone  and  public  address  systems,  which  are  essentially  robots.  You  could  argue  that  an  underground  train  is   not   a  mere   legal   or   financial   entity,   but   that   it   has   some   human   sensibility   because   passengers  have   the   impression   that   they  are  directly  addressed  by  a  person.  They  booked  their   trip  by  credit  card,  a  voice  spoke  to  them  and  they  did  what  it  said.  It  is  not  too  far  a  step  to  argue  that  that  train,  or  that  corporation,  is  a  separate  person,  or  entity.      B:  Like  the  Turing  test.ii    H:  If  you  can  have  a  corporation  that  has  a  legal  identity,  then  it  follows  that  you  can  have  an  artificial  entity,  an  artificial  person  or  an  artificial  identity?      B:  I  suppose  that  if  the  machine  harms  somebody,  you  would  try  to  find  out  who  was  responsible.      H:   If   it  was  a   company  with   its  own  bank  account,   you  could   say   that   the  corporation  harmed   the  other   person.   But  who   administers   the   account?   Since   he   or   she   is   just   an   employee,   they’re   not  liable  for  the  corporation.  Would  you  go  after  the  direct  owner?      B:  I  think  ultimately  that  somebody  has  to  check  things,  or  at  least  authorise  them.  There  has  to  be  a  controlling  mind.  What  about  identities  on  the  Internet,  where  people  create  hundreds  of  them?    H:  Yes,  there  are  a  lot,  but  look  at  Facebook  –  they  insist  that  you  actually  have  to  exist  to  participate.  You   have   to   provide   true   data.   Of   course,   people   break   that   rule,   but   Facebook   is   primarily  concerned  with  covering  its  back.    B:  You  could  create  different  personalities  with  the  same  date  of  birth  then?    H:  Again,  I  think  it  is  down  to  a  test  of  coherence  and  believability.  It  becomes  important  to  see  who  this  Facebook  personality  is:  Do  they  subscribe  to  other  services?  Are  they  recognised  by  other  legal  persons?   Do   they   engage   in   legal   relationships   with   other   people?   If   you’re   only   on   Facebook,   it  could  merely  be  an  alias.  

  5  

 B:  There  are  police  forces  now,  certainly  in  England,  who  use  social  media  networks  like  Facebook  to  track  people  who  are  interested  in  underage  sex.  Police  officers  masquerade  as  14-­‐year-­‐old  girls  and  enter  into  conversations  with  men  who  are  looking  for  what  they  have  to  offer.      H:  But  when  they  go  to  court,  the  police  do  have  to  say  that  they  used  an  alias  and  were  not  actually  the  14-­‐year-­‐olds  that  they  were  pretending  to  be?    B:  No,  but  they’re  allowed  to  use  it.  But  I  was  wondering  what  would  happen  if  you  sold  one  of  your  creations  to  the  state?  Say  it  was  bought  by  the  state  itself?  The  government  buys  works  of  art.  What  would  happen  to  it,  how  could  they  use  it?    H:  The   state  has  a  monopoly  on   the  creation  of  new   identities,  but  everyone  can  do   it.   The  police  agencies   in  particular  have  a  huge  apparatus   for   creating   identities.  They  can   issue  new  passports,  and   so   forth.   That’s   fine.   But   it’s   an   interesting   question:   Why   would   the   state   want   one   of   my  identities?   To   test   it,   perhaps?   I   think  my   identities  would   be   far  more   convincing   than   those   the  state  creates,  because  they  only  issue  passports  and  driver’s  licenses,  as  far  as  I  can  tell.      The  legal  aspects  of  buying  an  identity    A:  When  is  it  legal  to  buy  an(other)  identity?    H:   This   is   what’s   called   ‘making   a   market’.   This   is   what   happened   when   the   financial   markets  collapsed  and  the  mechanism  of  ‘making  a  market’  was  used  as  one  of  the  major  defences.  What  was  done   may   not   have   been   entirely   legal   and   was   probably   even   beyond   acceptable   norms,   and   it  backfired,  but  they  were  just  trying  to  make  a  market.   I  could  say  the  same  thing.   I  don’t  think  the  idea  of  buying  an  identity  is  widely  known  on  the  street.  But  there  already  is  a  market  for  what  I  call  the   ‘more   elite   people’.   They   can   buy   a   passport   and   wrap   themselves   in   a   corporate   shell.   This  information  and  knowledge  is  available  to  informed  people  around  the  world,  but  not  to  the  general  masses,  not   to   those  on  the  street.   I  would   like   to  bring   that  knowledge  to   the  general  population  and  expand  the  market.    A:  Would  it  not  be  of  particular  interest  for  those  who  want  to  use  it  for  criminal  purposes?    H:  Of  course  that  could  be  a  downside,  and  dangerous  once   it  becomes  apparent.  At   the  moment,  though,   you   can   do   anything   as   long   as   you   don’t   have   criminal   intentions.   I   suppose   that   if   you  create  a  market,  and  the  market  expands  and  people  start  using  it  for  criminal  purposes,  the  state  is  going  to  turn  around  and  stress-­‐test  it,  and  will  doubtless  start  imposing  limitations.      But  then  again,  not  too  long  ago  I  was  asked  to  act  as  a  consultant  for  a  European  commission.  The  European   Union,   or   basically   the   continent,   has   realised   the   effectiveness   of   the   natural   person,  mostly   because   they   see   it   as   a   very   good  management   technique,   especially   with   regard   to   the  mobility   of   labour.   It   has   been   demonstrated   across   the   European   Union   that   many   people   have  several   identities   now   –   either   through   dual   nationality,   marriage,   living   and   working   in   different  places,  or  historical  errors.  They  are  actually  two  distinct  people.  That’s  fine  in  the  UK,  but  it’s  been  very  problematic  for  Europe.  I’ve  seen  no  signs  of  a  directive  or  policy,  but  to  implement  and  make  this   work   at   an   instrumental   level   they   decided   that   human   beings   could   have   several   natural  identities.    B:  I  searched  in  Google  for  your  ‘trading  natural  persons’  and  I  suppose  on  the  simplest  level  this  is  already  happening.  For  example,  when  making  phone  inquiries  you  are  put  through  to  a  call  centre  in  India,  to  somebody  whose  real  name  is  Rahm  but  who  says  his  name  is  Richard.  At  that  moment  the  

