Scroll to top

© 2024 | The Ikoku Center ™ | All Rights Reserved
Founding | Governing | Ethics | Faith | Policies

Founding

Introduction

The founding of The Alvan Ikoku Center for Ethics has been at the behest and impetus solely of the Founder, Alvan Azinna Chibuzo Ikoku, and has proceeded as follows:

Founding History

Section 1.1.0. The Alvan Ikoku Center for Ethics was established:

1.1.1. Founding Entity
in 2021 by its sole Founder, Fiduciary, Member, and President, Alvan Azinna Chibuzo Ikoku.
1.1.2. Founding Entities
as part of ongoing work he has carried out for over three decades, leading also to his founding of The Ikoku Charitable Trusts, The Ikoku Foundations, The Ikoku Group, The Ikoku University, Publiks Inc, and Humana Sancta.
1.1.3. Founding Fulfillments
with the understanding that, where appropriate and authorized solely by the Founder, these distinct and independent entities will endeavor to coordinate efforts toward the fulfillment of their respective missions and purposes.

Founding Concerns

Section 1.2.0. The Alvan Ikoku Center for Ethics was also founded and developed in response to the concerns below:

1.2.1. Concern for Africa
the Founder’s longstanding concern for Africa.
1.2.2. Concern for Diasporas
the Founder’s longstanding concern for the global diasporas of Africa, in the Americas, Asia, Australasia, and Europe.
1.2.3. Concern for Coexisting Communities
the Founder’s longstanding concern for communities coexisting — ethically and humanely — with those in Africa and its global diasporas.
1.2.4. Concern for Ethics
the Founder’s longstanding concern for issues pertaining to ethics.
1.2.5. Concern for Humanity
the Founder’s longstanding concern for the human and humane, and attendant concern regarding de- and subhumanizing conduct and resulting instances of inhuman and inhumane treatment, with the Founder’s insights from such concern proving valuable during several periods, preceding and during the formation of The Alvan Ikoku Center for Ethics, where he was subject to inhumane conduct and treatment that entailed persistent, pervasive and profound violations of the confidentiality and privacy, freedom and liberty, independence and integrity, and, ultimately, sanctity of his being, body, and brain, as well as self, soul, and spirit.*

*for further, see Inhumane Conduct section below.

1.2.6. Concern for Indifference
the Founder’s longstanding concern for issues pertaining to difference, with the Founder’s insights from such concern proving valuable during the aforementioned periods of inhuman and inhumane conduct and treatment, with such insights elucidating that — as also experienced by others — such inhumane conduct and treatment depend upon and employ notions of human and perceived difference (including those pertaining to ability, birth, caste, citizenship, culture, ethnicity, gender, medical information, origin, race, religion, and sex) to elicit active and passive indifference as well as support for persistent, pervasive and profound violations of a person’s humanness.
1.2.7. Concern for Spirituality
the Founder’s longstanding concern for the spiritual nature of humans, with further insights from such concern emanating in response to the aforementioned periods, as well as past and present difficulties, even failures of prevailing forms of civics, commerce, education, law, politics, public discourse, and religion to provide a meaningful ethical and moral basis for a good life in contemporary society, one adequate for ensuring the basic human and humane coexistence as well as spiritual and theological equanimity of diverse human beings living in shared societies.
1.2.8. Concern for Vulnerability
the Founder’s longstanding concern for issues pertaining to lessening intractable problems and undue burdens experienced by vulnerable populations due to the aforementioned conduct and treatment, failures to prevent or remedy them, and the limits of processes that privilege majoritarian decision-making, interests, social structures, and views within a given community, institution, or polity.

