Categories
Judicial

75 Maxims Of Canadian Law

This is a list of latin maxims I gleaned from studying The Dictionary Of Canadian Law by Daphne Dukelow (3rd Edition). I am reproducing them here as I believe they are relevant to political life in Canada today and can help secure our future as a unique nationality.

This list is by no means exhaustive. There may be additional maxims of Canadian law that have not be included here.

The list is as follows:

  1. prior tempore potior jure – The person first in time is preferred in right.
  2. testes ponderantur, non numerantur – witnesses should be weighed, not numbered.
  3. jus non patitur ut iden bis solvatur – The law does not require a second payment for the same thing.
  4. juris effectus in executione consistit – The effect of law is given by execution.
  5. jura publica anteferenda privatis – Public rights should be preferred over private rights.
  6. volenti non fit injuria – To a willing person, injury is not done.
  7. judicium a non suo judice datum nullius estmomenti – A judgement given without proper jurisdiction has no effect in law.
  8. melius est petere fontes quam sectari rivulos – It is better to go to the source than follow tributaries.
  9. mentio unius exclusio alterius – To mention one thing is to exclude another.
  10. minatur innocentibus, qui parcit nocentibus – Whoever spares the guilty threatens the innocent.
  11. multa concedunter per obliquum, quae non concedunter de directo – Many things are permitted indirectly which are not permitted directly.
  12. fatetur facinus qui judicium fugit – One who flees judgement admits guilt.
  13. lex prospicit non respicit – The law looks forward, not backward.
  14. lex uno ore omnes alloquitur – The law addresses all parties with a single voice.
  15. lex est dictamen rationis – Law is the pronouncement of reason.
  16. leges extra territorium non obligant – Laws are not binding outside their own territory.
  17. judices non tenentur exprimere causam sententiae suae – Judges are not required to explain the reason for their decisions.
  18. nemo reus est nisi mens sit rea – No one is guilty unless they have a guilty mind.
  19. quot homines tot sententiae – There are as many opinions as there are people.
  20. quod nullius est id ratione naturali occupanti conceditur – What belongs to no one is by natural right granted to its occupier.
  21. rerum suarum quilibet est moderator et arbiter – Each person is manager and judge of their own affairs.
  22. non est regula quis fallet – A rule does not exist without exceptions.
  23. quod ab initio non valet in tractu temporis non convalecit – What does not go well from the beginning will not improve with the passage of time.
  24. res judicata pro veritate accipitur – Until reversed, a judicial decision is conclusive and its truth may not be contradicted.
  25. nemo patriam in qua natus est exuere nec ligeantiae debitum enjurare possit – No one can cast away the country where they were born, nor foreswear the allegience owed to its sovereign.
  26. nihil habet forum ex scena – The court has no concern for things which are not before it.
  27. eodem ligamine quo ligatum st dissolvitur – An obligation is ended the same way in which it was imposed.
  28. qui vult decipi decipiatur – Let the one who wants to be deceived be deceived.
  29. non jus, sed seisina, facit stipitem – Not right, but seisin, makes the family tree.
  30. os demonstrat quod cor ruminator – The mouth divulges what the heart is thinking.
  31. multitudo errantium non parit errori patrocinium – That many people make the mistake does not excuse the error.
  32. respiciendum est judicanti, ne quid aut durius aut remissius constituatur quam causa deposcit; nec enim aut severitatis aut clementiae gloria affectanda est – The one who judges should be mindful that nothing either more severe or more lenient is done than the case merits; for distinction should not be achieved by either severity or leniency.
  33. ignorantia juris non excusat – Ignorance of the law is no excuse.
  34. illus quod alias licitum non est necessitas facit licitum; et necessitas inducit privilegium quod jure privatur – Necessity permits what otherwise is not permitted; and necessity establishes a privilege which is justly removed.
  35. clam deliquentes magis puniunter quam palam – Those who sin secretly are punished more severely than those who sin openly.
  36. arma in armatos sumere jura sinunt – To use arms against persons who are armed is justifiable.
  37. judicia in deliberationibus crebro maturescunt, in accelerato processu nunquam – Judgements often ripen through deliberation, never in a hurried process.
  38. invito beneficium non datur – A benefit is not given to anyone who did not ask for it.
  39. actor sequitur forum rei – A plaintiff must take the case to the defendant’s jurisdiction.
  40. majus dignum trahit ad se minus dignum – The more worthy brings the less worthy along with it.
  41. crescente malitia crescere debet et poena – Where malice increases, punishment should also increase.
  42. cujus est dare ejus est disponere – The one who gives something can also control its disposition.
  43. debile fundamentum fallit opus – A weak foundation destroys the work.
  44. dies dominicus non est juridicus – The Lord’s Day (Sabbath) is not a day for business (Lord’s Day Act).
  45. libertas est naturalis facultas ejus quod cuique facere libet – Freedom is the power given by nature to do whatever one pleases.
  46. longa possessio parit jus possidendi et tollit actionem vero domino – Prolonged possession creates a right of possession, and removes any right of action from the real owner.
  47. justitia nemini neganda est – Justice should be denied to no one.
  48. melius est omnia mala pati quam malo consentire – It is better to endure all evil than to agree to evil.
  49. in his quae de jure communi omnibus conceduntur, consuetudo alicujus patriae vel loci non est alleganda – In those things which common right concedes to all, the custom of a particular country or place should not be brought forward.
  50. jus descendit, et non terra – Right descends, and not the land.
  51. in judicio non creditor nisi juratis – In trial, no one’s evidence is accepted unless that person is sworn.
  52. jus non habenti tute non paretur – It is safe to disobey one who has no legal right.
  53. justitia debet esse libera – Justice should be free.
  54. vir et uxor consentur in lege una persona – Husband and wife are held to be one person in law.
  55. vigilantibus subvenit lex – The law helps the vigilant.
  56. vim vi repellere licet, modo fiat moderamine inculpatae tutelae – It is legal to repel force with force, as long as it is governed by a desire to defend.
  57. vox emissa volat, litera scripta manet – The spoken word disappears, the written word remains.
  58. rex non potest peccare – The monarch can do no wrong.
  59. legatus regis vice fungitura quo destinatur et honograndus est sicut ille cujus vicemgerit – An ambassador takes the place of the monarch who sent them and should be honoured just as the person in whose place they stand.
  60. jurare est deum in testem vocare, et est actus divini cultus – To swear is to call a deity to witness, and is an act of religious worship.
  61. vix ulla lex fieri potest quae omnibus commoda sit – Barely any law can be made which is applicable to everything.
  62. qui sentit commodum sentire debet etonus – The one who bears the burden should also reap the benefit.
  63. salus populi est suprema lex – The safety of the people is the highest law.
  64. quae non valeant singula juncta juvant – Words which have no effect alone are effective when combined.
  65. quod nullius est, est domini regis – What belongs to no individual belongs to the sovereign.
  66. quod necessarium est licitum – What is necessary is also lawful.
  67. impunitas semper ad deteriora invitat – leaving a crime unpunished invites worse crimes to be committed.
  68. electa una via, non datur recursus ad alteram – Having elected, recourse to the alternative is not permitted.
  69. donari videtur, quod nullo jure cogente conceditur – A thing is considered given when it is transferred any way except by virtue of right.
  70. error qui non restitur, approbatur – One who fails to rectify a mistake is deemed to have approved it.
  71. do ut facias – I give so that you may perform.
  72. nec veniam, effuso sanguine innocentis, casus habet – If innocent blood is spilled, the case is unforgivable.
  73. extra legem positus est civiliter mortuus – One placed outside the law is dead civilly.
  74. omne quod solo inaedificatur solo cedit – Everything built into the ground is merged with it.
  75. omnia quae jure contrahuntur, contrario jure pereunt – All things accomplished by a law come to naught with a contradictory law.