  6  

trade-­‐off   is   already   happening,   because   there   is   an   expectation   that   we   are   talking   to   someone  named  Richard   rather   than  Rham.  Moreover,   now  you   also  have   automated   telephone   calls   being  made  to  answering  machines,  and  both  machines  end  up  talking  to  each  other.      H:  Yes,  much  like  the  stock  exchange,  where  computers  talk  to  each  other.    B:  And  worse,  when  trading  patterns  decline,  they  automatically  sell  your  shares  whether  you  want  to  or  not.  The  computer  controls  financial  crashes.      H:  Indeed,  high  frequency  trading.  Trading  for  the  sense  of  trading  because  they  earn  a  commission  on  the  trade.  Anyway,  it’s  safe  to  say  we’re  used  to  robots,  because  we’re  already  using  them  for  all  kind  of  things.      Three  scenarios:  incapacity,  transferability  and  sentencing  of  artificial  persons    1.  Incapacity:  others  taking  control    H:  There  are  three  specific  areas  that  caught  my  attention  in  my  research:  what  happens  with  regard  to  ‘incapacity’,  ‘transferability’,  and  ‘crimes  of  imprisonment  or  some  kind  of  fine’.    B:  Yes,  but  you  can’t  physically  lock  up  a  company.    H:  But  you  can  freeze  its  assets.    B:  No,  because  when  you’re   in  prison  there’s  nothing  to  stop  you  running  your  bank  accounts,  and  things  like  that.  You  can  freeze  a  natural  person’s  assets.      H:  Okay,  but  what  happens  if  a  company  did  something  terribly  wrong?    B:  Then  it  can  be  fined,  and  if  they  cannot  pay  the  fine  the  company  can  be  wound  up,  and  the  assets  sold  to  pay  it.      H:  So  it’s  a  form  of  execution?    B:   It   is  terminal.   If  somebody  is  made  bankrupt,  they  can  always  apply  to  discharge  the  bankruptcy  after  about  a  year.      H:  And  artificial  persons  can  be  bankrupted  as  well?    B:  Yes,   that’s  called  voluntarily   liquidation.   I’m  not  sure   if  you  can  revive   that  artificial  person  with  exactly   the   same   name   though;   you  may   have   to   alter   the   name   of   the   company.   It’s   called   the  ‘Phoenix   existence’,   which   is   when   something   is   reborn   from   the   ashes   remaining   after   its  destruction.   With   a   natural   person,   the   same   person   could   then   continue   being   bankrupted   and  discharging  their  bankruptcy  again  and  again.  I  suppose  there  would  be  a  difference.  But  incapacity  is  mainly  to  do  with  mental  capacity.    H:  Does  being  drunk  count  as  incapacity?    B:  Yes,  it  does.  If  you  sign  a  contract  when  you’re  drunk,  the  law  states:  ‘Individuals  who  are  clearly  intoxicated  are  generally  deemed  incapable  of  entering  into  legally  binding  agreements’.    