Founding Mission

Section 1.3.0. The Alvan Ikoku Center’s founding mission and purposes are therefore:

1.3.1. To Foster
to foster ethical practice and study concerned with Africa, its global diasporas, and common and coexisting societies of enduring concern to the Founder.
1.3.2. To Serve
to serve a range of communities touched by the Founder, including through disciplines in which he has trained and practiced.
1.3.3. To Fulfill
to fulfill its mission and purposes as a faith-aligned organization entity, abiding by the basic principles and practices of the Humana Sancta Faith (the “Humana Faith” and “Sancthumanism”).
1.3.4. To Succeed
and to succeed in developing an organization entity — as well as communities — where the aforementioned inhuman and inhumane conduct and treatment are considered incompatible with their principles and values as well as basic civility, decency, dignity and society, and so do not become or remain the means for any act or activity, benefit or good, product or service, mission or purpose.
Two Mannequins, One Yellow, the Other Black, Arranged in Yang-Yang or Twin Fetal Positions
Ethics (Javier Miranda)

Focus

Provision

The Alvan Ikoku Center for Ethics has also been developed, and its activities and administration focused, as follows:

Activities and Administration

Section 1.5.0. All acts, activities, affairs, agents, arrangements, assets, and equivalent of The Alvan Ikoku Center for Ethics are administered solely via the Founder, Alvan Azinna Chibuzo Ikoku, and solely via the Founder’s authorization, as provided for in the Codes and Policies, and thus focused to ensure their alignment with and furtherance of the mission and purposes of the organization. Accordingly, The Alvan Ikoku Center for Ethics’s administration is conducted solely via means limited by the organization’s entity status as:

1.5.1. Faith-Aligned
a faith-aligned organization.
1.5.2. Independent
an independent organization.
1.5.3. Non-Governmental
a non-governmental organization.
1.5.4. Non-Political, -Partisan
a non-political and non-partisan organization.
1.5.5. Non-Public, Private
a non-public and private organization.
1.5.6. Philanthropic
a philanthropic organization.
1.5.7. Single-Assetsholder
an organization whose assets and equivalent are wholly held and controlled by its sole Member and Founder, Alvan Azinna Chibuzo Ikoku.
1.5.8. Single-Member
an organization wholly controlled by its sole Member and Founder, Alvan Azinna Chibuzo Ikoku.

Areas and Efforts

Section 1.6.0. The Alvan Ikoku Center for Ethics administers its efforts via six (6) areas of focus:

1.6.1. Ethics | Care
Ethics | Care
1.6.2. Ethics | Civics
Ethics | Civics
1.6.3. Ethics | Communities
Ethics | Communities
1.6.4. Ethics | Education
Ethics | Education
1.6.5. Ethics | Practice
Ethics | Practice
1.6.6. Ethics | Research
Ethics | Research

Faith and Spirituality

Section 1.7.0. The Alvan Ikoku Center for Ethics’s faith-based commitments are focused as follows:

1.7.1. Humana Faith
that none of its acts, activities, agents, arrangements, or equivalent may in any way come in conflict with the Humana Sancta Faith (the “Humana Faith” and “Sancthumanism”) as such faith is administered, defined and interpreted solely by Alvan Azinna Chibuzo Ikoku, serving also as sole Founder and Presiding Officer of Humana Sancta.
1.7.2.1. Sanctity of Human, As-Is
that such non-conflict with the Humana Faith align with a belief in the sanctity of each human being as-is.
1.7.2.2. Sanctity of Human, Body
that such non-conflict with the Humana Faith align with a belief that the confidentiality and privacy, freedom and liberty, independence and integrity, and sanctity of each human’s inner being, brain, and body — as well as attendant rights to such — are inalienable, sacrosanct and thus absolute.
1.7.2.3. Sanctity of Human, Spirit
that such non-conflict with the Humana Faith align with a belief that the confidentiality and privacy, freedom and liberty, independence and integrity, and sanctity of each human’s inner self, soul, and spirit — as well as attendant rights to such — are inalienable, sacrosanct and thus absolute.
1.7.2.4. Sanctity of Human, Thoughts
that such non-conflict with the Humana Faith align with a belief that the confidentiality and privacy, freedom and liberty, independence and integrity, and sanctity of each human’s thoughts and mental activities, functions, and tasks, whether conducted in silence or voiced in solitude — and attendant rights to such — are inalienable, sacrosanct and thus absolute.
1.7.2.5. Sanctity of Human, Will
that such non-conflict with the Humana Faith align with a belief that the confidentiality and privacy, freedom and liberty, independence and integrity, and sanctity of each human’s will as to own consciousness, conscience, consent, as well as person — and attendant rights to such — are inalienable, sacrosanct and thus to be fully respected.
1.7.3. Sanctity of Protection
that such non-conflict with the Humana Faith include a faith-based commitment to protect against any infringement of the aforementioned beliefs and rights, including protection against any diminishment of a human’s humanness, humaneness, or humanity, or status and treatment as an equal and full human being as-is.
1.7.4. Sanctity of Provision
that such non-conflict with the Humana Faith include a faith-based commitment to provide for the aforementioned beliefs and rights, resulting in their highest possible level of spiritual and substantive enjoyment, for the Founder and every follower of Humana Sancta, worthy of the respect their humanity requires.

