Not "democratic", but "fair and accountable". You are effectively reinventing a legal system with the CoC rules and its enforcement. But it's a "kangaroo cour

Not "democratic", but "fair and accountable". You are effectively reinventing a legal system with the CoC rules and its enforcement. But it's a "kangaroo court". In the real world, we realised that power needs checks and balances. Justice must be seen to have been served in a fair and proportionate manner. That's why we have public hearings, jury trials, the defendant has the right to put forward their side of the story with legal representation, evidence is submitted by both sides, we have cross-examination, sentences are passed with reference to established precedent, and there is also the right to appeal a judgement. If organisations take it upon themselves to invent a faux legal system under which to operate, they can not omit the checks and balances without creating a system ripe for abuse and miscarriage of justice. The problem with CoC "enforcement" is that it is done behind closed doors with no oversight or accountability. The "defendant" has no right to properly hear the charges, or to present their case, or to appeal against it. It is manifestly unfair. As for "not giving anyone more power than they already had", this is also untrue. Committees and individuals have been explicitly bestowed with the power to enforce CoCs by pronouncing judgements and inflicting their will upon the members of their organisations. They have great power, but not the corresponding requirement for accountability to their members.