It is worth noting that rules can have exceptions, such as in the case of maxim #16 listed here. A citizen abroad may still be subject to certain laws due to their citizenship even though they are not within the domestic territory of their native land during that time. In this case, the citizen’s body is considered national territory, and therefore, subject to certain laws which accompany naturalized citizenship.

Categories
Judicial

Why Are You Walking Around With Our Women When You’re Not Born Here?

On July 30th, 2023, I posed this question to an immigrant at the Midtown Plaza in Saskatoon.

Three days later, the Saskatoon Police Service (SPS) was at my door threatening to “knock it in”, and shortly thereafter, broke and entered the apartment without a warrant.

This is a home invasion.

Under such duress, I surrendered myself into custody and spent the next 19 months incarcerated by the Province of Saskatchewan for advocating Canadian nationalism.

As men, protecting the interests of our nation (and our women for that matter) is our birthright, even when they may not understand why we do what we do. An administration that sets itself against this prerogative is acting contrary to our national interests and deserves no public support.

Questioning the motives of immigration is not a crime. For an electoral candidate advocating the political ideology of nationalism, questioning it is expected.

No person is required to agree with my interpretation of Canadian nationalism (they are free to choose who to vote for at the polls), but I am entitled to enforce such policies within reason.

On January 8th, 2025, I applied to the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal for leave to appeal this matter to the Supreme Court of Canada, given that the proceedings used evidence which ought to have been deemed inadmissible because its tendering into the court was a vicarious liability on behalf of the Crown. The peace officer who testified at trial on January 16th, 2024, recklessly waived their right to refuse answering questions tending to prejudice our national interest after they were informed that the court had not been declared according to Canadian law (no mention of His Majesty The King):

Right of refusal to answer or produce document
“Any person examined under any order made under this Part has the like right to refuse to answer questions tending to criminate himself, or other questions, as a party or witness, as the case may be, would have in any cause pending in the court by which, or by a judge whereof, the order is made.”

– Section 50(1), Canada Evidence Act

After the Justice dismissed my motion to strike this evidence from the charge about to be given to the jury, a verdict of guilty was rendered and a sentence imposed. This was done using inadmissible evidence and by withholding other exculpatory evidence (that which speaks to my innocence).