Incompatibility with Founding

Section 1.8.0. The activities, agents, and arrangements of The Alvan Ikoku Center for Ethics are therefore focused and limited via determinations of incompatibility with the company, as delineated below:

1.8.1. Above, Notwithstanding Proviso
firstly, above and notwithstanding any provision of applicable law or regulation, the Codes and Policies, or any equivalent founding or legal documents, no act, activity, agent, arrangement, or equivalent of The Alvan Ikoku Center for Ethics may
1.8.1.1. Above, Notwithstanding, Infringement, Founding
effect, facilitate, or otherwise foster any infringement of the Founding of The Alvan Ikoku Center for Ethics or the Governance of The Alvan Ikoku Center for Ethics, as described in the Codes and Policies (respectively, the “Founding” and the “Governance”).
1.8.1.2. Above, Notwithstanding, Infringement, Faith
effect, facilitate, or otherwise foster any infringement of the aforementioned faith-based commitments.
1.8.1.3. Above, Notwithstanding, Infringement, Policy
effect, facilitate, or otherwise foster any infringement of the Codes and Policies.
1.8.1.4. Above, Notwithstanding, Inhumane Conduct
effect, facilitate, or otherwise foster any of the aforementioned inhumane conduct.
1.8.1.5. Above, Notwithstanding Non-Preclusion
with the understanding that the lawfulness, perceived benefit, or equivalent consideration of a given act, activity, agent, arrangement, or equivalent does not preclude its incompatibility or its infringing, inhumane or equivalent nature in relation to The Alvan Ikoku Center for Ethics, which is to be determined solely by the Founder.
1.8.2. Adjudication, Incompatibility
thus, secondly, any such infringing or inhumane activity, agent, or arrangement — as well as any advantage, benefit, information, or property attributed to it — is to be adjudicated solely by the Founder as incompatible with The Alvan Ikoku Center for Ethics itself as well as its founding, governance, and overall administration.
1.8.3. Determination, Incompatibility
thus, thirdly, each activity, agent, and arrangement relating to The Alvan Ikoku Center for Ethics is subject to determinations of incompatibility further delineated below, namely,
1.8.3.1. Determination, Incompatibility, Activities
where the Founder determines that an act or activity effects, facilitates, or otherwise fosters any infringement of the Founding or Governance, any infringement of the aforementioned faith-based commitments, any infringement of the Codes and Policies, or any of the aforementioned inhumane conduct.
1.8.3.2. Determination, Incompatibility, Agents
where the Founder determines that an agent effects, facilitates, or otherwise fosters any infringement of the Founding or Governance, any infringement of the aforementioned faith-based commitments, any infringement of the Codes and Policies, or any of the aforementioned inhumane conduct.
1.8.3.3. Determination, Incompatibility, Arrangements
where the Founder determines that an arrangement effects, facilitates, or otherwise fosters any infringement of the Founding or Governance, any infringement of the aforementioned faith-based commitments, any infringement of the Codes and Policies, or any of the aforementioned inhumane conduct.
1.8.3.4. Determination, Incompatibility, Persons, Natural
where the Founder determines that a natural person effects, facilitates, or otherwise fosters any infringement of the Founding or Governance, any infringement of the aforementioned faith-based commitments, any infringement of the Codes and Policies, or any of the aforementioned inhumane conduct.