  7  

H:  How  about   if  you  have  an  existing  legally  binding  agreement  and  you’re  drunk?  Can  you  make  a  claim  against  that?    B:  ‘A  drunken  person  can  choose  to  rectify  a  contract  once  they  are  sober.’      H:   So,   if   I  made   a   contract  with   a   bank  when   I  was   sober,   and   then   spent   the  next   ten   years   in   a  drunken  daze,  would   I  have  access   to  that  service?   If   I  walked   into  the  bank  completely  drunk  and  said,  ‘I  want  to  withdraw  some  money’.    B:  They  might  turn  around  and  say,  we  need  a  third  party  to  confirm  your  information.  That  is  where  the  power  of  the  system  returns.  If  they  refuse  to  give  you  your  money  because  they’ve  noticed  that  you’re  blind  drunk  every   time  you  come   into   the  bank,  your  answer   to   that   could  be  either   to  get  proof  that  you  are  okay,  or,  if  you  didn’t  want  to  do  that,  you  could  give  somebody  lasting  power  of  attorney  and  try  to  persuade  the  bank  that  it  was  within  your  rights  to  do  so.      H:  And  in  terms  of  drunkenness,  if  I  had  a  contract  and  wanted  to  end  it,  but  I  was  drunk,  could  that  be  considered  void  as  well,  with  the  contract  continuing  until  I  sobered  up?    B:  I  suppose  if  you’re  drunk,  the  other  party  could  turn  around  and  say,  ‘We  don’t  think  you’re  in  the  right  state  to  make  this  type  of  decision’.  But  for  instance  with  a  contract  of  employment,  if  you  kept  turning   up   drunk   and   couldn’t   fulfil   your   contractual   duties,   then   sooner   or   later   the   other   party  could  say,  ‘We  regard  your  behaviour  as  so  far  beyond  the  terms  of  the  contract  that  we  are  going  to  terminate  it’  And  if  you  then  try  to  enforce  the  contract  by  claiming  compensation  because  they’re  in  breach   of   the   contract,   or   allow   you   to   continue  working   until   the   contract   ends,   you  would   lose  because  there  is  no  way  a  court  would  uphold  the  right  to  be  drunk  under  those  circumstances.      H:  So  it’s  possible  to  have  several  contracts  that  can  be  nullified  at  the  start,  the  midterm,  or  at  the  end  due  to  alcoholic  incapacity.    B:   Yes,   if   incapacity   affects   your   mental   state   then   it   would   be   the   same   as   some   other   form   of  perhaps  natural  illness  or  drug  addiction.  I’m  sure  that  drug  addiction  has  led  to  some  people  having  their  legal  capacity  taken  away  from  them.      H:   To   summarise   it   in   another   way,   if   the   human   being   who   possesses   that   natural   person   is  incapable  of  managing  his  or  her  affairs  properly,  then  that  natural  person  can  be  taken  away  from  that  human  being.  Can  it  be  permanently  taken  away?    B:  It  depends  on  the  type  of  power  of  attorney.      H:  Has  there  ever  been  a  precedent  that…    B:  Yes,  if  somebody  is  in  a  mental  institution,  in  which  case  they  cannot  take  decisions.  But  if  you’re  serving  a  life  sentence  you  can  still  control  all  your  financial  interests.    H:  But  you  can’t  vote?    B:  No,  not  at   the  moment,  but   it’s  a   tricky   thing.  Europe  has   said   that  everyone  should  be  able   to  vote,   regardless   of   civil   status.   I   don’t   know   what   the   situation   is   abroad;   I   think   that   even  incarcerated  criminals  can  vote  in  certain  circumstances  in  France.  They  are  now  working  around  the  lines,   because   incarceration   deprives   people   of   the   freedom   to   do   what   they   want   in   terms   of  physical  activities,  but  now  people  do  have  access  to  computers.  There  are   issues  about  the  use  of  Internet,  but  there   is  no  reason  why  people  who  have  been   incarcerated  cannot  run  their   financial  

