On behalf of all South Africans the following Notice & Demand is being served on the Land Claims Court, Constitutional Court, CEO (“President”) of RSA INC. and Minister of Justice by SA Jural Committee and SA Jural Assembly as to why the proposed Expropriation Bill is both illegal (according to their rules) and unlawful at common law and customary law.
This will also be published in 2 national newspapers in the legal notices section.
Note that the Committee is laying the foundations for an alternative people’s government and the Assembly for the people’s courts; in accordance with the 1955 Freedom Charter and 1990-94 Reconstruction & Development Policy Framework – both declared – The People Shall Govern!!! Not just a few but EVERYONE!!!
Any counterclaims can be made below this post or to SA Jural Assembly at firstname.lastname@example.org
Notice & Demand
Regarding the Proposed Expropriation Bill
Notice to Principals is Notice to Agents.
Notice to Agents is Notice to Principals.
Kindly Take Notice That the sine qua non (“that without which not”) of any matter is to establish the truth. And, the truth is that the expropriation of public and private land and property by agents of SOUTH AFRICA, GOVERNMENT OF SOUTH AFRICA, COURTS OF SOUTH AFRICA and all derivatives and franchises thereof, hereinafter ‘RSA INC’, is both unlawful and illegal for the reasons set out herein:
Regarding we the people
That, sovereignty is vested in we the people and not in some corporate legal fiction “STATE”:
“Sovereignty itself is… not subject to law, for it is the author and source of law… while sovereign powers are delegated to the agencies of government, sovereignty itself remains with the people, by whom and for whom all government exists and acts.” (Justice Thomas Stanley Matthews in Yick Wo v. Hopkins [p. 370]);
That, the Preamble of the CONSTITUTION OF THE REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA, ACT 108 OF 1996 declares South Africa to be a “Sovereign State”. However, “The words “sovereign state” are cabalistic words, not understood by the disciple of liberty, who has been instructed in our constitutional schools. It is our appropriate phrase when applied to an absolute despotism. The idea of sovereign power in the government of a republic is incompatible with the existence and foundation of civil liberty and the rights of property.” Gaines v. Buford, 31 Ky. (1 Dana) 481, 501.
That, we the people are endowed by our Creator with inherent, pre-existing, antecedent, natural, unalienable, inalienable rights such as Life, Freedom, Land and Property which existed long before the fiction called “government”.
There are areas in human behaviour for which we do not need a government slip. The quintessential right is the Creator-given right to dominion over land and the earth. (Genesis 1:28).
Now, some of our rights are enshrined within but, not subject to, the Bill of Rights; such as:
Section 25(1) – Property
No one may be deprived of property except in terms of law of general application, and no law may permit arbitrary deprivation of property.
However, ACTS, CODES and STATUTES Are Not Laws but rules that only apply to RSA INC. agents, employees and corporations as established further on under the same title. And, the source of law our rights cannot be limited by the Bill of Rights.
Maxim – Fraud lies hid in general expressions.
The concept of limited government
Take Further Notice That government officials are administrators – our hired help. We the people pay your salaries to serve we the people and administrate our public property – namely South Africa – the land and everything on, above and below it as well as the coastal waters.
South Africa is a Trust and we the people are the rightful and lawful creators, beneficiaries, shareholders, owners and priority claimants of everything tangible, on, above and below the soil.
The following is from a speech of the well-known U.S. Law Professor and Judge – Andrew P. Napolitano – titled The Natural Law as a Restraint Against Tyranny:
“The government derives its powers from the consent of the governed;
The fiction is that we have consented to the surrender of our rights; the reality is that our rights have been stolen from us because the government monopolises force; it’s a sad and terrible reality;
Sadly, today the government, to which none of us has consented which claims it has authority by majority vote to trample our natural rights and assault on those liberties that make up our humanity;
And, just because we have given some powers to the federal government, it does not mean we have kept the rest for ourselves, we have;
That’s the concept of limited government; the government must stop when it wants to touch our natural rights, whatever we think our natural rights are;
Because these are the things that we all yearn as human-beings to do; free from interference by the government;
If they belong to me as my fingers belong to me then they cannot be taken away by majority vote; they cannot be taken away by legislation; they cannot be taken away by command of the executive; (they cannot be taken away by the majority of the people); they can only be taken away if I give them up myself;
So, we can voluntarily surrender our own natural rights but, one cannot surrender someone else’s rights because natural rights are owned by each one.
That is the theory of the founding fathers of a republican form of government.”
Note that South Africa is a Republic which is a Trust of which our forefathers are the Donors, adult South Africans are Trustees, and all their offspring are beneficiaries.
Therefore, we the people are the rightful and lawful owners, shareholders, priority claimants and creditors for the original organic un-incorporated South African Republic, hereinafter ‘SAR’ as well as all accounts, credit and assets of all corporate RSA INC. entities derived from SAR.
The debts owed to the FED, UN/IMF, ENGLISH CROWN, DUTCH CROWN, VATICAN et al is not the liability of we the people but the liability of those acting as agents and fiduciaries and principals of RSA INC.