1.8.3.5. Determination, Example, Persons, Natural
as has been determined, among natural persons, in the cases of Eleanor Marie Brown (AB, Brown; JD, Yale) of Jamaica and the United States of America; Rafael Nadal Parera of Manacor, Mallorca, Spain; Cristiano Ronaldo dos Santos Aveiro of Funchal, Madeira, Portugal; and Jeff Williams of Telegraph Hill, San Francisco, California, United States of America, as well as the agents of the aforementioned and analogous, identical or similar persons engaged in analogous, identical or similar conduct;
1.8.3.6. Determination, Incompatibility, Persons, Legal
where the Founder determines that a legal person effects, facilitates, or otherwise fosters any infringement of the Founding or Governance, any infringement of the aforementioned faith-based commitments, any infringement of the Codes and Policies, or any of the aforementioned inhumane conduct.
1.8.3.7. Determination, Example, Persons, Legal
as has been determined, among legal persons, in the cases of Leland Stanford Jr University of Palo Alto, California, United States of America and The New York Times Company of New York City, New York, United States of America, as well as the agents of the aforementioned and analogous, identical or similar persons engaged in analogous, identical or similar conduct;
1.8.3.8. Determination, Incompatibility, Persons, Public
where the Founder determines that a government, political, public or state authority, entity, office, or person effects, facilitates, or otherwise fosters any infringement of the Founding or Governance, any infringement of the aforementioned faith-based commitments, any infringement of the Codes and Policies, or any of the aforementioned inhumane conduct.
1.8.3.9. Determination, Example, Persons, Public
as has been determined, among political persons, in the cases of the Central Intelligence Agency of the United States of America; Former President Barack Hussein Obama (AB, Columbia; JD, Harvard) of Honolulu, Hawaii and Chicago, Illinois, United States of America; and the Democratic Party of San Francisco, of California, and of the United States of America, as well as the agents of the aforementioned and analogous, identical or similar persons engaged in analogous, identical or similar conduct;
1.8.4. Determination, Incompatible, Consequence
thus, fourthly, subsequent to the Founder’s determination of incompatibility, such activity, agent, arrangement, or person is to be deemed unauthorized and unqualified — entailing, where applicable, the revocation of any authorization or qualification — to be an activity, agent, arrangement, or person of The Alvan Ikoku Center for Ethics, in any capacity, especially that pertaining to decision-making, leadership, membership, stakeholding, or voting, and in any way as part of its administration, or as a recipient of any assets, contract, funding, properties, support, work, or equivalent.
1.8.5. Incompatibility, Reporting, Informing Founder
and upon discovery by any person of any indication, instance, or possibility of incompatibility, such person must directly report to and fully inform the Founder of such issues.
1.8.6. Incompatibility, Sole Adjudicator, Founder
with the understanding that the Founder is the sole person with powers to conduct inquiries, investigations, and other proceedings regarding such issues and make adjudications and determinations of compatibility or incompatibility, confirmed and executed only via the Founder’s authorization.

