The Nazarenes and Apostles were an unruly bunch of free men and judicial activists that challenged the courts, judges, lawyers, government, mosaic laws and the hierarchal system as a whole… not much different to the free-wo/men-on-the-land of today…

Generations later and only now are judicial activists beginning to re-discover The Bible from a lawful perspective; as well as realise that the legal problems of society were not much different than as they are now.

The highest law is divine being a rule given by divine instruction as nothing may contradict such a rule. The second highest law be the reason of mind, being an edict given by a great council of wise elders or jurists, as nothing absurd and without good reason may be considered law. The third highest law be the law of the people, as the consent and will of the people is the source of true authority. Every law has it’s boundaries called jurisdiction.

Even today, for the believers in the teachings of Iesus (there was no ‘J’, only ‘I’, in English during the time the 1611 King James Version was written) the Nazarene and the Apostles The Bible is a source of divine law. Much to the concern of the Jewish and Roman scribes of that hierarchical era, the revolutionary teachings of the Nazarenes of the New Testament brought redemption to humanity and created a new natural law which literally superseded the old hierarchical mosaic laws. To many the Nazarenes were regarded as apostate and most of the Apostles met a tragic end. Gnostic Christians went into hiding or continued in other countries. Today the law of liberty is being revived as it was then.

The Nazarenes were well schooled and versed in different aspects of law:

The Gospel according to Matthew, Chapter IX,

Verse 9 And as Iesus passed forth from thence, he saw a man named Matthew, sitting at the receipt of custom: and he said unto him, Follow me. And he arose and followed him.  

This begs the question: What did Iesus and Matthew (a tax official) talk about which convinced Matthew to leave his job? Was it maybe in connection with the herein verses? Here is Levi, another tax official…

To Mark, Chapter II,

Verse 13 and he went forth again by the sea side, and all the multitude resorted unto him, and he taught them. 14 And as he passed by, he saw Levi the son of Alpheus sitting at the receipt of Custom, and said unto him, Follow me. And he arose, and followed him.

Remember, the Levites became the treasurers and the bankers; some even today…

The Gospel according to the Apostle Luke, Chapter V,

Verse 27 And after these things he went forth, and saw a Publican, named Levi, sitting at the receipt of custom: and he said unto him, Follow me. 28 And he left all, rose up, and followed him.

Sounds like the makings of a conspiracy already…

The Acts of the Apostles, Chapter VI,

Verse 9 Then there arose certaine of the Synagogue, which is called the Synagogue of the Libertines, and Cyrenians, and Alexandrians, and of them of Cilicia, and of Asia, disputing with Steven. 10 And they were not able to resist the wisdom and the spirit by which he spoke. 11 Then they suborned men which said, We have heard him speak blasphemous words against Moses, and against God. 12 And they stirred up the people, and the Elders, and the Scribes, and came upon him, and caught him, and brought him to the Council, 13 and set up false witnesses, which said, This man ceases not to speak blasphemous words against this holy place, and the Law. 14 For we have heard him say, that this Iesus of Nazareth shall destroy this place, & shall change the Customs which Moses delivered us. 15 And all that sate in the Council, looking steadfastly on him, saw his face as it had bene the face of an Angel. 

Is this not what judicial activists of today are doing? Speaking blasphemy against the law of the sea? Seeking to change the status quo/customs? Are the courts not using false witness against you? The opposing attorney is not a witness, they are a representative… where is the witness? The corpus delict? Absent a body there can be no dispute… the truth is, in a corporation versus a ‘citizen’ there is never a witness…

The Gospel according to the Apostle Matthew, Chapter XVII,

Verse 24 And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money, came to Peter, and said, Does not your master pay tribute? 25 He said, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Iesus prevented him, saying, What thinks thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? Of their own children, or of strangers? 26 Peter said unto him, Of strangers. Iesus said unto him, Then are the children free. 27 Notwithstanding, least we should offend them, go thou to the Sea, and cast a hook, and take up the fish that first comes up: and when thou hast opened his mouth, thou shalt find a piece of money: that take, and give unto them for me, and thee. 

A very telling verse showing Iesus’ disdain for authority and for money as when he overturned the tables of the moneylenders…

The Gospel according to John, Chapter VIII,

Verse 32 And you shall know the Truth, and the Truth shall make you free. 36 If the Son therefore shall make you free, you shall be free indeed. 

Very telling words… The mission of the Nazarenes was to set humanity free. There are only two places where the words ‘free man’ is used:

The First Epistle of the Apostle Paul to the Corinthians, Chapter VII,

Verse 22 For he that is called in the Lord, being a servant is the Lord’s free man: likewise also he that is called being free, is Christ’s servant. 23 You are bought with a price, be not you the servants of men.

Revelations, Chapter VI,

Verse 15 And the kings of the earth, and the great men, and the rich men, and the chief captains, and the mighty men, and every bondman, and every free man, hid themselves in the dens, and in the rocks of the mountains,

The Bible, 1611 King James Version 1611 as a source of divine law for Christians has the following to say on the jurisdiction of your body and spirit:

The First Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Corinthians, Chapter III

Verse 16 Know you not that you are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwells in you? 17 If any man defiles the Temple of God, him shall God destroy: for the Temple of God is holy, which Temple ye are. 18 Let no man deceive himself: If any man among you seems to be wise in this world, let him become a fool, that he may be wise. 19 For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God: for it is written, He takes the wise in their own craftiness 20 and again, The Lord knows the thoughts of the wise, that they are vain. 21 Therefore let no man glory in men, for all things are yours.

This begs the question as to how courts of today then gain jurisdiction over our body.

Chapter VI Verse 19: “What, know you not that your body is the Temple of the holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own? 20 For you are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are Gods.

Our bodies cannot be lawfully incarcerated by the state or anyone else. It belongs to your Creator and is under divine jurisdiction. And, we were redeemed with a price long time ago and which also means that under divine law we cannot be debtors.

The Second Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Çorinthians, Chapter VI,

Verse 16 and what agreement hath the Temple of God with idols? For ye are the Temple of the living God, as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in [them], and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.

Here again, the divine law dwells within us. Then how can for example THE STATE or any agency for that matter have jurisdiction over the people? 

The Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Ephesians, Chapter II,

Verse 18 for through him we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father. 19 Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners; but fellow citizens with the Saints, and of the household of God, 20 And are built upon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets, le-sus Christ himself being the chief corner stone, 21 In whom all the building fitly framed together, grows unto a holy Temple in the Lord: 22 In whom you also are built together for an habitation of God through the Spirit.

Here we find that our lawful citizenship of body and spirit is with the saints while today our ‘legal person’ aka strawman is REGISTERED as a ‘citizen’ of THE STATE which are all legal fiction terms as substantiated by the following Supreme Court ruling – No corporate jurisdiction over the natural man: Supreme Court of the United States 1795, “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)

The key is in the word ‘person’. The remedy lies in what is called the subject-matter-jurisdiction or jurisdiction. The ‘artificial person’ aka THE STATE or any other man-made legal fiction agency clothed as an ‘artificial person’ only have jurisdiction over the legal fiction aka ‘natural person’ which is a cabalistic term; Black’s Law 4^th Edition, 1968 defines ‘natural’ as follows:

NATURAL. The juristic meaning of this term does not differ from the vernacular, except in the cases where it is used in opposition to the term “legal;” and then it means proceeding from or determined by physical causes or conditions, as distinguished from positive enactments of law, or attributable to the nature of man rather than to the commands of law, or based upon moral rather than legal considerations or sanctions.

The above describes the contra-distinct jurisdictions between ‘natural’ (also similar to ‘lawful’) and ‘legal’ and like oil and water the two cannot mix. A ‘natural person’ is a legal term even though it is not lawful.

The Bible is full of verses written by the Apostles regarding the word ‘person’… “…let those who have ears hear…and those who have eyes see…”

Regarding the ‘person’: 

The First Epistle of Paul the Apostle to Timothy, Chapter I,

5 Now the end of the commandment is charity, out of a pure heart, and of a good conscience, and of faith unfeigned. 6 From which some having swerved, have turned aside unto vain jangling, 7 desiring to be teachers of the Law, understanding neither what they say, nor whereof they affirm.  

Do today’s law-givers know what they are saying with all these man-made rules they use in today’s courts?

8 But we know that the Law is good, if a man use it lawfully. 9 Knowing this, that the Law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly, and for sinners, for unholy, and profane, for murderers of fathers, and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, 10 For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for men-stealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine,

The key word is ‘lawful’ as opposed to ‘legal’; lawful refers to the un-enacted divine law, natural law or law of the land; and, today in contradistinction ‘legal’ is the commercial enacted law of the sea.

The General Epistle of the Apostle James, Chapter II,

Verse 1 My brothers, have not the faith our Lord Iesus Christ the Lord of glory, with respect of persons. 2 For if there come unto your assembly a man with a gold-ring, in goodly apparel, and there come in also a poor man, in vile raiment: 3 And ye have respect to him that wears the gay clothing, and say unto him, Sit thou here in a good place: and say to the poor. Stand thou there, or sit here under my footstool: 4 Are ye not then partial in yourselves, and are become judges of evil thoughts?

From the above we can deduct that a ‘person’ is someone who masks themselves with a certain status.

The Gospel according to the Apostle Matthew, Chapter XXII,

Verse 15 then went the Pharisees, and took counsel, how they might entangle him in his talk. 16 And they sent out unto him their disciples, with the Herodians, saying, Master, we know that thou art true, and teaches the way of God in trueth, neither cares thou for any man; for thou regards not the person of men. 

Here the Pharisees and Herodians were schooled in Roman legalese, trying to trap Iesus by the law regarding the ‘person’.