  8  

affairs  from  prison.  They  aren’t  prevented  from  doing  this,  whereas  a  mental  health  patient  probably  would  be.      2.  Transference:  Trading  natural  persons    H:  Do  you  think  that  trading  natural  persons  will  ever  happen?    B:   I   suppose   every   employment   situation   involves   somebody   marketing   themselves,   and   there’s  nothing   stopping   you   from   you   selling   yourself,   i.e.,   allowing   yourself   to   be   completely   owned   by  someone  else,  providing  the  agreement  between  them  does  not  break  the  law.    H:  The  scenario  I  was  imagining  would  be,  for  instance,  if  Annet  had  a  new  job  in  London,  you  could  employ  her   in  your  chambers  and  pre-­‐purchase  an   identity.  She  would  only  be  here  for  a  few  days  and  because  all  the  normal  paperwork  would  take  too  long,  you  could  use  the  identity.  You  can  have  a  natural  person  who  is  constantly  employed  here.  Annet  can  come  and  assume  the  identity  of  that  natural  person,  pay  taxes,  have  the  rights  and  duties  of  that  natural  person,  and  then  go  away  again,  taking   it   with   her.   Or   someone   else   could   use   it   with   you   retaining   ownership.   Would   that   be  possible?  Would  it  be  easy  to  administer?      B:  I  suppose,  if  no  payment  is  involved,  you  wouldn’t  have  to  notify  anybody.  But  the  moment  you,  as  an   employer   or   organisation,   have   to   inform   government   officials   for   tax   or   national   insurance  purposes,  then  the  state  becomes  involved  because  that  natural  person  is  engaging  in  a  relationship  with  the  state.  Then  it  will  become  more  complicated.      H:  Can  you  transfer  the  power  of  attorney?  For  instance,  if  I  was  incapacitated  and  I  nominated  you  as  my  attorney  and  you  are  effectively  managing  my  business,  could  you  then  transfer  that  power  of  attorney  to  Annet  without  my  approval?  In  effect  I  would  be  a  slave  and  you  would  be  making  money  by  trading  my  identity.    B:  Well,  this  is  what  I  found:  ‘The  person  making  the  power  of  attorney  should  appoint  the  Attorney  they   trust   and   in   whom   they   have   complete   confidence,   and   must   be   over   eighteen,   and   not  undischarged,   or   interim   bankrupt.   More   than   one   Attorney   can   be   appointed   to   act   together,  independently  or  together,  in  respect  of  some  matters,  and  independently  in  respect  of  others.  If  the  Power  of  Attorney  is  silent  on  how  two  or  more  Attorneys  are  to  act,  they  must  act  together.  Under  LPA   [Lasting  Power  of  Attorney]   it   is  possible   for   the  person  making   the  Power  of  Attorney,   to   the  point  of  replacement  of  the  Attorney’.iii  And  it  seems  that  the  person  granting  the  power  of  attorney  would  have  to  agree.  ‘Under  a  Property  and  Affairs  LPA  the  Attorney  will  commonly  be  able  to  pay  bills  and  expenses,  collect  income  and  benefits,  manage  Bank  and  Building  Society  Accounts,  buy  and  sell  property,  complete  and  submit  Tax  Returns  and  make  gifts  within  the  statutory   limits.  Under  a  Welfare   LPA   the   Attorney   is   likely   to   be   given   power   to   consent   or   refuse   particular   types   of  healthcare,  including  medical  treatment  and  may  even  be  able  to  consent  to  or  refuse  life  sustaining  treatment  on  behalf  of  the  person  that  has  made  the  LPA.  The  Attorney  may  also  be  able  to  decide  whether  the  Donor  remains  in  his  own  home  or  moves  into  residential  or  nursing  care  and  also  more  day   to   day   decisions   such   as   the   Donor's   diet,   dress   or   daily   routine.   LPA's   can   be   restricted   or  contain   conditions   limiting   the   Attorney's   authority.   The   Donor   can   also,   if   he   wishes,   include  guidance  for  the  Attorney  in  the  LPA.  This  guidance  is  not  legally  binding  but  could  be  invaluable  to  the  Attorney’.iv   So   that’s   the  definition.   It’s   very  broad.  Would  you  entrust  me  with  your  power  of  attorney?      H:  So  far,  yes.      3.  Sentencing:  arresting  and  trials  in  absence  