Upon application for the video recording made of me at the Midtown Plaza scene, the SPS has decided to withhold this evidence that paints the interaction in a substantially different light:

Saskatoon Police Service (SPS) refuses to disclose a video recording of me at the scene on July 30th, 2023 taken by the complainant. The video shows me informing (‘don’t violate our laws’) the complainant that they’re suspected of causing a disturbance at Midtown Plaza that day.

The complainant’s party was at suspicion of causing a disturbance, and in response, I acted within reason. I maintain I have committed no offense at the Midtown Plaza in Saskatoon.

Despite this, the provincial Crown claims I am now not allowed to attend Midtown Plaza in Saskatoon because my actions on July 30th, 2023 were a public safety risk. This is yet another example where Canadian nationalists are excluded from public property without due process. The real public safety risk lies with an administration that is attempting to criminalize our nation simply for existing.

Appeals with leave of provincial court
Subject to sections 39 and 42, an appeal to the Supreme Court lies with leave of the highest court of final resort in a province from a final judgment of that court where, in the opinion of that court, the question involved in the appeal is one that ought to be submitted to the Supreme Court for decision.

– Section 37, Supreme Court Act

It is a question of law whether my actions at the Midtown Plaza in Saskatoon on July 30th, 2023 served the public good, and whether there is evidence the actions alleged went beyond what served the public good. For greater certainty, it is a question of law whether the audio recording of the trial held in this matter (January 15th – 18th, 2024) demonstrates that no evidence exists to convict the accused.

In October, 2024, Justice Kaufman of the Federal Court (Winnipeg) refused to hear our application for the audio recording of this trial to be disclosed federally. The disclosure of this audio recording was already granted by Justice Morrall himself on September 4th, 2024 after we made an application for it to the Saskatchewan Court of King’s Bench, although it was not provided to us in time for our appeal hearing on September 6th, 2024.

We have yet to receive a copy of this audio recording.

On January 8th, the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal refused our application for leave to appeal this matter (CACR3770) to the Supreme Court and now we stand deprived of our right to a fair trial in the matter.

On January 8th, 2025, we applied to the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal for leave to appeal the lower court’s decision to use inadmissible evidence in the charge made to the jury (information #991240166).

As it now stands, there exists no evidence that my actions in Saskatoon that day extended beyond what served the public good.

The prosecution in this matter has prejudiced our national interest by manipulating the evidence at trial.

I have made this appeal to the court of last resort in Saskatchewan because I have witnessed the harm that is being done to Canadian interests as a result of this provincial government abusing its authority.

Justice Morrall committed a crime by counseling Canadian peace officers in furtherance of persecuting the accused and the nationality we advocate for:

Conspiracy, attempt, etc.
“Every person who conspires or attempts to commit, is an accessory after the fact in relation to, or counsels in relation to, an offence referred to in subsection (1) is guilty of an indictable offence.”

– Section 4(1.1), Crimes Against Humanity & War Crimes Act

I’ve been saying it since 2017 and I will say it again here: we need immigration reform. Without any apparent democratic channel to implement such a reform, Saskatchewan is imprisoning political advocates for questioning the an immigration system that is fracturing our national identity.

Historically, Canada has sourced its immigration from Northern Europe and the British Isles. We support returning to this immigration policy.

The implication gleaned from this encounter is that immigrants do not respect what Canada has been traditionally nor our way of life. If they did, they would answer our questions, which are fair and reasonable.

Our application for leave to appeal in forma pauperis to the Supreme Court was apparently faxed to the court registry by the Regina Provincial Correctional Center (RPCC) on October 1st, 2024. We demand that this appeal be heard by the Supreme Court, as the offense at suspicion of being committed (crimes against humanity) far outweighs in public importance claims of “harassment” relating to my actions at Midtown Plaza in Saskatoon that day.

Categories
Judicial

Beware The Parasitic Tribe

Disclaimer: As part of our proceedings within the Federal Court, the Canadian public has a right to be trier of fact in determining whether of not evidence exists that the following propaganda is criminal:

The question remains, as it always shall: is he a member of that Parasitic Tribe?
Is he the Black Sheep?
A member of the so-called “inside manipulators”?
Everywhere these people go they infiltrate the media, they hijack the central bank, and they infect the body politic like a parasite.
These people, they walk among us and you could walk right past them on the sidewalk.
You wouldn’t think twice about it.
While we focus our attention on our brothers and our sisters (who are with us, not against us) these Black Sheep hide and they perpetrate and they pull the strings.
And they laugh about it.
And they watch us.
And we fight each other.
And they profit from our wars.
And they seek to control and demoralize us in every aspect of what we try to do.
It’s their world and we’re just a number to them.
If they had their way, our entire way of life would be eradicated. They don’t like us. In fact, they despise us because of what we are and the spirit we represent. They cannot co-exist with it.
And what we need to do, perhaps more than anything, is remove these people, once-and-for-all, from our country.

Addendum: The people we speak of are not truly ‘Jews’. They are liars and deceivers attempting to hide from criticism by adopting a false identity. Let us be aware and expose them for what they are: a tribe of parasites.

“Behold, I will make them of the synagogue of Satan, those liars who claim to be Jews, and are not; behold, I will make them come before thy feet and know that you are my beloved.”

– Revelation 3:9