The Gospel according to the Apostle Luke, Chapter XV,

1 Then drew near unto him all the Publicans and sinners, for to hear him. 2 And the Pharisees and Scribes murmured, murmured, saying, This man receives sinners, and eats with them. 3 And he spoke this parable unto them, saying, 4 What man of you having a hundred sheep, if he loose one of them, does not leave the ninety and nine in the wilderness, and goes after that which is lost, until he find it? 5 And when he has found it, he lays it on his shoulders, rejoicing. 6 And when he comes home, he calls together his friends, and neighbours, saying unto them, Rejoice with me, for I have found my sheep which was lost. 7 I say unto you, that likewise joy shall be in heaven over one sinner that repents, more than over ninety and nine just persons, which need no repentance.

He has a great comeback for them in the form of a parable.

The Gospel according to the Apostle Luke, Chapter XX,

Verse 20 and they watched him, and sent forth spies, who should feign themselves just men that they might take hold of his words, that so they might deliver him unto the power and authority of the governor. 21 And they asked him, saying, Master, we know that thou says and teaches rightly, neither accepts thou the person of any, but teaches the way of God truly.

What is being implied here again is that the lawyers of that time tried to gain jurisdiction over Iesus by employing semantic deceit nowadays called LEGALESE, not much different to what the courts are doing today…

The Gospel According to Matthew Chapter XXVII,

Verse 23 And the Governor said, Why, what evil has he done? But they cried out, yes more, saying, Let him be crucified. 24 When Pilate saw that he could prevail nothing, but that rather a tumult was made, he took water, and washed his hands before the multitude, saying, I am innocent of the blood of this just person: see you to it.

Even Pilatus used semantic deceit by referring to the ‘person’ of Iesus because in truth he had no divine jurisdiction over the natural man, only his ‘person’ and this was his ‘legal’, but not lawful, justification for plausible deniability.

The Acts of the Apostles, Chapter X,

Verse 34 Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a trueth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons: 35 But in every nation, he that fears him, and works righteousness, is accepted with him.

Paul was highly schooled in Roman law as Saul before his conversion, but when he realised the nature of divine law, he could probably see the jurisdictional shortcomings of the Roman ‘legal’ hierarchal man-made laws. 

The Epistle of the Apostle Paul to the Romans, Chapter II,

Verse 11 for there is no respect of persons with God. 12 For as many as have sinned without Law, shall also perish without Law: and as many as have sinned in the Law, shall be judged by the Law. 13 ( For not the hearers of the Law are just before God, but the doers of the Law shall be justified; 14 For when the Gentiles which have not the Law, do by nature the things contained in the Law: these having not the Law , are a Law unto themselves, 15 Which show the work of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the meanwhile accusing, or else excusing one another: 16 In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by le-sus Christ, according to my Gospel.

Natural law is written in our hearts. It is our moral and ethical compass. We call it our ‘heart’, or ‘conscience’, or ‘gut feeling’.

The Epistle of Paul to the Galatians, Chapter II,

Verse 4 And that because of false brothers unawares brought in, who came in privily to spy out our liberty, which we have in Christ Iesus that they might bring us into bondage. 5 To whom we gave place by subjection, no not for an hour, that the truth of the Gospel might continue with you. 6 But of these, who seemed to be somewhat, (whatsoever they were, it makes no matter to me, God accepts no man’s person,) for they who seemed to be somewhat, in conference added nothing to me. 

The Creator accepts no man’s ‘person’ or status. We are all equal under divine law.

The Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Colossians, Chapter III,

24 Knowing, that of the Lord ye shall receive the reward of the inheritance: for ye serve the Lord Christ. 25 But he that does wrong shall receive for the wrong which he has done: and there is no respect of persons.

Again no respect for ‘persons’…

5 Hearken, my beloved brothers, has God not chosen the poor of this world, rich in faith, and heirs of the kingdom, which he has promised to them that love him? 6 But you have despised the poor. Do not rich men oppress you, and draw you before the Judgement seats? 7 Do they not blaspheme that worthy Name, by that which you are called? 8 If you fulfil the royal Law, according to the Scripture, you shall love your neighbour as yourself, you do well. 9 But if you have respect to persons, you commit sin, and are convinced of the Law, as transgressors. 10 For whosoever shall keep the whole Law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all. 11 For he that said, do not commit adultery; said also, do not kill. Now if you commit no adultery, yet if you kill, you have become a transgressor of the Law. 12 So speak you, and so do, as they that shall be judged by the Law of liberty. 13 For he shall have judgement without mercy, that has shown no mercy, & mercy rejoices against Judgement.

Are the courts and judges of today showing the people mercy?

The Fist Epistle of the Apostle Peter, Chapter I,

Verse 16 Because it is written, “Be ye holy, for I am holy”. 17 And if you call on the Father, without respect of persons judges according to every man’s work, pass the time of your sojourning here in fear: 18 For as much as you know that you are not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers; 19 But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a Lamb without blemish and without spot, 20 who verily was fore-ordained before the foundation of the world, but is manifest in these last times for you: 21 Who by him do believe in God that raised him up from the dead, and gave him glory, that your faith and hope might be in God.

We were redeemed!!!

The Second General Epistle of Peter, Chapter II,

Verse 2 And many shall follow their pernicious ways, by reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of: 3 And through covetousness shall they with feigned words, make merchandise of you, whose judgement now of a long time lingers not , and their damnation slumbers not

Does this not sound like what lawgivers today are doing to the people?

 The General Epistle of Jude,

Verse 16 these are murmurers and complainers, walking after their own lusts, and their mouth speaks great swelling words, having men’s persons in admiration because of advantage.

 The following verses we believe allude to this ‘advantage’ mentioned:

The Gospel according to the Apostle Matthew, Chapter XXIII,

Verse 12 And whosoever shall exalt himself, shall be abased: and he that shall humble himself, shall be exalted. 13 But wo unto you, Scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites; for you shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: For you neither go in your selves, neither suffer you them that are entering, to go in. 14 Woe unto you Scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites; for you devour widows houses, and for a pretence make long prayer; therefore you shall receive the greater damnation.

Sound like today’s global foreclosure pandemic? The rebuke continues…

15 Woe unto you Scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites; for you compass Sea and land to make one Proselyte, and when he is made, you make him two fold more the child of hell than yourselves.

The judicial activists will recognise that commercial law is the law of the sea and is swallowing up the law of the land by greying areas of jurisdiction; for example, how did the law of the sea such as admiralty law get onto the land?

16 Woe unto you, you blind guides, which say, Whosoever shall swear by the Temple, it is nothing: but whosoever shall swear by the gold of the Temple, he is a debtor.

Today all BAR members belong to a secret society known as The Temple in the City of London… they still make long ‘prayers’ in court documents… and they make one swear by the gold of baal’s unholy temple… hence the Jewish people traditionally only traded silver amongst themselves…

To add to this regarding oaths and solemn affirmations in a court:

Verse 34 But I say unto you, Swear not at all, neither by heaven, for it is Gods throne: 35 Nor by the earth, for it is his footstool: neither by Hierusalem, for it is the city of the great king. 36 Neither shalt thou swear by thy head, because thou cannot make one hair white or black. 37 But let your communication be Yes, yes: No, No: For whatsoever is more than these, comes of evil.

The rebuke continues… 

Verse 23 Woe unto you Scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites; for you pay tithe of mint, and aniseed, and cumin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the Law, judgement, mercy and faith: these ought you to have done, and not to leave the other undone. 24 You blind guides, which strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel. 

You blind guides, which strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel. Imagine saying the above in a court of today? He, he;

Verse 27 Woe unto you Scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites, for you are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men’s bones, and of all uncleanness. 28 Even so, you also outwardly appear righteous unto men, but within you are full of hypocrisy and iniquity.

Sounds like even then they powdered their faces into a mask? Does this bring to mind what judges or lawyers still do today with their wigs and bat-capes?

The Book of the Prophet Isaiah, Chapter III,

Verse 8 Woe unto them that join house to house, that lay field to field, till there be no place, that they may be placed alone in the midst of the earth.

Sound like any corporation or oligarch you may know of in today’s world?

Chapter X,

Verse 1 Woe unto them that decree unrighteous decrees, and that write grievousness which they have prescribed: 2 to turn aside the needy from judgement, and to take away the right from the poor of my people, that widows may be their pray, and that they may rob the fatherless.

Sound like a social welfare court near you? Or, much the same as courts of today are doing?

To conclude, this brings to mind the following enigmatic verse:

Ecclesiastes, Chapter I,

Verse 8 the thing that has been, it is that which shall be: and that which is done, is that which shall be done; and there is no new thing under the sun. 9 Is there anything, whereof it may be said, See, this is new? It has been already of old time, which was before us. 10 There is no remembrance of former things; neither shall there be any remembrance of things that are to come, with those that shall come after.

The Age of the Sovereignty of Humanity is Upon Us

 

“The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government…” Article 21(3), Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

From: http://www.worldservice.org/update.html

By Garry Davis (July 27, 1921 – July 24, 2013) who was an international peace activist who created the World Passport, a travel document originally based on Article 13(2), Universal Declaration of Human Rights and on the concept of world citizenship.

World Government of World Citizens

The AGE OF THE SOVEREIGNTY OF HUMANITY IS UPON US

JANUARY 1, 2013

The definition of “humanity” is 1. “All human beings collectively; the human race; humankind.” ^[1]

As “sovereignty” is defined as “supreme,” “preeminence,” “indisputable sovereign power,” humanity as such enjoys sine qua non such attributes.

Sovereignty therefore has passed historically and legally from the nation-state to Humanity.

The very Universal Declaration of Human Rights in its first article verifies and mandates each and every human as a fundamental unit of humanity in toto:

“All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.”