  9  

 B:  What  is  your  last  issue,  looking  at  crimes?    H:  For  instance,  if  I  commit  an  offense,  a  parking  violation,  the  police  aren’t  going  to  arrest  me  for  an  offense.  My  natural  person  will  be  summoned  to  court  and/or  fined.      B:  The  first  thing  that  will  be  asked  is  who  was  driving.  There  have  been  all  kinds  of  issues,  because  a  natural  person  can  say.  ‘There  were  two  of  us  that  night  and  I  can’t  remember  who  was  driving’.  And  this  causes  all  kinds  of  legal  problems,  because  the  legal  process  ends  there.      H:  The  other  example  is  if  I  physically  assault  someone,  I  would  be  arrested  or  not?    B:  Yes.    H:  There  is  a  quite  clear  distinction  between  the  two.    B:  Yes,  there  are  loads  of  legal  decisions  covering  very  specific  circumstances,  not  just  arrests  but  also  situations  when  the  police  can  stop  you  to  talk  to  you.   If  you  don’t  stop  and  talk  to  them  they  can  decide  whether  to  arrest  you  or  not.  They  can  ask  questions  to  try  to  establish  your  identity,  but  they  cannot  search  you.  The  rule  of  law  is  unbelievably  strong  in  terms  of  protecting  an  individual’s  rights  from  the  power  of  the  state.  This  is  why  the  continental  idea  of  an  identity  card  can  only  be  enforced  if   the  police  are  granted  the  power  to  demand  to  see  your   identity.   It  was  going  to  be  a  voluntary  system   in  England  because  even   if   they  had   implemented   it,   there  was  still  no  way   that   the  police  would  be  able  to  stop  you  to  check  your  identity.  Even  now,  if  the  police  stop  you  without  probable  cause,  you  have  a  certain  number  of  days  to  produce  your  documentation.  There  is  obviously  some  kind  of  philosophical  gulf  between  England  and  the  continent   in  terms  of  the  relationship  between  the  state  and  the  individual.  It  is  connected  to  what  we  call  the  ‘burden  of  proof’,  which  remains  with  the  state.  If  the  state  takes  someone  to  court,  it  usually  has  to  prove  the  case  against  him  or  her.  We  have  the  right  to  silence  and  although  it  is  being  whittled  away,  it  still  exists  in  theory.    H:  Could  you  summarise  those  situations  in  which  a  human  being  would  be  arrested,  or  the  natural  person  would  be  subject  to  some  kind  of  process  that  is  almost  independent  of  the  human  being,  so  that  the  process  can  take  place  in  their  absence.      B:  You  can  have  trials  in  absence.      H:  Even  for  murder?    B:  Yes,  you  can  tell  me  what  it  is  you  want  to  be  said  and  I  could  speak  on  your  behalf.      A:  Could  I  make  an  appeal  without  being  present?      B:  It’s  very  difficult;  you  would  have  to  provide  instructions.  I  don’t  think  the  court  of  appeal  would  hear   the   appeal.   I   suppose   you   could   instruct   the   solicitors,   but   the   court   of   appeal   might   turn  around  and   say  you  can  make  an  appeal   if   you  are  actually  present   so   that  you  can  pursue   it.  But  quite  recently  there  have  been  appeals  on  behalf  of  dead  people,  for  example,  by  families  who  worry  about   a   historical   or   social   stigma.   And   pardons   have   been   granted   to   people  who  were   shot   for  cowardice   during   the   First   World   War.   The   Criminal   Case   Review   Commission   can   refer   public-­‐interest  cases  to  the  court  of  appeal.  And  then  the  problem  is  whether  the  court  of  appeal  judges  it  by  today’s  standards,  or  by  historical  standards.  And  they  tend  to  apply  today’s  standards.      

