July 14th,2014 IN DEFENSE FOR FILING AN SCC MANDAMUS BCSC File # 26594

PREAMBLE: In 2007, i was forced to file a mandamus in the SCC because of the malfeasance created bythe AG off BC Wally Oppal, who was caught in having committed a Sec 340 CC offence of FRAUD,

1. All my problems in BC with the AG started with the fact that Wally Oppal mis'took', my 1951 birth landing to be a 1956 birth, in order to facilitate my very first cookie charges. At that time this lawyer from BC Civil Liberties' Jason Gratl told me he agreed to this because it was in my best interests. 1. I've been fighting it ever since. It's very basic: without a Birth Certificate, the AG and anyone in

his employe, MUST treat me to common law jurisdiction, in His Courts. 2. There really is no recourse other than filing a mandamus in the SCC, because I was prohibited to be

in any building where an employee of the AG might be, because i kept insisting that he had to be charged for enslaving me, under Sec 338 CC. I actually was not surprised when this mandamus was rejected at this SCC registrar's Office, but it was necessary at that time.

3. This ended up where in 2011 [while the Ontario Elections writ was dropped] where i accused the AG of Ontario of having allowed the AGs of BC to act as if i had a Birth Certificate, by filing a mandamus to give me a Certificate of landing, because i was now over 21 years old [from my abnormal landing date of 1989] therefore I was no longer a child, and i was entitled to proper ID/papers;

1. the Crown called it frivolous and vexatious, and the judge refused to seize the file.2. But, from this the form placed the Office of AG of Ontario in disrepute AND obviously it's more

than a coincidence that the AG of BC took a surprise resignation, the same day i landed back in BC. In this way all liability against the Office of the old AG of BC stopped.

3. Since then, i've been on a 'no-stop/ no-detain/ no arrest' list, and the arresting officers at the Car Free Days event [at face value] seem to have not known this status until after they hand cuffed me, and despite this status, these cops were told to highway rob my goods.

4. Senior negotiators at EC agree that I have a right to demand payment under Sec 337 CC but it's Vancouver Elections CEO /CFO who would write this check. Therefore, this BCSC Justice had 2 choices, [in this case]-[1] either tell Marc Mayrand to write VQMP a $3000. check [or] tell Marc Mayrand to appoint a CEO /CFO for Vancouver Elections, who could then write a check, [2] BUT the AG resorted to denying VQMP the right to be heard under de jure common law jurisdiction in a BC Court, and the AG knows that this Office has no such right to stop us.

5. So she assigned the dirty work to an un-named Associate Chief Justice and his Lordship [from some unspecified jurisdiction] to tell me that VQMP is not entitled to be heard in a BC Court.

6. As we see it: VQMP is being handled as 'those classes of persons' under this totally perverted marginal law provisions that King Harper is implementing with s-55 of the CDSA [App-1]1. At face value: we are being invited to fix our problem in FEDERAL COURT, and there is no

way we are filing any papers under that foreign NATO Admiralty Court system. 2. VQMP cannot be stripped of it's right to be governed under common law, unless we ask for it

[period] especially when BC voted out the HST, and voted to refuse to being principalities under a BC Elections Act referendum in 2003. [all under the Elections Act]

3. What we are faced with is an AG who is saying that; if we were not an Officially EDA [and /or] in any other province but BC, means we really would have no other option

7. This now leaves VQMP with filing [what appears to be the next logical step] NAMELY: a 1-page Notice of Liability on July 10th, onto Judith Guichon to instruct Marc Mayrand to fix this mess.1. This kind of liability only creates another liability that moves up the ladder, it never goes away2. It's unheard of, to not have a CEO /CFO in place way before any election season starts

Literally no Election can run without them. Regardless the post must be filled real soon3. Had there been a CEO in place, she would have come down, grilled me on the spot, and

them tell the cops to protect me from people abusing my right to campaign.4. ON MY ABNORMAL BIRTH: There are fewer than 50 people in the entire Commonwealth who have

a similar perfectly legal right to have no Birth Certificate, and i suspect not one of them has been tortured, and enslaved like i have been, by the AGs and SGs of BC. This struggle to be free defines who i am. The AG holds ample proof that i have accepted a Sacred mission, and frankly She would rather send you all to Hell, in order to prove that the BAR is not this wicked generation of 2Thes2.