Moreover, the UDHR’s Preamble affirms that:

“whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world…”

Sages and prophets, scientists ^[2] and artists of all fields ^[3] have from time immemorial prophesied that Humanity one day would enter the Age of Enlightenment, the Age of Wisdom and the Age of Unity. Moreover, from the Decalogue through the 1215 Magna Carta, the 1776 Declaration of Independence, the 1789 Declaration de l’Homme et du Citoyen, the 1789 U.S. Bill of Rights, the 1914 Atlantic Charter, the 1945 Nuremberg Principles, the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the 1953 Ellsworth Declaration (of World Government), and the 1974 Statute of the World Court of Human Rights, humanity has arrived, not without giant trials and tribulation, at the birth of the Age of Sovereign legitimacy and legitimate planetary citizenship.

In addition, having entered the Nuclear Age in 1945, when destructive power has risen from relative to absolute, moreover becoming genocidal, humanity itself became potentially a global target of the nation-state war system, carried over from the largely agricultural 18th and 19th centuries.

In brief, if humanity dies, so does the human race including all so-called fictional nation-states.

Therefore humanity per se has entered the prophetic Age of Legitimate Sovereignty.

Moreover, “Crimes against humanity” cited in the Nuremberg Principles, for the first time in judicial history, posited humanity as a reality and potential defendant. ^[4]

Thus, under total threat of attack and possible elimination by the anarchic nation-state system, ^[5] Humanity, as an existent fact, has achieved, as of 1945, a de facto and per se legitimate sovereign status vis-a-vis the war-dominated nation-state world.

In strictly legal terms, as of 1945, threatened by the obsolete national dysfunctional war system, humanity became a potential “plaintiff” beginning with the Nuremberg Trials following World War II, requiring legal defense. The nuclear “gun,” in verifiable and judicial fact, was and is pointing directly at it: a “global felony.”

In short, if humanity can be wiped out via nuclear weaponry, it is therefore obliged to defend itself legally as a potential victim. ^[6]

Thus, for the first time in juridical history, an indictment of “Crimes Against Humanity” entered international jurisprudence. A world court of human rights adjudicating world law is already mandated in the UDHR beginning with articles 6 to 9.

In turn, as humanity by definition is composed of all humans, each human claiming, as an inalienable right, the addition of world citizenship, becomes, and is legitimately, also a micro-global plaintiff vis-a-vis the national war system under the sovereign protection of world law.

Humans in society on whatever level become citizens and citizens form governments.

Or else inalienable rights of political choice are meaningless.

For it is only to protect these that individuals establish a social and political order, carefully defined and always at the consent of the governed. ^[7]

The aware individual, therefore, faced with a worldly disorder, has first to declare and affirm his or her dynamic political identification with his/her human community.

Also, in declaring ourselves citizens of the world community in which we currently live, we are affirming that essentially we are our own governors.

The individual affirmation and registration of world citizenship therefore is the first step toward realization of human rights for all, the realistic path to world peace. Because it is world humans legally bonding with fellow humans for their individual and collective survival, well-being and happiness.

In essence, we are certifying our innate and inalienable sovereignty as humans in charge of our own destiny.

This is the essence of the democratic principle and precisely where true sovereignty exists, is maintained and prevails for one and all.

The process is in full progress and has been since January 1, 1949. ^[8]

The benefits accruing to a sovereign humanity almost defy the boldest imagination.

Released from the strangling entanglements of internal planetary war, a giant leap forward in civic and economic benefits for a world citizenry would automatically ensue. Such items are already mandated in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights agreed upon by every member of the impotent and defective United Nations. Protection of Earth’s environment itself would be the primary and immediate task.

The greatest advancement, however, would be on the spiritual or consciousness level, already announced by such enlightened humans as Christ, Buddha, Mohammed, Lao-Tse, Vyasa, Diogenes, Socrates, Theilhard de Chardin, Plato, Thoreau, T. Paine, Gandhi, Einstein, H. G. Wells, Schweitzer, Buckminster Fuller, Martin Luther King, Jr., Emery Reves, and on and on, when the metaphysical development of our species would take a giant leap into realms only imagined today.

Finally, in the cosmic sense, Humanity is but a speck of matter in a timeless universe.

And yet, IT IS HERE AND NOW and WE ARE IT!

That is why we must survive and endure.

______________________________

1. Random House Collegiate Dictionary
2. Einstein: “A new type of thinking is essential if mankind is to survive and move to higher levels.”
3. Charlie Chaplin: “Charlot” for instance
4. (c) Crimes against humanity: Murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation and other inhumane acts done against any civilian population, or persecutions on political, racial, or religious grounds, when such acts are done or such persecutions are carried on in execution of or in connection with any crime against peace or any war crime.
5. The 18th, 19th centuries witnessed the increasing dominance of the nation-state system in a largely agricultural world, pre-technological, pre-electronics, pre-nuclear and pre-space.
6. Luis Kutner was one of the first to recognize the absolute need for the principle of habeas corpus to be raised to the global level since arbitrary detention, first achieved under the Magna Carta in 1215, was being violated throughout the nation-state system due to the anarchic condition prevailing between all nations by definition.
7. Example: Ninth Amendment of the US Constitution.
8. The founding of the International Registry of World Citizens in Paris, by the author and subsequently updated by the World Service Authority (administrative agency of the World Government of World Citizens), in 1954.

Everyone is crying out for peace, yes… none is crying out for justice…

Let Justice Be Done Though The Heavens may fall… From the Rooftops!!! we say

…and ye shall know the trueth…

https://giftoftruth.wordpress.com/annexures/

2015.10.20 UZA Report: “We, the People” v. RSA INC.

ZA – Southern Africa people’s courts, tribunals, oversight committees;

Without any prejudice to the living,

FIRST OFF: THIS IS NOT A WITCH HUNT; IT’S ABOUT TRUTH & RECONCILIATION;

 

It’s the foundations of this society that are corrupt… and we all turned a blind eye… most still do… not for long… we are the ‘trimtabs’; time to return to some good ole fashion morals and ethics; and, hold our public servants accountable; thus far, not a single soul of the thousands we have spoken to have ANY confidence in the current system; we DO NOT TRUST our Judges, Attorneys, Public Officials, Police, Military or any AGENTS of RSA INC. PERIOD! Trust must be earned, so they can start the first steps to re-conciliation, so a re-oath is in order:

This brings to mind a relevant point made by Albie Sachs, now retired CONcourt Judge and one of few worth two salts, just before this ‘democratic’ era came into being:

‘The Constitution is Natural Justice Writ Large’

‘It is no accident that constitutions usually come into being as a result of bad rather than good experiences. Their text, or sub-text, is almost invariably: “never again”. In the case of South Africa, the new constitution arises out of the need to escape from the profound humiliations and oppression created by apartheid. Through the constitution, we affirm that we learn something from our dolorous history. It is worth repeating: all constitutions are based on mistrust. If we could trust our rulers, our parties, ourselves, we would not need constitutions. Power not only corrupts, it intoxicates, it confuses. Like Nature, it abhors a vacuum. Like Water, it follows the path of least resistance. Oppression is oppression, but in some ways, oppression in the name of the good is worse than oppression in defence of the bad, since it tarnishes the very ideas it seeks to protect and deprives people even of the image or hope of a better society.’

[‘The Constitution is Natural Justice Writ Large’ in Corder and McLennan (eds) Controlling Public Power: Administrative Justice Through Law Cape Town, Department of Public Law, University of Cape Town: 1995, 51, 51.

“We, the People” v. RSA INC. 

1. Finally, a criminal complaint has been filed with the South African Police Services in the case of “We, the People” v. RSA INC.; as our criminal complaint is unusual, they referred the matter to their superior and could not provide us with a case number; we told them to contact us to set up a meeting; our experience is they usually disappear… very quickly make commercial arrests, but run from the truth… eish; document posted at: https://giftoftruth.wordpress.com/annexures/
2.  Finally, the case is being served on the Justices of the Constitutional Court of South Africa (CONcourt), The Judicial Services Committee, The Public Prosecutor, The Minister of Justice and Correctional Services and Deputy Minister for Justice and Constitutional Development; (interesting that Correctional Services is ABOVE Constitutional Development now… more slavery planned?)
3.  We, the people are applying to an International Tribunal By Friday 23^rd of October, 2015 the International Tribunal for Natural Justice will have received all documents, deposit and everything necessary to make a final decision on:
4. IF they are willing to take on such an onerous title? we won’t blame them if they don’t; however, we have to continue nonetheless at the law of necessity;
5. And if they are, to set a date for the trial which more than likely will be live-streamed or recorded; we will know soon enough from ITNJ and report;
6. Our common-law case: 2013/06/S11 with the CONcourt which started in 2013 is documented at https://giftoftruth.wordpress.com/constitutional-court/  
7. The Founding Affidavit in our case has just been posted at:  https://giftoftruth.wordpress.com/annexures/
8.  A few weeks ago we had emailed the UZA invitation to the CONcourt to show support for the ITNJ: http://www.itnj.org/
9. Today when we arrived at the CONcourt, Hillbrow the assistant registrar, Delano Louw was obviously expecting us; somehow he was more hue-man, not his usual sneering attitude;
10. The only people’ court on the land was dead quiet, as it mostly is… Ironic… no people complaining there… should be 1 000s there daily; only the tourists give it a bit of life; soon, our presence and offices will liven it up J
11. Since the Registrar, Martie Stander resigned in 2014 (went on ‘pension”) a new registrar still has not been appointed…
12. Workshops have taken off in the townships and UZA already has the support of a few referral marketing communities, stokvels, NGOs; it’s growing fast; all groups that are ‘under investigation’ by the National Credit Council;
13. UZA has the support of a few churches; and, hopefully soon millions will show solidarity;

28^th of January, 2016: WHAT IS HAPPENING SOUTHERN AFRICA?!?!?!