  10  

H:  But   for  what   kind  of   crimes  will   one  be  definitely   arrested?   So   far   I   haven’t  managed   to   find   a  handy  guide.      B:  Arrest  full  offenses.  An  arrest  full  offense  is  one  that  you  can  be  arrested  for.  There  is  a  definition.    H:  Is  there  a  general  legal  basis?    B:   ‘Arrest   legal  offences’  are  those  offenses  for  which  you  can  be  sent  to  prison  and   it  depends  on  the   seriousness   of   the   offence.   For   example,   what   happened   in   the   old   days   is   that   prostitutes  couldn’t  be   send   to  prison   for  prostitution   so   they  were   fined,  but   they   could  be   send   to  prison   if  they  didn’t  pay   the   fine.  But  normally   it’s  a  self-­‐serving  definition.   It’s  any  offence  where   the  state  has  decided  that  its  seriousness  warrants  the  police  being  given  the  power  to  take  the  natural  person  and  incarcerate  him  or  her.  But  it  is  very  easy  to  work  out  what  is  an  arrestable  offence,  and  what  is  not.  On  the  other  hand,  there  are  very  strict  limits  to  how  long  people  can  be  held.  The  police  have  to  apply   for  extensions,   and  at   that  moment   they  either  have   to   let   the  person  go,  or  press   charges,  which   is   the  crystallisation  of   the  state’s  allegation  against   the  person  who  may  have  committed  a  crime.      H:  If  a  human  being  can  have  multiple  natural  persons,  for  example,  the  European  Union  accepts  that  Annet  has   two  of   them,  because   she’s   attending  university  here   in   London  and  has  another   life   in  Amsterdam,   then  wouldn’t  biometrics  be   the  way   to  manage   them.  They  will   come  along  and  say,  okay,  which  Annet   is   this?   Is   this   the  English  one,  or   the  other  one?  Biometrics,   instead  of  being  a  considered  force  of  oppression,  could  be  seen  as  a  thing  of   liberation.   I  was  trying  to  persuade  the  credit   union   the   other   day   that   they   should   use   biometrics,   because  most   of   the   people  who   use  their   services   are   street   people.   They   don’t   have   the   capacity   necessary   to   manage   their   natural  persons,  which   is  why  they   live  on  the  street.  But  with  biometrics   they  can  all  come   in,  place  their  thumb  on  the  reader,  and  ask  the  teller  to  deposit  five  pounds  in  their  account.      Chances  of  success    A:  What  are  your  chances  of  succeeding  with  this  project?    H:  It  is  down  to  economics  and  if  the  European  Union  carries  on  becoming  increasingly  more  mobile  and   there’s   enough   economic   growth.   If   there   is   a   financial   incentive   for   it,   the   idea   that   human  beings  can  have  more  than  one  natural  person  is  very  likely  to  be  implemented  and  instrumentalised  in  computer  systems  throughout  the  European  Union.  There  must  be  some  acceptance  or  directive  from  above.   In   the  end  many  of   these   things  come  down  to  convenience.  For   instance,   if   you  met  Bob  before  appearing   in  court  and  you  say,   ‘I’m  Annet  from  Amsterdam’,  but  you’ve  actually  got  a  British  passport  and  live  here,  than  the  court  might  say,  this  British  person  is  the  person  we  are  going  to   deal   with.   Why   would   they   deal   with   the   Dutch   Annet   and   all   her   paperwork   from   the  Netherlands,  there’s  no  need  to  do  that.      B:  People  can  have  two  passports  according  to  English  law.  We  still  recognise  people’s  right  to  have  an   independent  existence  and  be  accountable  to  another  state,  but   they  aren’t  mutually  exclusive.  And  both  passports  will  probably  be  in  the  same  name.      H:  People  often  have  passports   in  different  names,  for  example,  because  they  got  married,  or  their  name  cannot  be  written  in  other  alphabets,  etc….    B:  Yes  that’s  true.  How  did  the  people  you  spoke  to  at  the  European  commission  react?    