Maxim – The partner of my partner is not my partner.
Natural rights have been flipped
Judge Napolitano continues: The presumption of liberty says that the rights that we did not surrender to the government, we retained for our self; and, they can never be taken away by popular vote or majority vote or command by a governor or a president.
Now, if the government recognised the concept of natural rights, it would know that virtually everything it has done since the last century other than to protect of natural rights;
Question: Is there any legitimate activity a government has in a free society? Yes, to protect the natural rights of the people in that society; meaning, do not assault my freedom, my life, my liberty, my property! Protect it! That is what we have a government for.
And, a government that believes in natural rights will limit itself to those behaviours;
Do you know of any government today that limits itself to only the protection of natural rights? That is the ideal.
We need to understand the force of darkness among us and that force of darkness is the very government we have elected and empowered to impose the darkness upon us. The better we understand it, the more we understand it, the sooner we can be free from its shackles.”
The fiction of government
Take Further Notice That: “Inasmuch as every government is an artificial person, an abstraction, and a creature of the mind only, a government can interface only with other artificial persons. The imaginary, having neither actuality nor substance, is foreclosed from creating and attaining parity with the tangible. The legal manifestation of this is that no government, as well as any law, agency, aspect, court, etc. can concern itself with anything other than corporate, artificial persons and the contracts between them.” (S.C.R. 1795, (3 U.S. 54; 1 L.Ed. 57; 3 Dall. 54))
Therefore, no COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA OR GOVERNMENT OF SOUTH AFRICA has ANY jurisdiction over anything tangible; not we the people and certainly not over our land, air, water, coastal waters and natural resources, be it private or public.
And, therefore statutory law is not law per se but, merely the rules relating to contracts between corporate artificial persons and neither applies to real living people nor has any jurisdiction over we the sovereign people or our land, air, water, coastal waters and natural resources, be it private or public. In fact only common law people’s courts and or customary law courts and tribal authorities have jurisdiction to decide on matters regarding tangible reality – people, land, minerals, natural resources, water, air and so forth.
The truth is that COURTS OF SA employ DOG-LATIN legalese which is merely semantic deceit under colour of law and fictions of law to subvert our status and thereby falsely “re-venue” we the living people, the lawful creditors, owners, and priority claimants of all South Africa, into bankrupt legal fiction CORPORATE STRAWMAN “DEBTORS’ with no rights into their watery sea venues and into CROWN “property” via actionable fraud, bad faith, bad motive, barratry (piracy), breach of contract and treaty, cheat, colourable transactions, concealment, conversion, false pretences, fraud, graft, gross misconduct, misdescription, misrepresentation, mischaracterization, law of war, personation, pressganging, racketeering, trespass with force and fraud, quasi trusts, unconscionable contracts and bargain, usury to name but a few.
A full investigation into all commercial paper issued by RSA INC. agencies and the chain of title and tax filings will confirm our claims. Clear proof is the mysterious “disappearance” of most original bills, birth certificates, court orders, mortgage bonds, municipal bills, tax invoices, tenders, title deeds, vehicle registration papers, warrants and other commercial paper issued by RSA INC. corporate service providers.
Maxim – He who sells justice for money is guilty of barratry (piracy).
Take Further Notice That SOUTH AFRICA, REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA, GOVERNMENT OF SOUTH AFRICA and all derivatives and franchises thereof, hereinafter RSA INC., is not a lawful not-for-profit de jure government by, for and of the people but, merely foreign, privately-owned, de facto. corporate services providers operating under law merchant in the international sea jurisdiction and is not the lawful government as was intended to be, since the 1994 Reconstruction.
And, the CONSTITUTION OF THE REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA ACT No. 108 1996 is merely a creature of Statute – a corporate charter and corporate rules for how these foreign corporate service providers and their franchises, agencies and agents must behave when providing services to we the people on our lands. And, your services are appalling and overpriced. We can do it ourselves and for way cheaper. We therefore no longer require your services. You are fired as of immediate effect.
That when we do a search on company listings such as https://dnb.com or https://manta.com we find many RSA INC. franchises listed as private companies.
Now, there is a big difference between a lawful government and private company. A lawful government is a not-for-profit Public Trust of which we the people are the rightful and lawful owners, shareholders and priority claimants. The Freedom Charter affirms that: “South Africa belongs to all who live in it, black and white, and that no government can justly claim authority unless it is based on the will of the People;”
Whereas, a private company is in the business of profiting off of we the people for the benefit of a small group of private shareholders as is the case with.
And, RSA INC. is managed by the major banks for the benefit of their, mostly foreign, shareholders – the global elites which is a recipe for disaster. Refer to: https://giftoftruth.wordpress.com/rsa-inc/
According to the 2013 edition of the Corpus Jurus Secundrum, CORPORATIONS Section, and Subsection 38 – 41 – the U.S. Supreme Court states that whenever the United States (a body public corporate) engages in commercial business it abandons its sovereign capacity and is to be treated as any other corporation. The same applies to every other country registered in the US/UN/IMF such as RSA INC.