1.  We are challenging Germany’s record: on that day we declare to have more than 250 00 people to OCCUPY PEACE on Constitutional Hill to witness our Justices re-oath themselves to we, the people; either with an International Chief Justice present and or World Hereditary Chiefs
2. Failing which we occupy constitutional hill; we will notify you along the way as to what is unfolding; this is the only remedy and probably our LAST chance to avert chaos; as a last resort we reserve the right to declare a people’s state of emergency and call up our peace-keepers and peace-makers and peace officers and all who solemnly affirm/oath themselves to we, the people as the lawful state and Republic;
3. Townships are already burning; Cosmos City, Vosloorus; we are doing workshops in these areas and educating people on their rights and lawful defence;
4. AND TO STAND WITH US ON THE 28^TH JANUARY 2016!!!
5.  We, the people are binding the Justices with the chains of the Constitution:
6. to the original meaning of a Republic;
7. to their oath;
8. to the original Bill of Rights at centre stage;
9. failing which, they must vacate office immediately and we will have replacements on hand; even if Tribal Elders: 1 from each tribe would be ideal;  

Southern Africa Bills to be passed on the following:

1. Note: in order for us to have pedigree, we must be written into the Constitution;
2. Our already established rights are written into the original Bill of Rights;
3. National People’s Newspaper Gazette; (the current one is a fraud);
4. Southern Africa Express Trust: an interim transmitting utility  to facilitate commercial transactions and be an interim revenue fund; we call it “re-public” i.e. we, the people are re-publicing our asset value;
5. re-public = re-present – re-view – re-oath – re-voke – re-instate – re-purpose – re-habilitate – re-venue – re-ferendum – re-tain and maintain;
6. Superior jurisdiction people’s courts, forums, oversight committees and tribunals to be recorded (not registered) and Via (not enacted) gazetted;
7. The natural law procedure for people’s trial by jury courts, forums, oversight committees and tribunals to: convene, summons, hold fair hearings, making rulings, verify for judicial review at International Law, gazette, implement if not contested;
8. Moratorium on ALL commercial claims against natural ‘citizens’;
9. Full contract, settlement, closure on books of RSA as per GAAP within 30 Days;
10. Full global audit and repatriation of gold, silver, minerals, heritage and all collateral wealth to balance the books;
11. Full national audit on ALL public commonwealth i.e. everything on and in the land;
12. Power of banking placed back in the hands of we the people;
13. People’s Bank to be launched and positive economics ventures funded;
14. SAPS and Military and all public servants re-oath themselves; failing which to vacate office;
15. People to be informed and educated via people’s gazette
16. Interim National Referendum ( 1 page); starting 28^th of February 2016;
17. Complete the 1 page interim referendum and receive:
18. a debit card for R5 000 per month; every month;
19. a sim card for 30 min free talktime daily and 25 sms free daily;
20. National Referendum to start 29^th of January 2016 on issues such as self-governance and self-determination;

How do we declare courts? The natural law procedure for people’s trial by jury courts, forums, oversight committees and tribunals to: declare, convene, summons, hold fair hearings, making rulings, verify for judicial review at International Law, gazette, implement if not contested;

If you are still reading this then you are probably the 1% of the 99% he he; may as well consider volunteering; sadly, there is NO other remedy: https://giftoftruth.wordpress.com/volunteers/

The Ghoringhaicona Hereditary Council will be declaring their court to rule and find remedy for their natural birthright claim to land on the Cape Flats by their custom; we expect others to follow;

use common sense to declare a fair court; imagine you are the receiver of a summons from a people’s court… what would you feel is fair? And keep in mind: it’s about reconciliation and NOT retribution; rather rule on turning Monsanto into an organic company than shut it down; the Southern Africa Trust will foot the bill if it’s towards positive change; start preparing your cases people!!

Soon, you can hold people accountable who act as agents for harmful CORPORATIONS…

Without prejudice, ex causa onerosa, in peace,

 

ITNJ Ceremonial Seating Preview

Dear People,

Without prejudice,

FINALLY… a Real Natural Remedy… by the people, for the people, of the people;

You are invited to watch 25 min of thought-provoking footage, presentation and interviews…

Some of the Southern Africa crew speak in this video beginning at timestamp 21:12….

Pomp and circumstance not being our cup of tea he he, but it is for the people…

Have you signed the ITNJ Treaty? http://www.itnj.org/

And…

scarcely has it been posted on you-tube and the first disinformation starts in the comments section… which we felt compelled to respond to;

Maxim: “An error not resisted is approved.”

Comments:

Lynnie: Nice Introduction but isn’t this the one, hijacked by Bar Attorneys as Rod Class and others who started the ITNJ are saying? >”Hijacked” being the key word.<

brother-thomas: Hi Lynnie, without any prejudice and only in order that the truth may set us free are we responding; your presumption is unfortunately incorrect; pay no attention to false prophets…

Rest assured that we the people of Southern Africa have done our provisional filings at natural law and the ITNJ has accepted our terms as an independent sovereign court of record as we, the sovereigns are the court and all proceedings will be according to our wishes with our jury as this is a Southern Africa matter and ITNJ are merely arbitrators:

maxim: “The court is the person and the suit of the sovereign.”

and, at natural law, we are peers and disputes can only be settled before a jury;

maxim: “The decree of the sovereign makes law.”

This is a SA matter with SA remedies by the people, for the people and of the people; the ITNJ will just be affirming our representative administrative action which will be held to referendum once the first extraordinary remedies have been implemented starting 28th of January 2016 for RSA at Constitutional Court of South Africa which will be live-streamed; we aim to have more than 250 000 people on Constitutional Hill to witness our Justices re-oath themselves to the original Bill of Rights and the original Constitution of the original Republic of South Africa;  Our Constitutional Court has already granted quiet title action, but they requested we get a Chief Justice: enter ITNJ;

Final proof of the un-restricted sovereignty and access to court that ITNJ has granted us:

Affidavit of Truth: I brother-thomas, a people hereby solemnly affirm to whom these presents shall come; that, as administrator of UZA the first people’s court on the land; and, a religious man who by Black’s Law 4th Edition, 1968 is civilly dead, the ITNJ have nonetheless provisionally accepted our court filings of “We, the People” v. RSA INC.; specifically, the people ACTing as Justices of our Constitutional Court of South Africa; final filings will be in by 17 October 2015; trial to commence in November;  

Details and navigational links to our actions are at giftoftruth dot wordpress dot com: click on the FAQs page for brief descriptions and navigational links; be blessed;  

What we have here with the Baptists is evidence of how destructive the ego can be and poor America has a lot of that going on ACROSS the board: from corporate to sovereign; this destructive ego will lead to a violent confrontation on US soil; Is history seeking to repeat itself? Is it necessary? Does it matter who is right if our common goal is LIBERTY!!! THAT IS WHAT WE ALL HAVE IN COMMON! THE REST IS BAGGAGE; let it go already… we rest our case, your honour…

Us Africans are one people and do not easily entertain trifles and avoid scandals; so, we are friends  with sacha, rod, Rebecca and co; EVERYBODY EQUALLY; we wrote them we love them but what they are doing is un-Christian; anyone may email us at commonlawsa at “gee”-mail dot com if they have ANY evidence to the contrary and we will repent in public and amend our ways; this is it, people; ripleys believe it, or not… the silver bullet (we, the people)… whatever you want to call it; Until then, in the words of Thomas Paine:

“UNITED WE STAND; DIVIDED WE FALL!”

Sincerely, ex causa onerosa,

be blessed, in peace,

administrator uza – brother-thomas

CANONS OF JUDICIAL ETHICS – “A Judge should have two salts…”… Do they?…

Without any prejudice,

We have first-hand experience, on numerous occasions, in the courts of Southern Africa that  people acting as commercial executive administrators acting as “Judges” fall short on at least 90% of the following; we say that we stand witness to the Judges to be found wanting… ex causa onerosa; in peace – uza

Let us know what your experience is?

 

CANONS OF JUDICIAL ETHICS *

With Amendments to January 1, 1968

Ancient Precedents.

“And I charged your judges at that time, saying Hear the causes between your brethren, and judge righteously between every man and his brother, and the stranger that is with him. Ye shall not respect persons in judgment; but ye shall hear the small as well as the great; ye shall not be afraid of the face of man; for the judgment is God’s; and the cause that is too hard for you, bring it unto me, and I wil hear it” — Deuteronomy, I, 16-17.

“Thou shalt not wrest judgment; thou shat not respect persons, neither take a gift; for a gift doth blind the eyes of the wise, and pervert the words of the righteous.” — Deuteronomy, XVI, 19.

“We will not make any justiciaries, constables, sheriffs or bailiffs, but from those who understand the law of the realm and are well disposed to observe it.” — Magna Charta, XLV.

“Judges ought to remember that their office is jus dicere not jus dare; to interpret law, and not to make law, or give law.”

“Judges ought to be more learned than witty; more reverend than plausible; and more advised than confident. Above all things, integrity is their portion and proper virtue.”

“Patience and gravity of hearing is an essential part of justice; and an over speaking judge is no well-tuned cymbal. It is no grace to a judge first to find that which he might have heard in due time from the Bar, or to show quickness of conceit in cutting off evidence or counsel too short; or to prevent information by questions though pertinent.”

“The place of justice is a hallowed place; and therefore not only the Bench, but the foot pare and precincts and purprise thereof ought to be preserved without scandal and corruption.” – Bacon’s “Essay Of Judicature.”

Preamble.

In addition to the Canons for Professional Conduct of Lawyers which it has formulated and adopted, the American Bar Association, mindful that the character and conduct of a judge should never be objects of indifference, and that declared ethical standards tend to become habits of life, deems it desirable to set forth its views respecting those principles which should govern the personal practice of members of the judiciary in the administration of their office. The Association accordingly adopts the following Canons, the spirit of which it suggests as a proper guide and reminder for judges, and as indicating what the people have a right to expect from them.

Preamble.

In addition to the Canons for Professional Conduct of Lawyers which it has formulated and adopted, the American Bar Association, mindful that the character and conduct of a judge should never be objects of indifference, and that declared ethical standards tend to become habits of life, deems it desirable to set forth its views respecting those principles which should govern the personal practice of members of the judiciary in the administration of their office. The Association accordingly adopts the following Canons, the spirit of which it suggests as a proper guide and reminder for judges, and as indicating what the people have a right to expect from them.