Inhumane Conduct

Section 1.9.0. The aforementioned inhumane conduct include the behaviors delineated below, properly understood to not only treat a person inhumanely but to also risk rendering the treater inhumane, and so they are to be absent from any and all acts, activities, agents, arrangements, and equivalent relating to The Alvan Ikoku Center for Ethics, and are not to be effected, facilitated or fostered in any way or via any manner, means, method, or mode, or to any degree:

1.9.1. Denial, Autonomy
the denial or pervasive infringement of a human being’s autonomy, rights to autonomy, or protections of such — via the preclusion of meaningful consent or decision-making for the self.
1.9.2. Denial, Confidentiality
the denial or pervasive infringement of a human being’s confidentiality, rights to confidentiality, or protections of such — via the preclusion of meaningful opportunity or possibility for confidences or confidential acts, affairs, matters, relations, or services.
1.9.2.1. Denial, Confidentiality, Body
the denial or pervasive infringement of a human being’s confidentiality of body and person, rights to confidentiality of body and person, or protections of such — via the preclusion of meaningful opportunity or possibility for being confidential or living confidentially, by or with oneself, with absolute confidentiality and thus without disclosure or dissemination.
1.9.2.2. Denial, Confidentiality, Mind
the denial or pervasive infringement of a human being’s confidentiality of mind and thought, rights to confidentiality of mind and thought, or protections of such — via the preclusion of meaningful opportunity or possibility for cognizing or thinking confidentially, by, to or with oneself, with absolute confidentiality and thus without disclosure or dissemination.*
1.9.2.3. Denial, Confidentiality, Speech
the denial or pervasive infringement of a human being’s confidentiality of conversation and speech, rights to confidentiality of conversation and speech, or protections of such — via the preclusion of meaningful opportunity or possibility for conversing or speaking confidentially, by, to or with oneself, with absolute confidentiality and thus without disclosure or dissemination.
1.9.3. Denial, Dignity
the denial or pervasive infringement of a human being’s dignity, rights to dignity, or protections of such — via public debasement or degradation, social excoriation or stripping.
1.9.4. Denial, Equality
the denial or pervasive infringement of a human being’s consideration, recognition, and treatment as equally and fully human, and so deserving of a fundamental reciprocity — to not do to that person what is not done simultaneously to each and every human being, or what would not be done to oneself or one’s most loved one.
1.9.5. Denial, Freedom
the denial or pervasive infringement of a human being’s freedom, rights to freedom, or protections of such — via any means of de facto or de jure enslavement, forced labor, or indentured servitude.
1.9.5.1. Denial, Freedom, Body
the denial or pervasive infringement of a human being’s freedom of body and person, rights to freedom of body and person, or protections of such — via the preclusion of meaningful opportunity or possibility for being free or living freely, by or with oneself, with absolute freedom and thus without coercion or constraint.
1.9.5.2. Denial, Freedom, Mind
the denial or pervasive infringement of a human being’s freedom of mind and thought, rights to freedom of mind and thought, or protections of such — via the preclusion of meaningful opportunity or possibility for cognizing or thinking freely, by, to or with oneself, with absolute freedom and thus without coercion or constraint.*
1.9.5.3. Denial, Freedom, Speech
the denial or pervasive infringement of a human being’s freedom of conversation and speech, rights to freedom of conversation and speech, or protections of such — via the preclusion of meaningful opportunity or possibility for conversing or speaking freely, by, to or with oneself, with absolute freedom and thus without coercion or constraint.
1.9.6. Denial, Liberty
the denial or pervasive infringement of a human being’s liberty, rights to liberty, or protections of such — via any means of de facto or de jure disenfranchisement, arbitrary or undue imposition by a community or state.
1.9.6.1. Denial, Liberty, Body
the denial or pervasive infringement of a human being’s liberty of body and person, rights to liberty of body and person, or protections of such — via the preclusion of meaningful opportunity or possibility for being libertied or living liberally, by or with oneself, with absolute liberty and thus without imposition or intrusion.
1.9.6.2. Denial, Liberty, Mind
the denial or pervasive infringement of a human being’s liberty of mind and thought, rights to liberty of mind and thought, or protections of such — via the preclusion of meaningful opportunity or possibility for cognizing or thinking liberally, by, to or with oneself, with absolute liberty and thus without imposition or intrusion.*
1.9.6.3. Denial, Liberty, Speech
the denial or pervasive infringement of a human being’s liberty of conversation and speech, rights to liberty of conversation and speech, or protections of such — via the preclusion of meaningful opportunity or possibility for conversing or speaking liberally, by, to or with oneself, with absolute liberty and thus without imposition or intrusion.
1.9.7. Denial, Privacy
the denial or pervasive infringement of a human being’s privacy, rights to privacy, or protections of such — via the preclusion of meaningful opportunity or possibility for private life or private acts, affairs, matters, relations, or services.
1.9.7.1. Denial, Privacy, Body