Therefore, RSA INC. Agencies, Agents and Employees cannot engage in commercial private-for-profit business and still claim to be a lawful public “government”. The entire tax history of RSA Departments will document that they are private, for-profit, corporations. And, if they are not government then it means that the actual lawful government offices are vacant and then it is the duty of we, the people to fill those offices and to govern ourselves so as to review and complete the “Reconstruction” of South Africa as set out in the 1994 Reconstruction & Development Policy Framework.
RSA INC. Bankruptcy
Take Further Notice That RSA INC. is in fact operating under revolving, rehabilitation bankruptcy since the 1933 Bretton Woods Agreement and Emergency Currency Acts and the Federal Reserve Act. And, the Federal Reserve System is in fact a non-permanent non-banking debt based fiat currency system which was supposedly introduced to try and “rehabilitate” the “bankruptcy” of nations but instead was a ploy by the Merchant Bankster Mafia in a debt-for-gold swop scam and the ultimate confiscation thereof due to the resulting runaway inflation caused by unsustainable interest equations and hyperinflation which we can all now see with the dramatic escalating increase in prices of goods.
“By this means government may secretly and unobserved, confiscate the wealth of the people, and not one man in a million will detect the theft.” – British Lord John Maynard Keynes
And, it gave central banks the licence to create and print fiat currency out of thin air.
“Banks lend by creating credit. (ledger-entry credit, monetized debt) They create the means of payment out of nothing.” — Ralph M. Hawtrey, Secretary of the British Treasury
Since, Federal Reserve currency such as the South African Rand, is not backed by anything of value, it is merely IOUs – promises to pay sometime in the future.
And, since the Federal Reserve System is way past its 75 year statute of limitations and cannot be rehabilitated, it is time to End the Fed. Refer to https://giftoftruth.wordpress.com/end-the-fed/
And, as Thomas Jefferson rightly said: “The issuing power of money should be taken away from the banks and be restored to the people to whom it properly belongs.”
This is why BRICS was established: to develop an alternative system to the Fed with value-backed lawful money and a value-for-value system of trade and thereby end U.S. and fiat U.S. Dollar hegemony. .
Therefore, Take Further Notice That there is no lawful value-for-value exchange or just compensation if land was to be appropriated for fiat currency in Rands. Refer to https://giftoftruth.wordpress.com/banking/
And, that it is both illegal and unlawful for a bankrupt entity to engage in commerce beyond the statute of limitations.
“We are completely dependent on the commercial banks. Someone has to borrow every dollar we have in circulation, cash or credit. If the banks create ample synthetic money we are prosperous; if not, we starve. We are absolutely without a permanent money system…. It is the most important subject intelligent persons can investigate and reflect upon. It is so important that our present civilization may collapse unless it becomes widely understood and the defects remedied very soon.” – Robert H. Hemphill, Credit Manager, Atlanta Federal Reserve Bank, in the Foreword to a book titled “100% Money” by Irving Fisher 1936.
Un-incorporated South African Republic
Take Further Notice That RSA INC.is derived from the original organic un-incorporated land jurisdiction South Africa, South African Republic and SA Trusts, hereinafter ‘SAR’, of which we the people are the rightful and lawful creditors, heirs, owners and priority claimants.
And, that all gold, silver, diamonds and all other natural resources that have been confiscated in the Federal Reserve Swindle are due and owing back to the people. .
All debts need to be contracted, the books balanced and all accounts closed in accordance with the Bills of Exchange Acts both national and international.
And, the only legal and lawful way to settle the debts of the bankrupt RSA INC. is by the proper application of the Bills of Exchange Amendment ACT 56 of 2000.
ACTS, CODES and STATUTES are not “Laws”
Take Further Notice That ACTS, CODES and STATUTES are not “laws” but merely rules that apply to RSA INC. employees, not their employers, namely we the people.
“US. SUPREME COURT DECISION – “All codes, rules, and regulations are for government authorities only, not human/Creators in accordance with God’s laws. All codes, rules, and regulations are unconstitutional and lacking due process…” Rodriques v. Ray Donavan (U.S. Department of Labor) 769 F. 2d 1344, 1348 (1985).
“A “Statute” is not a Law,” (Flouraoy v. First Nat. Bank of Shreveport, 197 La. 1067, 3 So.2d 244, 248)
“A “Code” or “Statute: is not Law,” (Flouraoy v. First Nat. Bank of Shreveport, 197 La. 1067, 3 So.2d 244, 248)
“Statutes apply only to state created creatures known as corporations no matter whether [creatures of statute and offices of] state, local, or federal [government].” (Bolonial) Pipeline Co. v. Traigle, 421 US 100. (1975).
US. SUPREME COURT DECISION – “…every man is independent of all laws, except those prescribed by nature. He is not bound by any institutions formed by his fellowman without his consent.” Cruden v. Neale, 2 N.C. 338 (1796) 2 S.E.