  11  

H:  They  hadn’t  thought  of   it,  and  after   I  explained   it,   they  thought   it  was  pretty  obvious.   It  already  exists  and  is  likely  to  continue  and  become  prevalent.  Also,  when  Annet  is  here,  people  don’t  want  to  know  what’s   going   on   legally   in   the  Netherlands,   she’s   just   here.   For   example,   her   university   only  wants  to  know  where  she’s  staying  in  the  UK,  what  her  bank  account  number  is  and  how  long  she‘ll  be  here.  It  is  just  a  kind  of  ease,  ease  of  interaction.      B:  What  happens  if  people  have  avatars?  There  are  role-­‐playing  games  where  they  can  earn  credits  that  they  can  actually  buy  and  sell.  This  means  that  you  can  create  different  online  identities.      H:  I  would  see  that  as  a  kernel,  a  seed  of  an  identity.    B:  Presumably  you  can  also  sell  that.  The  person  at  the  keyboard  only  needs  to  have  access.    H:  Unless  you  are  conducting  relationships  with  other  bodies  with  that  name,  then  it  would  still  be  seen  as  an  alias,  wouldn’t  it?    B:  An  alias  yes,  but  I  mean,  what’s  the  difference?  If  you  ultimately  end  up  being  able  to  buy  and  sell  an  alias  and  turn  it  into  hard  cash,  then  it  doesn’t  matter  who  is  at  the  other  end  of  the  connection.  You  can  say,  ‘I  will  sell  you  my  created  identity  in  that  particular  space  or  Internet  world’.    A:  But  you’re  still  confined  to  that  virtual  world.      H:  Yes,  and   if  that   identity   links  to  other  online  worlds,  beyond  that  particular  space,  or  with  other  entities,   then   I  would   say   that   it   is   another   person.   The  big   difference,   though,   between   a   human  being  and  a  natural  person,   is  that  a  natural  person  can  be  administered  remotely,  and  be  in  many  places   at   the   same   time.   It’s   almost   like   the   foundations   for   a   network,   electronic   networking.   To  manage  me  physically  you’ve  got  to  be  here,  but  who  knows  what  is  going  on  with  all  those  different  bits  of  paper  around  the  world  that  are  currently   in  my  name.   Is  my  personhood  being  adapted  or  modified  without  me  even  being  aware  of   it,  and  how   is   it  being  changed?   In  a  way   this  has  been  going  on  for  hundreds  of  years,  hasn’t  it?    B:   Yes,   it   reminds   me   of   the   moment   when   cheques   were   invented.   People   deposited   gold   and  bullion   coins   with   goldsmiths   and   asked   for   a   receipt,   which   became   a   ‘bankers   note’   that  represented  the  bank’s  promise  to  pay  on  demand  the  amount  specified  in  that  note.  The  goldsmiths  realised  that  not  everyone  wanted  their  money  at  the  same  time  so  they  lent  it  to  other  parties.  But  if  all  their  depositors  wanted  their  all  their  money  at  the  same  time  –  effectively  a  run  on  the  bank  –  then  the  bank  suddenly  found  itself  in  deep  water.    H:  I  guess  we  agree  on  most  things.    B:  Yes,  absolutely.  I  find  it  difficult,  the  move  from  the  solid  world  to  thinking  about  what  lies  behind  it   because  we   take   it   so  much   for   granted.  We   live   in   a   time  of   enormous   technological   advances  where  people  can  do  these  things.  In  the  old  days  you  lived  in  one  place  and  you  were  one  person.  Somehow  that  seemed  easier….    

                                                                                                                 Notes    i  A  credit  union  is  a  cooperative  financial  institution  that  is  owned  and  controlled  by  its  members  and  operated  for  the  purpose  of  promoting  thrift,  providing  credit  at  competitive  rates,  and  providing  other  financial  services  to  its  members  (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Credit_union#cite_note-­‐0).  

  12  

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         ii  The  Turing  test  evaluates  a  machine’s  ability  to  demonstrate  intelligence.  In  the  test  a  human  judge  engages  in  a  natural  language  conversation  with  a  human  and  a  machine,  each  of  which  tries  to  appear  human.  All  the  participants  are  separated  from  each  another  and  from  the  machine.  If  the  judge  cannot  reliably  distinguish  between  the  machine  and  the  human  responses,  the  machine  is  said  to  have  passed  the  test.  iii  http://solicitorpages.co.uk/381392-­‐Lasting-­‐Power-­‐Of-­‐Attorney-­‐Uk-­‐Law.html  iv  Ibid.