the denial or pervasive infringement of a human being’s privacy of body and person, rights to privacy of body and person, or protections of such — via the preclusion of meaningful opportunity or possibility for being private or living privately, by or with oneself, with absolute privacy and thus without detection or dissemination.
1.9.7.2. Denial, Privacy, Mind
the denial or pervasive infringement of a human being’s privacy of mind and thought, rights to privacy of mind and thought, or protections of such — via the preclusion of meaningful opportunity or possibility for cognizing or thinking privately, by, to or with oneself, with absolute privacy and thus without detection or dissemination.*
1.9.7.3. Denial, Privacy, Speech
the denial or pervasive infringement of a human being’s privacy of conversation and speech, rights to privacy of conversation and speech, or protections of such — via the preclusion of meaningful opportunity or possibility for conversing or speaking privately, by, to or with oneself, with absolute privacy and thus without detection or dissemination.
1.9.8. Denial, Private Property, Work
the denial or pervasive infringement of a human being’s private property or work, rights to private property or work, or protections of such — via the preclusion of meaningful opportunity or possibility for personal or private labor, office or work space, opportunity or pursuit, remuneration or value.
1.9.9. Exhibition, Exposure
the exhibition or exposure of a human being — via a totalizing regime that provides other persons, even the greater public, an unconsented surfeit of access and information regarding the human being, while systemically withholding basic, fundamental and necessary information from the human for ceasing any of the aforementioned inhumane conduct.
1.9.10. Experimentation, Testing
the experimentation, research, or testing on a human being — especially for any benefits or purposes or via any means or methods that are not fully informed or unconsented.
1.9.11. Extortion, Ransom
the extortion or ransom of a human being.
1.9.12. Harassment, Stalking
the persistent or pervasive harassment, stalking, or tracking of a human being.
1.9.13. Harm, Injuring
the insistent or persistent physical, physiological or psychological abuse, harm, or injury of a human being.
1.9.14. Human Use, Instrumentality
the instrumental use of a human being as means to others’s ends.
1.9.15. Human Utility, Utilitarianism
the utilitarian use or utility of a human being for the greater good or the increased or maximal gain of a community, field, group, or state.
1.9.16. Indifference, Cruelty
the cruel or depravedly indifferent treatment of a human being — via maleficence, malfeasance, or malevolence meant to incur pain or suffering.
1.9.17. Isolation, Marginalization
the isolation or marginalization of a human being from humans — and vice versa — via any means of ostracizing or scapegoating, stigmatization or vilification.
1.9.18. Persecution, Prejudiced
the insistent or persistent persecution of a human being — for any aims or purposes or via any means or methods that are explicitly based on or motivated by bias, discrimination, prejudice, or equivalent.
1.9.19. Sporting, Toying
the sporting or toying with a human being — via any means of amusing or entertaining oneself, betting, chasing, competing, gambling, gaming, hunting, or racing against the unconsenting human.
1.9.20. Surveillance, Mind
the detection, dissemination, monitoring, policing, recording, reporting, surveillance, tracking, transmission, or equivalent of a human being’s thoughts and other activities, functions, and tasks of the brain and mind.*
1.9.21. Targeting, as Conditions
the targeting of a human being to make any of the aforementioned inhumane conduct a condition of advancement, affiliation, association, care, existence, learning, life, participation, research, service, support, training, wealth, work, or equivalent — especially where it is not such a condition for every other person.
1.9.22. Targeting, as Means
the targeting of a human being to make any of the aforementioned inhumane conduct a means for acquiring, disenfranchising, claiming, coercing, coopting, creating, intruding or participating in, sharing, stealing, taking over, usurping, or otherwise engaging in the administration, control, development, ownership, or equivalent of any asset, interest, property, share, stock, or equivalent of The Alvan Ikoku Center for Ethics or the Founder, Alvan Azinna Chibuzo Ikoku, or any other entity, office, or person.
1.9.23. Totalitarianism, Incremental
the enabling of a community, entity, office, person, sector, or state to subject a human being to any of the aforementioned inhumane conduct, and thus instantiate incremental, often de facto forms of totalitarianism.†
1.9.24. Tyranny, Incremental
the enabling of a community, entity, office, person, sector, or state to choose, decide, or vote to subject a human being to any of the aforementioned inhumane conduct, and thus instantiate incremental, often de facto forms of tyranny.‡
*. Note
* with the understanding that protected activities, functions, and tasks of the brain and mind include, but are not limited to, those of cognition, communication, conscience, consciousness, dreaming, emotion, ideation, memory, perception, physiology, sensation, signaling, thought, and equivalent.
†. Note
† with the understanding that totalitarianism develops where private or public infringement has become so pervasive, or totalizing, as to erase or override distinctions between personal, private, public and state, or render a human’s activities or affairs, being, body, or brain, self, soul, or spirit the domains, properties, utilities, or equivalent of others.
‡. Note
‡ with the understanding that tyranny develops where private or public governance, often via misleadingly evoking ‘we the people,’ has become so arbitrary as to revert to acting as a government of peoples, not of laws (cf. John Adams, John Stuart Mill, Alexis de Tocqueville).