US. SUPREME COURT DECISION – The common law is the real law, the Supreme Law of the land, the code, rules, regulations, policy and statutes are “not the law”, [Self v. Rhay, 61 Wn (2d) 261]
People v. Ortiz, (1995) 32 Cal.App.4th 286. “A statute does not trump the Constitution.”
Bennett v. Boggs, 1 Baldw 60, “Statutes that violate the plain and obvious principles of common right and common reason are null and void.”
Supreme Court Ruling [Miller vs. U.S., 230 F. 486, 489] “The claim and exercise of a constitutional Right cannot be converted into a crime.”
Shuttlesworth v. City of Birmingham, Alabama, 373 U.S. 262 (1963): “If the State converts a right (liberty) into a privilege, the citizen can ignore the license and fee and engage in the right (liberty) with impunity.”
In Hertado v. California, 110 US 516, the U.S Supreme Court states very plainly: “The state cannot diminish rights of the people.”
Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, 1914, p. 2961: “Those who have the right to do something cannot be licensed for what they already have right to do as such license would be meaningless.”
City of Dallas v Mitchell, 245 S.W. 944 “To take away all remedy for the enforcement of a right is to take away the right itself. But that is not within the power of the State.”
In re McCowan (1917), 177 C. 93, 170 P. 1100 “Ignorance of the law does not excuse misconduct in anyone, least of all in a sworn officer of the law.”
Brookfield Const. Co. v. Stewart, 284 F. Supp. 94. “An officer who acts in violation of the Constitution ceases to represent the government.”
U.S. v. Jannotti, 673 F.2d 578, 614 (3d Cir. 1982) “There is no crueler tyranny than that which is exercised under cover of law, and with the colors of justice …” Griffin v. Maryland, 378 U.S. 130
10 Co. 77; Dig. 2. 1. 20; Story, Confl. Laws ‘ 539; Broom, Max. 100, 101: “One who exercises jurisdiction out of his territory cannot be obeyed with impunity.”
Therefore, we do not recognise any ACT, BILL, CODE, STATUTE or other legislation of RSA INC. as being lawful or having any authority over we the people; especially not an Expropriation Bill.
Maxim – One who exercises jurisdiction out of his territory is not obeyed with impunity.
COURTS OF SOUTH AFRICA
Take Further Notice That COURTS OF SOUTH AFRICA are not “judicial courts”; they are merely administrative tribunals;
“There are no Judicial courts in America and there has not been since 1789, Judges do not enforce Statutes and Codes. Executive Administrators enforce Statues and Codes. There have not been any Judges in America since 1789. There have just been Administrators.” FRC v. GE 281 US 464, Keller v. PE 261 US 428 1 Stat. 138-178
The same applies to South Africa and every other western commonwealth country part of the International BAR Association and BAR legal system.
“Courts are Administrative Tribunals” Clearfield Trust, et al v. United States 318 U.S. 363 (1943)
That, COURTS OF SOUTH AFRICA are in fact British and Dutch TEMPLE CROWN COURTS and Roman VATICAN COURTS under the STATUTES OF ROME still administrating “Crown Property” on our lands. We are still under the yoke of Roman Slavery Law even though it has been dead for over 1000 years.
Even the Chief Justice of the CONSTITUTIONAL COURT has SOVEREIGN LETTERS PATENT from the CROWN. Therefore, they work for the CROWN as “Admiralty Officers” and not for we the people.
And, they are in fact “sea courts” only having jurisdiction over commerce in the sea jurisdiction and not on the land. The HIGH COURT is in fact the “HIGH SEAS” COURT.
Now, the marine league, marking the limit of national jurisdiction on the high seas, is equal to three geographical (or marine) miles of 6,075 feet each so they are way beyond the limited bounds of their watery jurisdiction.
Customary Law Courts
Take Further Notice That the sovereignty of South African tribes was already established during the early 1800s in Treaties made with the BRITISH CROWN recognising the supremacy of customary courts and tribal authorities on their land.
And, as customary law is a living law it is alive and well amongst the various peoples.
Therefore, COURTS OF SOUTH AFRICA have no jurisdiction over any Southern African tribal lands as well as the neighbouring States.
In fact, RSA INC. is supposed to assist and fund tribes in their mission towards self-governance and self-determination in accordance with the U.N. Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Refer to: http://un.org/esa/socdev/unpfii/documents/DRIPS_en.pdf
Common Law Courts
Furthermore, leading up to 1994, we the people wished for people’s courts and to develop the common law and customary law and people’s courts. The 1990-1994 Reconstruction and Development Policy Framework clearly states in Section 5.7:
5.7 THE ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE
5.7.1 The system of justice should be made accessible and affordable to all people. It must be credible and legitimate. The legal processes and institutions should be reformed by simplifying the language and procedures used in the court, recognising and regulating community and customary courts, and professionalising the Attorney-General’s office. The public defence system must be promoted and the prosecution system reformed. The pool of judicial officers should be increased through the promotion of lay officials, scrapping the divided bar and giving the right of appearance to paralegals.