1. Relations of the Judiciary.

The assumption of the office of judge casts upon the incumbent duties in respect to his personal conduct which concern his relation to the state and its inhabitants, the litigants before him, the principles of law, the practitioners of law in his court, and the witnesses, jurors and attendants who aid him in the administration of its functions.

2. The Public Interest.

Courts exist to promote justice, and thus to serve the public interest. Their administration should be speedy and careful. Every judge should at all times be alert in his rulings and in the conduct of the business of the court, so far as he can, to make it useful to litigants and to the community. He should avoid unconsciously falling into the attitude of mind that the litigants are made for the courts instead of the courts for the litigants.

3. Constitutional Obligations.

It is the duty of all judges in the United States to support the federal Constitution and that of the state whose laws they administer; in so doing, they should fearlessly observe and apply fundamental limitations and guarantees.

4. Avoidance of Impropriety.

A judge’s official conduct should be free from impropriety and the appearance of impropriety; he should avoid infractions of law; and his personal behavior, not only upon the Bench and in the performance of judicial duties, but also in his everyday life, should be beyond reproach.

5. Essential Conduct.

A judge should be temperate, attentive, patient, impartial, and, since he is to administer the law and apply it to the facts, he should be studious of the principles of the law and diligent in endeavouring to ascertain the facts.

6. Industry.

A judge should exhibit an industry and application commensurate with the duties imposed upon him.

Black’s Law Dictionary 4th Ed. Rev.

LX IX

___

CANONS OF JUDICIAL ETHICS

7. Promptness.

A judge should be prompt in the performance of his judicial duties, recognizing that the time of litigants, jurors and attorneys is of value and that habitual lack of punctuality on his part justifies dissatisfaction with the administration of the business of the court.

8. Court Organization.

A judge should organize the court with a view to the prompt and convenient dispatch of its business and he should not tolerate abuses and neglect by clerks, and other assistants who are sometimes prone to presume too much upon his good natured acquiescence by reason of friendly association with him.

It is desirable too, where the judicial system permits, that he should cooperate with other judges of the same court, and in other courts, as members of a single judicial system, to promote the more satisfactory administration of justice.

9. Consideration for Jurors and Others.

A judge should be considerate of jurors, witnesses and others in attendance upon the court.

10. Courtesy and Civility.

A judge should be courteous to counsel, especially to those who are young and inexperienced, and also to all others appearing or concerned in the administration of justice in the court.

He should also require, and so far as his power extends, enforce on the part of clerks, court officers and counsel civility and courtesy to the court and to jurors, witnesses, litigants and others having business in the court.

11. Unprofessional Conduct of Attorneys and Counsel.

A judge should utilize his opportunities to criticise and correct unprofessional conduct of attorneys and counsellors, brought to his attention; and, if adverse comment is not a sufficient corrective, should send the matter at once to the proper investigating and disciplinary authorities.

12. Appointees of the Judiciary and Their Compensation.

Trustees, receivers, masters, referees, guardians and other persons appointed by a judge to aid in the administration of justice should have the strictest probity and impartiality and should be selected with a view solely to their character and fitness. The power of making such appointments should not be exercised by him for personal or partisan advantage. He should not permit his appointments to be controlled by others than himself.

He should also avoid nepotism and undue favouritism in his appointments.

While not hesitating to fix or approve just amounts, he should be most scrupulous in granting

Or approving compensation for the services or charges of such appointees to avoid excessive allowances, whether or not excepted to or complained of. He cannot rid himself of this responsibility by the consent of counsel.

13. Kinship or Influence.

A judge should not act in a controversy where a near relative is a party; he should not suffer his conduct to justify the impression that any person can improperly influence him or unduly enjoy his favor, or that he is affected by the kinship, rank, position or influence of any party or other person.

14. Independence.

A judge should not be swayed by partisan demands, public clamor or considerations of personal popularity or notoriety, nor be apprehensive of unjust criticism.

15. Interference in Conduct of Trial.

A judge may properly intervene in a trial of a case to promote expedition, and prevent unnecessary waste of time, or to clear up some obscurity, but he should bear in mind that his undue interference, impatience, or participation in the examination of witnesses, or a severe attitude on his part toward witnesses, especially those who are excited or terrified by the unusual circumstances of a trial, may tend to prevent the proper presentation of the cause, or the ascertainment of the truth in respect thereto.

Conversation between the judge and counsel in court is often necessary, but the judge should be studious to avoid controversies which are apt to obscure the merits of the dispute between litigants and lead to its unjust disposition. In addressing counsel, litigants, or witnesses, he should avoid a controversial manner or tone.

He should avoid interruptions of counsel in their arguments except to clarify his mind as to their positions, and he should not be tempted to the unnecessary display of learning or a premature judgment.

16. Ex parte Applications.

A judge should discourage ex parte hearings of applications for injunctions and receiverships where the order may work detriment to absent parties; he should act upon such ex parte applications only where the necessity for quick action is clearly shown; if this be demonstrated, then he should endeavor to counteract the effect of the absence of opposing counsel by a scrupulous cross-examination and investigation as to the facts and the principles of law on which the application is based, granting relief only when fully satisfied that the law permits it and the emergency demands it. He should remember that an injunction is a limitation upon the freedom of action of defendants and should not be granted lightly or inadvisedly. One applying for such relief must sustain the burden of showing clearly its necessity and this burden is increased in the absence of the party whose freedom of action is sought to be restrained even though only temporarily.

17. Ex parte Communications.

A judge should not permit private interviews, arguments or communications designed to influence his judicial action, where interests to

LXX

___

CANONS OF JUDICIAL ETHICS

be affected thereby are not represented before him, except in cases where provision is made by law for ex parte application.

While the conditions under which briefs of argument are to be received are largely matters of local rule or practice, he should not permit the contents of such brief presented to him to be concealed from opposing counsel. Ordinarily all communications of counsel to the judge intended or calculated to influence action should be made known to opposing counsel.

18. Continuances.

Delay in the administration of justice is a common cause of complaint; counsels are frequently responsible for this delay. A judge, without being arbitrary or forcing cases unreasonably or unjustly to trial when unprepared, to the detriment of parties, may well endeavor to hold counsel to a proper appreciation of their duties to the public interest, to their own clients, and to the adverse party and his counsel, so as to enforce due diligence in the dispatch of business before the court.

19. Judicial Opinions.

In disposing of controverted cases, a judge should indicate the reasons for his action in an opinion showing that he has not disregarded or overlooked serious arguments of counsel. He thus shows his full understanding of the case, avoids the suspicion of arbitrary conclusion, promotes confidence in his intellectual integrity and may contribute useful precedent to the growth of the law.

It is desirable that Courts of Appeals in reversing cases and granting new trials should so indicate their views on questions of law argued before them and necessarily arising in the controversy that upon the new trial counsel may be aided to avoid the repetition of erroneous positions of law and shall not be left in doubt by the failure of the court to decide such questions.

But the volume of reported decisions is such and is so rapidly increasing that in writing opinions which are to be published judges may well take this fact into consideration, and curtail them accordingly, without substantially departing from the principles stated above.

It is of high importance that judges constituting a court of last resort should use effort and selfrestraint to promote solidarity of conclusion and the consequent influence of judicial decision. A judge should not yield to pride of opinion or value more highly his individual reputation than that of the court to which he should be loyal. Except in case of conscientious difference of opinion on fundamental principle, dissenting opinions should be discouraged in courts of last resort.

20. Influence of Decisions Upon the Development of the Law.

A judge should be mindful that his duty is the application of general law to particular instances, that ours is a government of law and not of men, and that he violates his duty as a minister of justice under such a system if he seeks to do what he may personally consider substantial justice in a particular case and disregards the general law as he knows it to be binding on him. Such action  may become a precedent unsettling accepted principles and may have detrimental consequences beyond the immediate controversy. He should administer his office with a due regard to the integrity of the system of the law itself, remembering that he is not a depositary of arbitrary power, but a judge under the sanction of law.

21. Idiosyncrasies and Inconsistencies.

Justice should not be moulded by the individual idiosyncrasies of those who administer it. A judge should adopt the usual and expected method of doing justice, and not seek to be extreme or peculiar in his judgments, or spectacular or sensational in the conduct of the court. Though vested with discretion in the imposition of mild or severe sentences he should not compel persons brought before him to submit to some humiliating act or discipline of his own devising, without authority of law, because he thinks it will have a beneficial corrective influence.

In imposing sentence he should endeavor to conform to a reasonable standard of punishment and should not seek popularity or publicity either by exceptional severity or undue leniency.

22. Review.

In order that a litigant may secure the full benefit of the right of review accorded to him by law, a trial judge should scrupulously grant to the defeated party opportunity to present the questions arising upon the trial exactly as they arose, were presented, and decided, by full and fair bill of exceptions or otherwise; any failure in this regard on the part of the judge is peculiarly worthy of condemnation because the wrong done may be irremediable.

23. Legislation.

A judge has exceptional opportunity to observe the operation of statutes, especially those relating to practice, and to ascertain whether they tend to impede the just disposition of controversies; and he may well contribute to the public interest by advising those having authority to remedy defects of procedure, of the result of his observation and experience.

24. Inconsistent Obligations.

A judge should not accept inconsistent duties; nor incur obligations, pecuniary or otherwise, which will in any way interfere or appear to interfere with his devotion to the expeditious and proper administration of his official functions.

25. Business Promotions and Solicitations for Charity.

A judge should avoid giving ground for any reasonable suspicion that he is utilizing the power or prestige of his office to persuade or coerce others to patronize or contribute, either to the success of private business ventures, or to charitable enterprises.