Intrinsic Refusals

Section 1.10.0. In light, therefore, of the aforementioned, incompatibility with The Alvan Ikoku Center for Ethics entails the following basic refusals, each intrinsic to the basic humanity, humanness, and humaneness of each human being, including the Founder, and to the respect such humanity requires:

1.10.1. Basic Refusal, Inhumane Conduct
that The Alvan Ikoku Center for Ethics and the Founder resolutely refuse to give any agreement, assent, authorization, consent, license, permission, or equivalent — or to waive any attendant decisions or rights — for any of the aforementioned inhumane conduct, in any way, via any manner, means, method, or mode, to any degree, under any circumstances, for any period, or for any perceived benefit, end, goal, good, interest, mission, need, objective, purpose, reason, or equivalent.
1.10.2. Basic Refusal, Inhumane Use, Utility
that The Alvan Ikoku Center for Ethics and the Founder resolutely refuse to give any agreement, authorization, assent, consent, license, permission, or equivalent — or to waive any attendant decisions or rights — for any access or use of The Alvan Ikoku Center for Ethics or Founder, or any of The Alvan Ikoku Center for Ethics’s or the Founder’s activities, affairs, agents, arrangements, or assets, or being, body or brain, or self, soul, or spirit, or any equivalent, with the effect or intent of construing, employing or otherwise using the Founder — or any human being — instrumentally or utilitarianly, as a means or medium, for a greater good or to an end of another person or any association, community, field, group, polity, public, or society of persons, in any way, via any manner, means, method, or mode, to any degree, under any circumstances, for any period, or for any perceived benefit, end, goal, good, interest, mission, need, objective, purpose, reason, or equivalent.
1.10.3. Basic Refusal, Intrusive Access
that The Alvan Ikoku Center for Ethics and the Founder resolutely refuse to give any agreement, assent, authorization, consent, license, permission, or equivalent — or to waive any attendant decisions or rights — for any access to, entry or intrusion into, or recording or transmission of the administration of The Alvan Ikoku Center for Ethics or Founder, or any of The Alvan Ikoku Center for Ethics’s or the Founder’s activities, affairs, agents, arrangements, assets, or any equivalent, in any way, via any manner, means, method, or mode, to any degree, under any circumstances, for any period, or for any perceived benefit, end, goal, good, interest, mission, need, objective, purpose, reason, or equivalent.
1.10.4. Basic Refusals as Principle
that these four basic refusals — at once human and humane — together constitute a fundamental limiting and restricting principle, and wherever there is conflict or question, legally override and supersede any conflicting clause or interpretation of any alleged, assumed, construed, presumed or otherwise made or understood agreement, arrangement, article, assent, authorization, bylaw, choice, code, consent, contract, decision, guideline, law, license, order, permission, policy, principle, provision, regulation, right, term, vote, warrant, or equivalent.
Life (Isaac Quesada)