And, the 1955 Freedom Charter declares: “ALL SHALL BE EQUAL BEFORE THE LAW! …The courts shall be representative of all the people;”
And, Mulligan Ex Parte very clearly states that wherever American (and South African) Common Law Courts are up and operating, the admiralty courts must cease operating as military tribunals and revert to their proper place as courts merely concerned with actual maritime contracts and other admiralty issues.
To this end Southern Africa Jural Assembly, hereinafter ‘SAJurA’, was established in 2020, laying the foundations for the people’s courts with rules and procedures, principles of common law, keeping record and protecting the rights of the people; especially, from corporate raiders engaged in inland piracy from the high seas. Refer to https://giftoftruth.wordpress.com/sa-jural-assembly/
Common Law Judge Anna von Reitz for the Alaska Supreme Court affirms that: “These foreign international courts which are doing so much damage to our property and our people are merely opportunists filling a gap that we left open through ignorance. When our courts stand on the land, their courts cannot usurp— but when we allow our Common Law Court System to stand vacant, the cat is away and the rats can play.”
Now, according to the English “Old Authority, Sir William Blackstone, the common law simply means “the embodiment of the moral sentiment of the community”
And, it is mostly oral and un-written and expressed from time to time by a jury of peers or similar forum; or, by referendum.
South African Common Law, which only applies to we the people, is not to be confused with colonial Roman Dutch or English Common Law which is merely Admiralty law of the sea, grafted with the Law Merchant, and relating only to sea commerce and the contracts between corporate legal fiction entities.
Furthermore, the Bill of Rights makes provision for the people’s courts:
Section 34. Access to courts
Everyone has the right to have any dispute that can be resolved by the application of law decided in a fair public hearing before a court or, where appropriate, another independent and impartial tribunal or forum.
And, Section 39(3) of the Bill of Rights recognises that we the people have other rights and implies that common law and customary are in separate jurisdictions:
39. Interpretation of Bill of Rights
3. The Bill of Rights does not deny the existence of any other rights or freedoms that are recognised or conferred by common law, customary law or legislation, to the extent that they are consistent with the Bill.
Take Further Notice That jurisdiction is the authority, capacity, power or right to of a particular court to act and decide in a dispute; and, when jurisdiction is challenged It cannot be assumed, it must be proven.
It was Thomas Jefferson who said: “The germ of destruction of our nation is in the power of the judiciary, an irresponsible body — working like gravity by night and by day, gaining a little today and a little tomorrow, and advancing its noiseless step like a thief over the field of jurisdiction, until all shall render powerless the checks of one branch over the other and will become as venal and oppressive as the government from which we separated.”
Furthermore, there are two main jurisdictions: land and sea. The international sea jurisdiction relates to commerce between corporate legal fictions and the contracts between them; whereas, we the people occupy the land and the land jurisdiction.
And, the law of the land is natural law, common law, customary law and law of nations; and deals with reality and facts.
Maxim – Juries must answer to questions of fact and judges to questions of (commercial) law. Ex parte United States, C.C.A. Wis., 101 F.2d 870, 874.
Land and sea are two separate and contradistinct jurisdictions and like land and sea, oil and water separated by a beach or sand bar, do not mix.
Maxim – Every jurisdiction has its own bounds.
Furthermore, regarding jurisdiction over land, COURTS OF SA and SA GOVERNMENT are way in overreach of their limited fiction sea jurisdiction. And, we hereby openly challenge your jurisdiction to expropriate land, amongst other things:
Maxim – One who exercises jurisdiction out of his territory is not obeyed with impunity.
Now, ss. 39(1)(c) of the Bill of Rights recognizes our right to quote foreign law:
39. Interpretation of Bill of Rights
When interpreting the Bill of Rights, a court, tribunal or forum ¬
c. may consider foreign law.
Therefore, we are quoting the following U.S. rulings regarding jurisdiction in the absence of equivalent South African Common Law case law.
“A court may not render a judgment which transcends the limits of its authority, and a judgment is void if it is beyond the powers granted to the court by the law of its organization, even where the court has jurisdiction over the parties and the subject matter. Thus, if a court is authorized by statute to entertain jurisdiction in a particular case only, and undertakes to exercise the jurisdiction conferred in a case to which the statute has no application, the judgment rendered is void.” 46 Am. Jur. 2d, Judgments § 25, pp. 388-89.
“A court cannot confer jurisdiction where none existed and cannot make a void proceeding valid. It is clear and well established law that a void order can be challenged in any court.” Old Wayne Mut. L. Assoc. v. Mcdonough, 204 U.S. 8, 27 S.Ct. 236 (1907).
“Once jurisdiction is challenged, the court cannot proceed when it clearly appears that the court lacks jurisdiction, the court has no authority to reach merits, but rather should dismiss the action.” Melo v. U.S., 505 F.2d 1026.
“There is no discretion to ignore lack of jurisdiction.” Joyce v. U.S., 474 2D 215.