He should, therefore, not enter into such private business, or pursue such a course of conduct, as would justify such suspicion, nor use the power of his office or the influence of his name to promote the business interests of others; he should not solicit for charities, nor should he enter into any business relation which, in the normal course of events reasonably to be expected, might bring his personal interest into conflict with the impartial performance of his official duties.

I,XX I

___

CANONS OF JUDICIAL ETHICS

26. Personal Investments and Relations.

A judge should abstain from making personal investments in enterprises which are apt to be involved in litigation in the court; and, after his accession to the Bench, he should not retain such investments previously made, longer than a period sufficient to enable him to dispose of them without serious loss. It is desirable that he should, so far as reasonably possible, refrain from all relations which would normally tend to arouse the suspicion that such relations warp or bias his judgment, or prevent his impartial attitude of mind in the administration of his judicial duties.

He should not utilize information coming to him in a judicial capacity for purposes of speculation; and it detracts from the public confidence in his integrity and the soundness of his judicial judgment for him at any time to become a speculative investor upon the hazard of a margin.

27. Executorships and Trusteeships.

While a judge is not disqualified from holding executorships or trusteeships, he should not accept or continue to hold any fiduciary or other position if the holding of it would interfere or seem to interfere with the proper performance of his judicial duties, or if the business interests of those represented require investments in enterprises that are apt to come before him judicially, or to be involved in questions of law to be determined by him.

28. Partisan Politics.*

While entitled to entertain his personal views of political questions, and while not required to surrender his rights or opinions as a citizen, it is inevitable that suspicion of being warped by political bias will attach to a judge who becomes the active promoter of the interests of one political party as against another. He should avoid making political speeches, making or soliciting payment of assessments or contributions to party funds, the public endorsement of candidates for political office and participation in party conventions.

He should neither accept nor retain a place on any party committee nor act as party leader, nor engage generally in partisan activities.

Where, however, it is necessary for judges to be nominated and elected as candidates of a political party, nothing herein contained shall prevent the judge from attending or speaking at political gatherings, or from making contributions to the campaign funds of the party that has nominated him and seeks his election or re-election.

the impression that if chosen, he will administer his office with bias, partiality or improper discrimination.

While holding a judicial position he should not become an active candidate either at a party primary or at a general election for any office other than a judicial office. If a judge should decide to become a candidate for any office not judicial, he should resign in order that it cannot be said that he is using the power or prestige of his judicial position to promote his own candidacy or the success of his party.

If a judge becomes a candidate for any judicial office, he should refrain from all conduct which might tend to arouse reasonable suspicion that he is using the power or prestige of his judicial position to promote his candidacy or the success of his party.

He should not permit others to do anything in behalf of his candidacy which would reasonably lead to such suspicion.

31. Private Law Practice.

In many states the practice of law by one holding judicial position is forbidden. In superior courts of general jurisdiction, it should never be permitted. In inferior courts in some states, it is permitted because the county or municipality is not able to pay adequate living compensation for a competent judge. In such cases one who practises law is in a position of great delicacy and must be scrupulously careful to avoid conduct in his practice whereby he utilizes or seems to utilize his judicial position to further his professional success.

He should not practise in the court in which he is a judge, even when presided over by another judge, or appear therein for himself in any controversy.

If forbidden to practise law, he should refrain from accepting any professional employment while in office.

He may properly act as arbitrator or lecture upon or instruct in law, or write upon the subject, and accept compensation therefor, if such course does not interfere with the due performance of his judicial duties, and is not forbidden by some positive provision of law.

32. Gifts and Favors.

A judge should not accept any presents or favors from litigants, or from lawyers practising before him or from others whose interests are likely to be submitted to him for judgment.

33. Social Relations.

It is not necessary to the proper performance of judicial duty that a judge should live in retirement or seclusion; it is desirable that, so far as reasonable attention to the completion of his work will permit, he continue to mingle in social intercourse and that he should not discontinue his interest in or appearance at meetings of members of the Bar. He should, however, in pending or prospective litigation before him be particularly careful to avoid such action as may reasonably tend to awaken the suspicion that his social or business relations or friendships constitute an element in influencing his judicial conduct.

34. A Summary of Judicial Obligation.

In every particular his conduct should be above reproach. He should be conscientious, studious, thorough, courteous, patient, punctual, just, impartial, fearless of public clamor, regardless of

LXXII

___

29. Self-Interest.

A judge should abstain from performing or taking part in any judicial act in which his personal interests are involved. If he has personal litigation in the court of which he is judge, he need not resign his judgeship on that account, but he should, of course, refrain from any judicial act in such a controversy.

30. Candidacy for Office.**

A candidate for judicial position should not make or suffer others to make for him, promises of conduct in office which appeal to the cupidity or prejudices of the appointing or electing power; he should not announce in advance his conclusions of law on disputed issues to secure class support, and he should do nothing while a candidate to create As amended August 31, 1933 and September 20, 1950.

** As amended August 31, 1933.

___

CANONS OF JUDICIAL ETHICS

public praise, and indifferent to private political or partisan influences; he should administer justice according to law, and deal with his appointments as a public trust; he should not allow other affairs or his private interests to interfere with the prompt and proper performance of his judicial duties, nor should he administer the office for the purpose of advancing his personal ambitions or increasing his popularity.

35. Improper Publicizing of Court Proceedings.*

Proceedings in court should be conducted with fitting dignity and decorum. The taking of photo graphs in the court room, during sessions of the court or recesses between sessions, and the broadcasting or televising of court proceedings detract from the essential dignity of the proceedings, distract participants and witnesses in giving testimony, and create misconceptions with respect thereto in the mind of the public and should not be permitted.

* Adopted September 30, 1937; amended September 15, 1952 and February 5, 1963.

Provided that this restriction shall not apply to the broadcasting or televising, under the supervision of the court, of such portions of naturalization proceedings (other than the interrogation of applicants) as are designed and carried out exclusively as a ceremony for the purpose of publicly demonstrating in an impressive manner the essential dignity and the serious nature of naturalization.

36. Conduct of Court Proceedings.*

Proceedings in court should be so conducted as to reflect the importance and seriousness of the inquiry to ascertain the truth.

The oath should be administered to witnesses in a manner calculated to impress them with the importance and solemnity of their promise to adhere to the truth. Each witness should be sworn separately and impressively at the bar or the court, and the clerk should be required to make a formal record of the administration of the oath, including the name of the witness.

* Adopted September 30, 1937.

I,XXII

end

Don’t YOU know?!? Talkin Bout a Revolution…

Don’t you know, they’re talkin ’bout a revolution

It sounds like a whisper

Don’t you know, they’re talkin ’bout a revolution

It sounds like a whisper

While they’re standing in the welfare lines

Crying at the doorsteps of those armies of salvation

Wasting time, in the unemployment lines

Sitting around, waiting for a promotion

Don’t you know, they’re talkin ’bout a revolution

It sounds like a whisper

Poor people gonna rise up and get their share

Poor people gonna rise up and take whats theirs 

Don’t you know, you better run, run, run, run, run

Run, run, run, run, run, run, run

Oh, I said you better, run, run, run, run, run, run, run

Run, run, run, run, run

‘Cause finally the tables are starting to turn, talkin ’bout a revolution

‘Cause finally the tables are starting to turn, talkin ’bout a revolution, oh no

Talkin ’bout a revolution ,oh 

While they’re standing in the welfare lines

Crying at the doorsteps of those armies of salvation

Wasting time in the unemployment lines

Sitting around waiting for a promotion

Don’t you know, theyre talkin ’bout a revolution

It sounds like a whisper

 And finally the tables are starting to turn, talkin ’bout a revolution

Yes, finally the tables are starting to turn, talkin ’bout a revolution, oh no

Talkin bout a revolution, oh no, talkin bout a revolution, oh no

 Songwriter: Chapman, Tracy L

 

SIRS? BANKSTERS? sirs… better start getting dressed… for the tea party… SIRS, expect the people… and the Queen will be there, please keep your head and R.S.V.P.

the following has gone out this morning to the CEOs of major RSA Banks & FSPs:

THE SYSTEM IS CRACKING AND THE ONLY THING STANDING BETWEEN YOU AND THE PEOPLE IS US!!! WE ARE HOSTING MASS WORKSHOPS TO CALM THEM DOWN! THEY KNOW THE TRUTH! AND ONLY THE TRUTH WILL SET US FREE NOW; SO, GO TO:

https://giftoftruth.wordpress.com/banksters/  

BLESSED ARE THE PEACEMAKERS!!!

ALL OF THIS CAME ACROSS OUR NEWS DESK IN ONLY THE LAST 24 HOURS: READ AND WEEP…

Q3 Earnings Bloodbath Continues With Terrible Monsanto Results: Company Fires 2,600 As It Boosts Buyback ~ ZeroHedge

It had been quite a downcast start to the third quarter earnings season following very disappointing earnings from Illumina, Adobe and Yum Brand. Then Moments ago agri-giant Monsanto made it four out of four when it reported a huge miss on both the top and bottom line, with Q4 revenue of $2.36 billion, far below the $2.79 billion consensus estimate and down 10% from a year ago. The EPS was likewise a disaster, which at at loss of $0.19 in Q4, was also far below the consensus estimate of ($0.03).Q4 EBIT tumbled to -$773 million, while full year EBIT was down 15% to $2.2 billion.

This is what the company justified this shockingly bad result:

Full-year net sales results were driven by the performance of the company’s Seeds and Genomics segment and licensing agreements, which were more than offset by foreign currency headwinds, declining corn acres and declines in glyphosate pricing.

https://ascendingstarseed.wordpress.com/2015/10/07/q3-earnings-bloodbath-continues-with-terrible-monsanto-results-company-fires-2600-as-it-boosts-buyback-zerohedge/

LaRouche Mobilizes to Shut Down Wall Street, As Bankers Shriek:

“The System Is Cracking”

As you read this report, a strong delegation of LaRouche PAC organizers from New York City—seasoned veterans of Lyndon LaRouche’s “Manhattan Project”—has arrived in Washington, D.C. to head up a day of organizing and lobbying on Capitol Hill on Oct. 7, to urge key responsible Congressmen and Senators to act at once to shut down Wall Street, and implement Glass-Steagall. As LPAC’s 7-point statement, “For Urgent Attention of Congressmen, Senators and Other Members of the U.S. Government” specifies: “There is now an acute emergency which threatens to kill millions of Americans, primarily, and also citizens of other countries,” which requires action now, this week.