5. BOTTOM LINE: on this – At face value, it simply does not make sense for no one to just write a check – IF, it doesn't make sense, then the motives behind it are driven by FAITH [in what?]

BACKGROUNDER: What part of: “Lest we forget” does the BAR not get?

You have to be wilfully blind to not see the parallels between Germany [in 1934] and Canada in 2014. 1. Just like Germany, after years of debate [in our case – last May] BC Civil Liberties Society has filed

its' final submission to the SCC on allowing a State sanctioned right to assisted suicide. This means that somewhere around October /November the SCC will be handing down a ruling on this1. In Germany this law was applied to 'those classes of persons' that Hitler called 'undesirables', in

order to sterilize them and euthanize the terminal ill, AND then it took a 'life' of it's own when the German Supreme Court said that since they were being governed in this Federal Court System that Hitler set up meant they had no jurisdictional right to interfere with this policy

2. In Canada, King Harper setup his Federal Court within the 1st 100 days of being in Office, and at that time signed the Continuity of Government Treaty with the USA, and formally declared that Parliament was handing over all Maritime jurisdiction from sea to sea to sea, to NATO. [2009]

3. This resulted where the Order of the Garter's Crest remained in Provincial Courts and the Order of Canada Crest now is over Parliament and the Federal Appeals Courts AND the Federal Court of Canada became the Federal Court with a NATO Coat of Arms, under Admiralty jurisdiction.1. At that time: All kinds of oath holders [like the Coroner's Office, Order of the Garter guards,

etc] all became contract employees AND the Sheriffs started being gutted thru attrition.4. Since then, This Federal Court has been getting an ever increasing case load of trade cases that

are now covered under this NATO jurisdiction, because they fall under NAFTA rules /regulations

2. In October 2013, Harper tabled s-55 of the CDSA [App1] with the Throne Speech, in order to convert the MMAR program into an international trade agreement to regulate cannabis under this new MMPR program that is being set-up and to be governed under these NATO Federal Courts.1. At that time, he converted all the 'people' contracted under the MMAR program into being 'those

classes of persons' who were being stripped of having any protection under Canada's rule of law1. This court has a mandate [contract] to set-up a business enterprise, and frankly the needs of

the MMAR victims are not to over-ride /obstruct the needs of these new businesses to profit.2. In March 2014, an MMAR class action suite started and all the files created by 'those classes of

persons' were attached or left pending to the outcome of this MMAR /Allard case ruling.3. This same week, the only SCC marijuana case since R v Oakes [1989] - R v Smith case came

before the SCC for trial, and it was stayed, until after this MMAR /Allard case had been ruled on.1. As we see it: Mr Smith is being denied to be ruled under the Supremacy of our rule of law,

AND it's the same alienation of the fiduciary trust that German High Court did 80 years ago. 1. Again – What part of “Lest we forget” does the BAR not get?

2. This stay by itself means the SCC does not want to interfere with this Federal Court ruling, because otherwise this 'not guilty ruling' that would have come from this case, does not exist 1. Mr Smith may not have a choice in this, because his lawyer must be submissive to the

AG. And the chances that he will be handed over as 'one of those classes of persons' is certain to occur because of King Harper's contractual obligations to trash our Constitution

3. On July 3rd the AG of BC handed the Marijuana Party [of Canada] over to this Associate Chief Justiceand his Lordship, and Constitutionally this contravention MUST be reversed by Judith Guichon because Her fiduciary trust demands it, especially when BC voted to remain Municipalities, and we soundly voted out this HST perversion of law that King Harper is trying to drag down our throats.1. VQMP and Marc Boyer simply cannot be denied the right to be governed under the Supremacy

of Parliament, because frankly we are upholding our fiduciary trust as a Loyal Opposition Party.2. Judith Guichon and Marc Mayrand can settle this dispute with VQMP by agreeing to pay an

IC75-2R8 damage claim of $3000. that occurred from the wrongful confiscation of our goods.3. As we see it: The Constitutional Challenge that we are pressing will find a life of its own

Frankly: The BAR is being called on to do good, so that good can result. It's your choice.It's hard to refute that no good will result from fighting this un-winable battle of defying us,

4. BOTTOM LINE: if the BAR refuses to fix itself, then be on notice: Without this Faith that can move mountains, the islands get what's due, and you will learn to fear the voice from the west of Isaiah 59, because frankly, the world would rejoice over witnessing God's promise to act with speed and finality