“The burden shifts to the court to prove jurisdiction.” Rosemond v. Lambert, 469 F.2d 416.
“Court must prove on the record, all jurisdiction facts related to the jurisdiction asserted.” Latana v. Hopper, 102 F. 2d 188; Chicago v. New York, 37 F.Supp. 150.
“The law provides that, once State and Federal Jurisdiction has been challenged, it must be proven.” Main v. Thiboutot, 100 S.Ct. 2502 (1980).
“Jurisdiction can be challenged at any time.” Basso v. Utah Power & Light Co., 495 F.2d 906, 910.
“Defense of lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter may be raised at any time, even on appeal.” Hill Top Developers v. Holiday Pines Service Corp., 478 So.2d. 368 (Fla.2nd DCA 1985).
“Once challenged, jurisdiction cannot be assumed, it must be proved to exist.” Stuck v. Medical Examiners, 94 Ca.2d 751. 211 P.2d 389.
“Jurisdiction, once challenged, cannot be assumed and must be decided.” Main v. Thiboutot, 100 S.Ct. 2502 (1980).
“The law requires proof of jurisdiction to appear on the record of the administrative agency and all administrative proceedings.” Hagans v Lavine, 415 U.S. 533.
“Since jurisdiction is fundamental, and it is jurisdiction alone that gives a court power to hear, determine, and pronounce judgment on the issues before it, jurisdiction must be continuing in the court throughout the proceedings.” Re. Cavitt, 254, P.599
“Since jurisdiction is fundamental to any valid judicial proceeding, the first question that must be determined by a trial court in any case is that of jurisdiction.” Dillon v. Dillon, 187, P.27.
Therefore, we hereby expressly challenge the jurisdiction of RSA INC. And, when jurisdiction is challenged, courts may not proceed until they have proven up their claim. The herein-addressed must first prove up their jurisdiction over the land or cease and desist under colour of law.
Maxim – The order of things is confounded if every one preserves not his jurisdiction.
Take Further Notice that the “Old Authorities” are deemed an authoritive source of South African Law and Sir William Blackstone is regarded as the English Common Law “Old Authority” by the BAR legal system..
Blackstone clearly states the following: “So great moreover is the regard of the law for private property, that it will not authorize the least violation; no, not even for the general good of the whole community.” – (Sir William Blackstone; Commentaries on the Laws of England; Vol I [Page 139])
“And these (rights) may be reduced to three principal or primary articles; the right of personal security, the right of personal liberty, and the right of private property: because, as there is no other known method of compulsion, or abridging man’s natural free will, but by an infringement or diminution of one or other of these important rights, the preservation of these, inviolate, may justly be said to include the preservation of our civil immunities in their largest and most extensive sense.” – (Sir William Blackstone; Commentaries on the Laws of England; Vol I [Page 129])
The people shall govern
Take further Notice That both the Freedom Charter and the RDP Policy Framework expressly declared: “THE PEOPLE SHALL GOVERN!!!”
However, as some people such as Ronnie Kasrils revealed in his book titled “Armed and Dangerous”, leading up 1994 “our people were sold down the river” in favour of the global elites who are still in control and ruling from behind the corporate veil.
The RDP Policy Framework clearly declares the following:
“1.1 The RDP is an integrated, coherent socio-economic policy framework. It seeks to mobilise all our people…
…Only an all-round effort to harness the life experience, skills, energies and aspirations of the people can lay the basis for a new South Africa.
… The RDP is an expression of confidence in the wisdom, organisational abilities and determination of our people.
This programme is essentially centred on: 1.3.3 A people-driven process.
Peace and security for all. Promoting peace and security must involve all people and must build on and expand the National Peace Initiative.
1.3.7 The RDP requires fundamental changes in the way that policy is made and programmes are implemented. Above all, the people affected must participate in decision-making. Democratisation must begin to transform both the state and civil society.
Democracy is not confined to periodic elections. It is, rather, an active process enabling everyone to contribute to reconstruction and development.
1.3.8 An integrated programme, based on the people,…
1.4.2 Meeting Basic Needs. The first priority is to begin to meet the basic needs of people
1.4.3 Our people should be involved in these programmes by being made part of the decision-making…
1.4.4 Developing Our Human Resources. The RDP is a people centred programme – our people must be involved in the decision-making process, in implementation, in new job opportunities requiring new skills, and in managing and governing our society.
1.4.12 Building the Economy. …A process of reconstruction is proposed to ensure that these strengths now benefit all our people.
1.4.22 …The RDP can only be people-centred if the planning and coordinating processes allow the active involvement of democratic structures.
1.5.2 The RDP attempts to provide achievable, realistic and clear programmes to answer these questions. But it goes further than this and encourages people and their organisations to participate in the process. In the conclusion we outline proposed concrete steps to make such participation possible.
2.1.1 Poverty is the single greatest burden of South Africa’s people, and is the direct result of the apartheid system and the grossly skewed nature of business and industrial development which accompanied it.
