The Code means whatever the Presiding Quaesitor and the majority of the voters at Tribunal want it to mean.
If this was the case there would be no code, just opinions about shit.
Modern legal theory and procedure don't apply.
I didn't mention modern legal theory or procedure. Firstly, what I described, the breaking down of an offence into constituent parts is not a modern practice. It dates to Roman times and the provision of a mental element was part of roman law as well as canon law. The revival of roman law and the influence of canon saw the secular authorities incorporate the element of mens rea from the 12th century onward.
Identifying facts that "could form an offence" is not out of the mythic paradigm, but it's not how the Order of Hermes forms its law,
It is not correct that everyone just votes at tribunal to convict or not convict. There is a dedicated pre-tribunal procedure where the PQ gives a view as to whether the facts (once the conflict between them have been eliminated) have merit when the code is applied to them. In other words, "could they sustain a conviction". Most of the cases are resolved this way, not at Tribunal. In modern terms this would be referred to as a directions hearing.
Nor is in correct to say that facts do not form the basis for hermetic law. Facts form the basis of all codes of conduct, systems of laws, rules or procedures in every culture. If facts don't form the basis for it than what does? Air, love, good-will? I think you are trying to say the content of the facts don't matter. It might be the case that some tribunals might take that view sometimes but that does not mean that facts do not form the basis for hermetic law. Facts are the whole foundation for the system. There is a great deal of the material in HOH:TL about test cases and proposal rulings. There is also the requirement that facts must be produced at both private and public hearings.
A tribunal has a basic vested interest in seeing a consistent code applied both by itself and its officers. If any idiot could level irrelevant facts on a consistent basis and achieve consistent convictions based on the "vibe" or lack of popularity, part of the glue that bound the order together would disintegrate.
Misusing facts, or misinterpreting them has beset all tribunals of law since the dawn of time. Wrongful convictions, lazy juries, dumb jurors, incompetent judges. It was why the appeal courts were created in the 1800's because first instance decisions were so riddled with error, so often. There is no reason why the same thing does not effect hermetic tribunals.
You state that there are examples of violations of the rule against interfering with mundanes that do not fit the fact pattern I describe. That could simply be first instance error and the order of hermes is very medieval in that regard because it has no machinery to reverse its own legal errors. But it is true that the elements I suggested might not fit most of the situations given in say HOH:TL. That's because at the time I was only seeking to give myself short term amusement. However I promise give it a go if people want me to. Why dont you throw some more examples on the thread and I will have a go.
Ironically it would fit the example you provide regarding the creation of precious metals. The precious metals issue basically comes down to inflation or worse outright theft if the silver is not made with vis. Hindering, obstructing or impeding are all made out if Pierre the peasant cannot buy bread anymore because of price inflation in his village. Or because the silver that he got from selling the covenant a herd of goats suddenly disappeared.