N3 is going to need its own version of a "bar exam" to certify legal professionals to operate in the N3 jurisdiction.

If you don't certify law professionals and judges inside N3, then that falls to other jurisdictions to do.

source code for Designated Smart Contracts should be explained line by line to make them accessible and inclusive to non-coders.

Participating in governance at all times may not be a realistic duty unless the governance process isn't heavy.

Also, what happens if someone is sick, or is raising a young child? Are they in violation and at risk of losing citizenship?

There are three things happening in 4.3.a,

What about sticking to simply: 4.3.a "Every Citizen shall uphold this Constitution." 4.3.b "Citizens are expected to participate in governance when their life permits."

Suggest removing the part about needing to act in accordance with the values outline in the N3 Manifesto for the reason that it violates the free will of citizens to compel them to follow the values of any document even if the manifesto is a good doc.

This seams to fit better in article 3.

I think this is an unrealistic law. Horses die in battles, bears, wolves, and other animals may attack or be killed with people in the wild in entertainment based movies. Do we want to remove all these things in movies?

What is the intent here? What if we rephrase to something like: "The production of content where an animal is actually hurt in the process of production is banned and is a crime. Further all content that promotes abuse, mistreatment, cruel acts towards animals is banned."

Add: From forces outside their natural environment.

We shouldn't protect or care for an animal being attacked by another animal in nature. We also shouldn't be compelled to provide care to any animal against our will.

I'd like to take it a step further and say that animals in the food industry can't be kept in cages or confined to a small area that doesn't let them live a natural or unhappy life.

This isn't always possible. For example, if a hunter is hunting an elk, they may shoot the elk and it will take a little while for the elk to actually die. Or if you're being attacked by a bear, or mountain lion you can't just instantly kill it in a single blow.

We need a definition of what includes an animal, unless we literally mean even mosquitoes, flies, bed bugs etc. If we don't mean to include these, then we need to clearly define what is an animal with rights.

This is extremely vague.

few problems with this. if killing wild animals is genocide, does that mean killing dogs or cats on mass is not because they are domesticated?

Also, what if your house is invested with wild field mice? Is killing them an act of genocide?

What is the intent of this line of text?

the definition of the word biocide doesn't fit the context of this article.

"A biocide is defined in the European legislation as a chemical substance or microorganism intended to destroy, deter, render harmless, or exert a controlling effect on any harmful organism" source; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biocide