2.3.6 A further component of the public works programme must be provision of education and training and the involvement of communities in the process so that they are empowered to contribute to their own governance. (Emphasis added]
184.108.40.206 ensure accountability so that the people have control over what is provided;
3.2.1 Human resources, unlike other resources, think for themselves! People are, and must remain, the architects of the RDP as it unfolds in the years to come…
3.6.2 Youth development more generally must focus on education and training, job creation, and enabling young people to realise their full potential and participate fully in the society and their future. It must restore the hope of our youth in the future, and in their capacity to channel their resourcefulness and energy into reconstruction and development.
4.2.6 The RDP will foster a new and constructive relationship between the people, their organisations in civil society, key constituencies such as the trade unions and organised business, the democratic government, and the workings of the market.
220.127.116.11 Our principal objective is to transform mining and mineral-processing industries to serve all of our people.
18.104.22.168 The government must consider ways and means to encourage small-scale mining and enhance opportunities for participation by our people through support, including financial and technical aid and access to mineral rights. However, standards in respect of the environment, health and safety and other working conditions must be maintained.
4.7.5 Community banking. Community banks of various types have proven able to finance informal entrepreneurs, especially women. The democratic government must encourage community banking. It must reform regulations to foster the development of community banks while protecting customers. Where possible, government structures at all levels should conduct business with these institutions. The government must encourage the established banks and other financial institutions to help fund the community banks.
4.7.7 The Reserve Bank. The Interim Constitution contains several mechanisms which ensure that the Reserve Bank is both insulated from partisan interference and accountable to the broader goals of development and maintenance of the currency.
In addition, the law must change the Act governing the Reserve Bank to ensure a board of directors that can better serve society as a whole. The board must include representatives from the trade unions and civil society. In future, a stronger board of governors should emerge through the appointment of better qualified individuals. The new constitutional requirement that the board of governors record its decisions, publicise them when feasible, and account to parliament should help in developing a more professional and credible executive, with greater ability to exercise its mandate than the present board of governors.
4.7.8 The democratic government should immediately increase the resources available in the Reserve Bank and other appropriate agencies for combating illegal capital flight.
Furthermore, the democratic government must enter into discussions with holders of wealth in an effort to persuade them of the harmful effects their actions are having on our economy.
5.2 VISION AND OBJECTIVES
5.2.1 The People shall govern. The RDP vision is one of democratising power. Democracy is intimately linked to reconstruction and development. We will not be able to unleash the resources, neglected skills and stunted potential of our country and its people while minority domination of state and civil institutions persists. [Emphasis added] Without thoroughgoing democratisation, the whole effort to reconstruct and develop will lose momentum.
Reconstruction and development require a population that is empowered through expanded rights, meaningful information and education, and an institutional network fostering representative, participatory and direct democracy.
5.2.2 Democracy requires that all South Africans have access to power and the right to exercise their power. This will ensure that all people will be able to participate in the process of reconstructing our country.
5.2.6 Democracy for ordinary citizens must not end with formal rights and periodic one-person, one-vote elections. Without undermining the authority and responsibilities of elected representative bodies (the national assembly, provincial legislatures, local government), the democratic order we envisage must foster a wide range of institutions of participatory democracy in partnership with civil society on the basis of informed and empowered citizens (e.g. the various sectoral forums like the National Economic Forum) and facilitate direct democracy (people’s forums, referenda where appropriate, and other consultation processes). [Emphasis added]
5.7 THE ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE
5.7.1 The system of justice should be made accessible and affordable to all people. It must be credible and legitimate. The legal processes and institutions should be reformed by simplifying the language and procedures used in the court, recognising and regulating community and customary courts, and professionalising the Attorney-General’s office. The public defence system must be promoted and the prosecution system reformed.
The pool of judicial officers should be increased through the promotion of lay officials, scrapping the divided bar and giving the right of appearance to paralegals.
5.10.1 The Public Service – … the public service must internalise the concept of ‘serving the people’.
6.3.2 …The national RDP structure should also have oversight of inter-governmental financial transfers (national to provincial, provincial to local, etc.) to ensure that these are in conformity with the overall national objectives of the RDP.
6.5.8 The democratic government must end unnecessary secrecy in the formulation of the budget. To that end, it must change the relevant regulations. We must establish a Parliamentary Budget Office with sufficient resources and personnel to ensure efficient democratic oversight of the budget. Transformation of the parastatals and cooperation with forums will also help ensure more efficient and open budgeting processes.”
And, finally, the ANC agreed to the following:
7.1 Throughout this document, we have stressed that the RDP is a people-driven programme. People have been part of drawing up the RDP and they must now take the process forward. How can this be done in concrete ways? A number of processes must now begin.
7.2 The RDP will now be used to consult widely, in order to get comment and further input. Any organisation that wishes to make such a contribution can do so in writing, or contact the ANC to arrange a meeting. Any organisation that feels that it can make a specific contribution to the implementation of the RDP should do likewise.”
To this end the Southern Africa Jural Committee has been established and is laying the foundations and developing the South African people’s government: people’s courts; people’s banks; oversight committees; a committee for every aspect of society.