Panic among Wall Street and City of London bankers is evident just barely below the surface. The lead article in the Oct. 3-9 edition of the Economist, the banner publication for City of London financial interests, warns that “the system is cracking,” and calls for a massive effort to backstop the bubble with new waves of quantitative easing—exactly as Lyndon LaRouche has warned is their intention. Similarly, Forbes magazine frets that “there are over $600 trillion in OTC [over-the-counter] derivatives outstanding” on the books of the mega-banks (although the real number is probably twice that amount), which could blow the entire system apart, once a run begins. “For the likes of JP Morgan, Bank of America, Citigroup, Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley, these issues remain a topic of life or death.”

https://peoplestrustmalaysia.wordpress.com/2015/10/07/larouche-mobilizes-to-shut-down-wall-street-as-bankers-shriek-the-system-is-cracking/

BY LAROUCHE POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE, LAROUCHEPAC.COM:

FOR URGENT ATTENTION OF CONGRESSMEN,

SENATORS AND OTHER MEMBERS OF THE US GOVERNMENT

October 5, 2015 — Key responsible Congressmen and Senators (and there are some), and other US government representatives must meet at once, to issue Findings of Fact and Statements of Commitment roughly as follows, for immediate enactment into law, and into immediate effect.

1.) There is now an acute emergency which threatens to kill millions of Americans, primarily, and also citizens of other countries.

2.) This is due immediately to the bankruptcy of Wall Street. Wall Street is totally and irremediably bankrupt. The successive Bush and Obama bailouts and the rounds of “quantitative easing,” have only succeeded in making all of Wall Street’s values valueless, and finalizing its bankruptcy.

3.) If Wall Street is permitted to blow out again on its own terms, as now appears imminent, the result will be the worst panic in history, which will close down everything that remains of the US economy. We will have mass death, on the order of the Black Plague which wiped out one-third of the population of Europe. Another Wall Street bailout, which Obama will demand if he is permitted to remain in office, would trigger a hyper-inflation just as deadly.

4.) Hence, Wall Street must be closed down pre-emptively by US Government action, in the spirit of what Franklin Roosevelt would do if he were alive today. (Although the crisis he faced was far milder.) Only activities compatible with a strict Glass-Steagall standard must be allowed to continue.

5.) The Federal Government must issue US dollars as credit to preserve the lives of the population and employ all the employable, in the spirit of Roosevelt’s kindred actions with Harry Hopkins.

6.) Over the slightly longer term, US Federal credit must be used to rapidly raise the level of productivity of US labor, through increased energy-flux density with scientific and technological progress.

7.) Finally removing Barack Obama from office would be an excellent starting-point for these urgent reforms.

CONGRESSMAN, ARE YOU A CO-SPONSOR OF GLASS-STEAGALL?                     1. 1709 & H.R. 381

BANKRUPT WALL STREET’S WORTHLESS ASSETS

BEFORE THEY BANKRUPT THE UNITED STATES

Download the pdf at:

https://larouchepac.com/sites/default/files/20151005-congressmen-senators_0.pdf

World Is On Brink Of New Recession, IMF Warns:

By kchild2013 on October 7, 2015 ; From Sky News, by Ed Conway, Oct 2015

“The forecast change, contained in the Fund’s World Economic Outlook, will be seen as further evidence of the risk that the world could slide back into a slump in the coming months.”

“Moreover, downside risks to the world economy appear more pronounced than they did just a few months ago.”

“The Fund said that the Brazilian economy would shrink at a rate of 3% this year and 1% next, and that Russia would shrink by 3.8% this year.”

http://wchildblog.com/2015/10/07/world-is-on-brink-of-new-recession-imf-warns/

URGENT NOTICES ARE GOING OUT NOW!!!

2015.10.08 – RSA NOTICE TO BANKS & FSPs

Dear People acting as CORPORATE agent,                                             2015.10.08

Without any prejudice, see this as an invitation to come to the table and start discussing remedies; we are inviting FSP CEOs to step up to the plate, but they are hiding; the system is cracking… the ship is sinking… Your corporation is NOT practicing positive economics, nor have you been trained in it:

“Progress in positive economics will require not only the testing and elaboration of existing hypotheses but also the construction of new hypotheses. On this problem there is little to say on a formal level. The construction of hypotheses is a creative act of inspiration, intuition, invention; its essence is the vision of something new in familiar material. The process must be discussed in psychological, not logical, categories; studied in autobiographies and biographies, not treatises on scientific method; and promoted by maxim and example, not syllogism or theorem.” – Milton Friedman – Essays on Positive Economics; page 27; Part I – The Methodology of Positive Economics; University of Chicago Press (1953), 1970, pp. 3-43

We say that we can wait no longer and are now taking action; therefore, we write to you on behalf of UZA: people’s courts, forums and tribunals, the Southern Africa Chapter of the committee in support of the International Tribunal for Natural Justice. The Tribunal will function similarly to the Nuremberg Tribunal, where government officials in Germany were tried for crimes against humanity. The primary difference is that the ITNJ is founded on principles of Natural Law, and has universal jurisdiction, recognizing no borders against justice. The ITNJ therefore stands positioned to set legal precedents that restore common dignity, truth & reconciliation, and reason to the delivery of justice in the world.

We are reaching out to CEOs and leaders to discuss disclosure, remedies, natural justice and positive economics. Please have a look at the Proclamation, Mission, and Treaty of the International Tribunal for Natural Justice (www.itnj.org) and consider aligning with this noble endeavor. We would be greatly honoured to count your name and voice among those people now advocating a planetary renewal in law and governance. The International Tribunal for Natural Justice was officially established on February 14th of this year – and the world is responding. Thousands of constitutional scholars, law researchers, human rights groups and activists are joining hands across a wide spectrum of issues to support the ITNJ. The Tribunal’s ceremonial seating was broadcast around the world via secure live-stream: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5-IDJKGHyJQ

The establishment of the ITNJ means that it is no longer out of reach to bring to trial the decision-makers at the top of corporate and government structures masquerading as our governments and our court systems. No longer will corporate agents be able to hide behind a corporate veil claiming immunity from prosecution. We sincerely hope you will participate. This is truly for the People, by the People. You are invited to contact the Administrator at commonlawsa@gmail.com in confidence;  ex causa onerosa, all rights reserved, in peace,

SEND THIS TO YOUR CEO!!! CIRCULATE THIS AMONGST ALL STAFF!!!

HOLD A REFERENDUM AND FIRE THE ONES BLOCKING CHANGE!!!

THE LONGER WE WAIT THE MORE THE DESTRUCTION!!!

PERPETRATORS WILL BE TRIED BY THE PEOPLE IF THEY DO NOT ACT!!!

YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED!!! WE SEE WHAT IS COMING!!!

WE WANT PEACE, TRUTH & RECONCILIATION ONLY;

WE ARE ALL GUILTY, BUT THE UN-EDUCATED PEOPLE DO NOT SEE IT THAT WAY… HELP US TO EDUCATE THEM!!!

https://giftoftruth.wordpress.com/faqs/

CONTACT OUR ADMINISTRATOR URGENT AT COMMONLAWSA@GMAIL.COM

International Tribunal for Natural Justice – International Chapters meeting – feedback to the People – 2015.07.17

Without prejudice,

This is a brief report on the online meeting of the various Chapters who have volunteered their efforts for the International Tribunal for Natural Justice, inaugurated 15^th June, 2015, which now happens on a fortnightly basis; This report is to inform You as one of We, the People because our actions are of the people, for the people, by the people;

 

This was the second week that we gathered and most of it has been people introducing themselves to each other and a brief story of their journey; Ordinary people who have investigated the deception on we, the people have already volunteered with the ITNJ from countries such as America, Canada, Denmark, England, India, Ireland, Holland, Pakistan, South Africa. Each of these people are engaged in some form of judicial and people’s activism and are now uniting as representatives of a global effort which can only be achieved by your support.

One member raised the issue of REGISTRATION; she felt that this would give their Chapter standing in their country; however, the group consensus was that to REGISTER the ITNJ would be a limitation on our Sovereign Rights and then we could not possibly be representing the people who support our actions; we did find an alternative acceptable remedy for her to create a win-win for all;

This is clear proof that ITNJ is not prepared to compromise its values “of the people, for the people, by the people” and gives me further confidence in the success of our collective vision; United we stand.

What’s Next?

Invitations will go out for endorsements between various international common law grand juries and ITNJ committee members and the endorsement of the ITNJ Treaty; if this resonates with you then download, read and hopefully sign the Treaty at http://www.itnj.org/itnj/itnj-treaty/

We are currently translating the ITNJ Treaty into all participating languages;

Brief profiles and contact details of all participating Chapters will be posted in due time;

Workshops have already been launched in America by the common-law grand juries:

• Common-law & Natural law juries and courts of record
• Private Attorney Generals
• Oath-keepers
• Bounty Hunters and how to affect people’s arrests
• Sheriffs We will be inviting other judicial activist groups to join us in solidarity; finally, we are putting our differences aside and focusing on that which we, the people have in common; If this is all new to you then go to: www.itnj.org and www.itnjcommittee.orgIn peace, SA Chapter ITNJ

• Later in the year we expect to launch ITNJ workshops in participating countries on how to convene a court of record in order to settle disputes between people and with corporations; and, failing lawful remedy, how to transfer the matter for cause before the ITNJ;
• A brand new Public discussion forum has been launched at www.naturaljusticeacademy.org

For Southern Africa Chapter workshops go to https://giftoftruth.wordpress.com/workshops/

In Peace, SA Chapter ITNJ

The 1955 Freedom Charter and 50 Years of Racial ‘Apartheid’ plus 20 Years economic ‘Apartheid’

It is the 60 year anniversary of the 1955 Freedom Charter of South Africa. Instead of celebrating its adoption, South Africa is still in the grip of the colonial slave-masters. Apartheid is alive and well; however, it is no longer racial, but economic apartheid. In addition, it is a global pandemic and not restricted to South Africa.