Form

Provision

The Alvan Ikoku Center for Ethics’s organizational form is as delineated below:

Formation

Section 1.12.0. The Alvan Ikoku Center for Ethics is formally organized as a philanthropic organization entity, under the aegis and administration of The Alvan Ikoku Philanthropies — a division of The Alvan Ikoku Group LLC — and in partnership with The Chinyere and Chinelo Ikoku Foundation and The Alvan Azinna Chibuzo Ikoku Foundation.

Names

Section 1.13.0. The Alvan Ikoku Center for Ethics is also officially known under the business names, The Alvan Azinna Chibuzo Ikoku Center, The Alvan Ikoku Center, and The Ikoku Center. All three names, as used in official Ikoku Center documents, products, services, and sites, refer to the same aforementioned organization entity.

Conclusion

— Conditions and Terms

— 1.14.1. All of the aforementioned in this section constitutes the Conditions and Terms of Founding of The Alvan Ikoku Center for Ethics (the “Conditions and Terms of Founding” and “Conditions of Founding”) and forms an integral part of the Conditions and Terms of The Alvan Ikoku Center for Ethics, the Codes and Policies of The Alvan Ikoku Center for Ethics, as well as The Ikoku Center Conduct and Service Agreement you may enter into with The Alvan Ikoku Center for Ethics.

— Concerns and Questions

— 1.14.2. Please report any concerns about code or policy violations, and send any questions you may have regarding the Conditions of Founding or The Ikoku Center Conduct and Service Agreement, to policies@ikokuphilanthropies.com.

— Concluding

— 1.14.3. And as a concluding aviso and proviso, you are informed as well as reminded that by commencing or continuing any conduct or service relating to The Alvan Ikoku Center for Ethics — in any way, either directly or indirectly, and via any manner, means, method, or mode — you enter into The Ikoku Center Conduct and Service Agreement and agree to abide by and be legally bound by the Policy conditions, principles, protections, and terms described above, and the Codes and Policies, in their entirety without modification or severability, as amended from time to time solely by the Founder.

Feeling, Madonna della Pietà (Grant Whitty)
Reading (Matthew Henry)
Meeting (Ricardo Gomez Angel)
Understanding (Yang Miao)

Also at the Center

The Ikoku Center is dedicated to the study and application of ethics for the benefit of communities, institutions, lives, and societies — in Africa and across the globe. And so in accordance with the above, the Center provides the following:

I.

Examining the Good

A center committed to studying and applying our various methods for examining the good — via analysis, conversation, deliberation, education, and further evaluation of beliefs, laws, mores, norms, values, and virtues.

II.

Being, Doing Good

A center also committed to studying and applying our various modes for being good, doing good, and living a good life among others — via forms of community, conscience, duty, obligation, reciprocity, responsibility, and service.

III.

Providing the Good

A center also committed to studying and applying our various means for providing the good to ourselves as well as others — via the ethics of care, civics, communities, economies, institutions, and the professions.

More About Us

The Ikoku Center

About Us • Founding • Governance

Care
Civics
Ethics