And, to establish people’s Land Oversight Committees to ensure the people’s right to land is protected; and, to identify lawful ways to distribute unused public lands for local community use,
And, to hold referendums by, for and of the people in accordance with 5.2.6: “…and facilitate direct democracy (people’s forums, referenda where appropriate, and other consultation processes).”
And, 5.3.2 “…Consideration should be given to the implementation of a constitutional provision for *by, for and of the people) the calling of a referendum in order to overturn unpopular laws, and to ensure that certain laws get passed.”
However, the people’s right to referendum has not been recognised by the Bill of Rights but that does not mean we have not retained that right. We have.
And, any and all referendums held by, for and of the people that are deemed lawful by any and all people’s courts or forums recognised by the people will be deemed lawful and binding on all organs of State and STATE.
Take Final Notice That: we do not recognise any RSA INC. agency or franchise as “lawful government.” Not until the Freedom Charter and RDP Policy Framework is fulfilled.
Either, you must prove up your claim or cease and desist under colour of law.
Maxim – That which was originally void, does not by lapse of time become valid.
That no RSA INC. BANKS, COURTS, “GOVERNMENT” AGENCY or franchises thereof have neither any lawful claim or standing or jurisdiction over any land nor to expropriate any land or anything else tangible above, below or on it.
Your duty and obligations are to provide services. And your services are not required in any matter related to land.
We, the people have the lawful right as owners to refuse the expropriation of land, albeit private or public land.
And, if we do we have the right to informed consent and access to information and just compensation in lawful money, meaning payment in gold or silver; not fiat currency.
That any and all land expropriated becomes public land owned by we the people.
Maxim – Capture by pirates and robbers does not change title.
And, if we do not consent then we have the right to defend our land from invasion by the law of necessity.
Maxim – Necessity overrules the law.
Maxim – Necessity makes that lawful which otherwise is not lawful.
Furthermore, if you refuse to come to the table and continue with this unlawful action, you give us the right to lien you in your personal and private capacity and seize your accounts, assets and property for causing harm and loss to the people and Republic.
In commerce truth is sovereign.
In commerce for any matter to be resolved it must be expressed.
Truth is expressed in the form of an affidavit.
An un-rebutted affidavit stands as truth in commerce.
An un-rebutted affidavit becomes the judgement in commerce.
Therefore, we demand that you contact us via the email below to enter into peaceful negotiations.
“Aluta continuua!” – the struggle continues ‘These freedoms we will fight for, side by side, throughout our lives, until we have won our liberty.’
Affected parties wishing to dispute the claims made herein or make their own counter-claims must respond within twenty one (21) days excluding the day of original service of this Notice & Demand Regarding the Expropriation Bill. Responses must be written under affirmation and upon the pains and penalty of perjury; and is subject to the de jure jurisdiction of SA Jural Assembly and or other recognised people’s courts.
Failure to record a de jure dispute against the claims made herein will result in an automatic default judgment securing forevermore all rights herein claimed and barring the bringing of charges under statutory rules against any SAR nationals for exercising their sovereignty, freedoms, natural unalienable rights and duties.
Note: A Non-Response to this Notice expresses non-objection and tacit agreement to the claims made herein. Silence is consent; By Order.
Govern yourselves accordingly; In peace.
Declared and recorded on the land commonly known as South Africa, un-incorporated.
By: SA Jural Committee and SA Jural Assembly
9 thoughts on “Notice & Demand Regarding the Proposed Expropriation Bill to RSA INC. from we the people”
Azanyokanyo made the first comment: “Customary Law and Common Law” are in separate jurisdictions, meaning neither has standing in the other.”
Our response: customary and common law are both in the same living land jurisdiction; they are in fact the law of the land; however, as living laws both customary and common law differ from place to place and from generation to generation; so, both can also be called “the law of the place.”
The place where a dispute arose determines the jurisdiction; in that sense you are correct that common law has no jurisdiction over tribal lands and vice versa;
However, there are many people living on tribal lands who are not happy with their tribal authority and would rather choose common law;
There is no perfect system; but, they all would be if only the system of governance truly abides by the will of it’s people;
And, for this there must be checks and balances in place to ensure accountability; who are the chiefs willing to hold themselves accountable to?
At common law with a jury of peers everyone is accountable to everyone else, regardless of status and title.
I reject it totally. It’s land grabbing.
We are being strong armed by the few who haven’t a clue what’s actually going on.
It is unconstitutional, unlawful and communistic and needs to be scrapped
I reject it totally it’s landgrabbing.
It is unconstitutional and unlawful. I bought my house legitimately. Service providers acknowledge that this is my property as well as the constitution. You will not expropriate my house/property.
iT IS TIME FOR THE ALLIANCE AND COMMONWEALTH AND MARSHALLS TO ACT
Are you the Freedom Alliance?
If this is true then all countries in the world where in some areas were indigenous people need to be done with in the same way. It s not practical and must be rejected with contempt!