 

 When you read the following, you will realize that we are back in 1955:

 The Freedom Charter is a unique document in that for the first time ever, the people were actively involved in formulating their own vision of an alternative society. The existing order of State oppression and exploitation which was prevalent in the 1950’s (and earlier) was totally rejected.

The notion of a Charter was first mooted at the annual Congress of the African National Congress in August 1953. Prof Z K Mathews formally suggested convening a Congress of the People (C.O.P.) to draw up the Freedom Charter. The idea was adopted by the allies of the ANC, the South African Indian Congress, the South African Colored People’s Organization and the South African Congress of Democrats.

The Congress of the People was not a single event but a series of campaigns and rallies, huge and small, held in houses, flats, factories, kraals, on farms and in the open. The National Action Council enlisted volunteers to publicize the C.O.P, educate the people, note their grievances and embark on a “million signatures campaign”.

Thus when the people met on the 25th and 26th June 1955, the Congress of the People that was convened in Kliptown, near Johannesburg, represented a crucial historical moment in establishing a new order based on the will of the people. It brought together 2,844 delegates from all over the country. The Freedom Charter proclaims that ”South Africa belongs to all who live in it” and that “all shall be equal before the law”. It pledged to continue the struggle until a new democratic order was put into place.

Hence, the Charter is a significant document because it embodies the hopes and aspirations of the people.

The Charter was subsequently endorsed by the C.O.P. However, it is important to notice that there are groups that still do not endorse or accept the charter such as the Pan African Congress and the Azania People’s Organization.

1955 Freedom Charter

We, The people of South Africa, declare for all our country and the world to know:

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;

That our people have been robbed of their birthright to land, liberty and peace by a form of government founded on injustice and inequality;

That our country will never be prosperous or free until all our people live in brotherhood, enjoying equal rights and opportunities;

That only a democratic state, based on the will of all the people, can secure to all their birthright without distinction of colour, race, sex or belief;

And Therefore we, the People of South Africa, black and white together – equals, countrymen and brothers – adopt this Freedom Charter. And we pledge ourselves to strive together, sparing neither strength nor courage, until the democratic changes here set out have been won.

THE PEOPLE SHALL GOVERN!

Every man and woman shall have the right to vote for and to stand as a candidate for all bodies which make laws;

All people shall be entitled to take part in the administration of the country;

The rights of the people shall be the same, regardless of race, colour or sex;

All bodies of minority rule, advisory boards, councils and authorities, shall be replaced by democratic organs of self-government.

ALL NATIONAL GROUPS SHALL HAVE EQUAL RIGHTS!

There shall be equal status in the bodies of the state, in the courts and in the schools for all national groups and races;

All people shall have equal right to use their own languages and to develop their own folk culture and customs;

All national groups shall be protected by law against insults to their race and national pride;

The preaching and practice of national, race or colour discrimination and contempt shall be a punishable crime;

All apartheid laws and practices shall be set aside.

THE PEOPLE SHALL SHARE IN THE COUNTRY’S WEALTH!

The national wealth of our country, the heritage of all South Africans, shall be restored to the people;

The mineral wealth beneath the soil, the banks and the monopoly industry shall be transferred to the ownership of the people as a whole;

All other industry and trade shall be controlled to assist the well-being of the people;

All people shall have equal rights to trade where they choose, to manufacture and to enter all trades, crafts and professions.

 THE LAND SHALL BE SHARED AMONG THOSE WHO WORK IT!

Restriction of land ownership on a racial basis shall be ended, and all the land re-divided amongst those who work it, to banish famine and land hunger;

The state shall help the peasants with implements, seed, tractors and dams to save the soil and assist the tillers;

Freedom of movement shall be guaranteed to all who work on the land;

All shall have the right to occupy land wherever they choose;

People shall not be robbed of their cattle, and forced labour and farm prisons shall be abolished.

ALL SHALL BE EQUAL BEFORE THE LAW!

No one shall be imprisoned, deported or restricted without a fair trial;

No one shall be condemned by the order of any government official;

The courts shall be representative of all the people;

Imprisonment shall be only for serious crimes against the people, and shall aim at re-education, not vengeance;

The police force and army shall be open to all on an equal basis and shall be the helpers and protectors of the people;

All laws which discriminate on grounds of race, colour or belief shall be repealed.

ALL SHALL ENJOY EQUAL HUMAN RIGHTS!

The law shall guarantee to all their right to speak, to organise, to meet together, to publish, to preach, to worship, and to educate their children;

The privacy of the house from police raids shall be protected by law;

All shall be free to travel without restriction from countryside to towns, from province to province, and from South Africa abroad;

Pass laws, permits and all other laws restricting these freedoms shall be abolished.

THERE SHALL BE WORK AND SECURITY!

All who work shall be free to form trade unions, to elect their officers and to make wage agreements with their employers;

The state shall recognise the right and duty of all to work, and to draw full unemployment benefits;

Men and women of all races shall receive equal pay for equal work;

There shall be a forty-hour working-week, a national minimum wage, paid annual leave, and sick leave for all workers, and maternity leave on full pay for all working mothers;

Miners, domestic workers, farm workers and civil servants shall have the same rights as all others who work;

Child labour, compound labour, the tot system and contract labour shall be abolished.

THE DOORS OF LEARNING AND OF CULTURE SHALL BE OPENED!

The government shall discover, develop and encourage national talent for the enhancement of our cultural life;

All the cultural treasures of mankind shall be open to all, by free exchange of books, ideas and contact with other lands;

The aim of education shall be to teach the youth to love their people and their culture, to honour human brotherhood, liberty and peace;

Education shall be free, compulsory, universal and equal for all children;

Higher education and technical training shall be opened to all by means of state allowances and scholarships awarded on the basis of merit;

Adult illiteracy shall be ended by a mass state educational plan;

Teachers shall have all the rights of other citizens;

The colour bar in cultural life, in sport and in education shall be abolished.

THERE SHALL BE HOUSES, SECURITY AND COMFORT!

All people shall have the right to live where they choose, to be decently housed and to bring up their families in comfort and security;

Unused housing space shall be made available to the people;

Rent and prices shall be lowered, food plentiful and no one shall go hungry;

A preventive health scheme shall be run by the state;

Free medical care and hospitalisation shall be provided for all, with special care for mothers and young children;

Slums shall be demolished, and new suburbs built where all have transport, roads, lighting, playing fields, creches and social centres;

The aged, the orphans, the disabled and the sick shall be cared for by the state;

Rest, leisure and recreation shall be the right of all;

Fenced locations and ghettoes shall be abolished and laws which break up families shall be repealed.

 

THERE SHALL BE PEACE AND FRIENDSHIP!

South Africa shall be a fully independent state, which respects the rights and sovereignty of all nations;

South Africa shall strive to maintain world peace and the settlement of all international disputes by negotiation – not war;

Peace and friendship amongst all our people shall be secured by upholding equal rights, opportunities and status for all;

The people of the protectorates- Basutoland, Bechuanaland and Swaziland shall be free to decide for themselves their own future;

The right of the peoples of Africa to independence and self-government shall be recognised and shall be the basis of close co-operation.

Let all who love their people and their country now say, as we say here:

‘THESE FREEDOMS WE WILL FIGHT FOR, SIDE BY SIDE, THROUGHOUT OUR LIVES, UNTIL WE HAVE WON OUR LIBERTY.’

Adopted at the Congress of the People at Kliptown, Johannesburg, on 25th and 26th June, 1955.

In Conclusion

The following definitions are from Black’s Law Dictionary, 4^th edition; we have compiled a list of interesting facts about common-law legal terms and what they really mean as opposed to what we assume they mean;

Download UZA – Common Law definitions and meanings 2015.07 and other educational manuals which we consider of value from: http://www.giftoftruth.wordpress.com/common-law-manuals/

Common Law Maxim: “The Decree of the sovereign makes the law”;

THIS IS NB !!! This is very important to take note of; to date, the 1955 Freedom Charter is the only document which has been decreed by the people;

Time for a new one?

DEFINITIONS:

COURT. International Law; The person and suite of the sovereign;

DECREE. In Practice: The judgment of a court of equity or admiralty, answering for most purposes to the judgment of a court of common law. A decree in equity is a sentence or order of the court, pronounced on hearing and understanding all the points in issue, and determining the rights of all the parties to the suit, according to equity and good conscience. Daniell, Ch.Pr. 986; Wooster v. Handy, C.C.N.Y., 23 F. 49, 56; Motion Picture Patents Co. v. Universal Film Mfg. Co., D.C., N.Y., 232 F. 263, 265; Bull v. International Power Co., 84 N.J.Eq. 209, 93 A. 86, 88; Alford v. Leonard, 88 Fla. 532, 102 So. 885, 890.

It is a declaration of the court announcing the legal consequences of the facts found. Robertson v. Talmadge, Tex.Civ.App., 174 S.W. 627, 629.

A decree, as distinguished from an order, is final, and is made at the hearing of the cause, whereas an order is interlocutory, and is made on motion or petition. Wherever an order may, in a certain event resulting from the direction contained in the order, lead to the termination of the suit in like manner as a decree made at the hearing, it is called a “decretal order.” Brown.

The International Tribunal for Natural Justice is our Decree !!!

People’s court:          http://www.itnj.org

Support          http://www.itnjcommittee.org