re CLASS ACTIONS suits
To certify a "class" you need a well-defined group of people
all sharing common interests and common concerns
Mr Justice Smith in Sutherland v. B.C. outlines 7 criteria
for groups who want to be certified as a class...
For example:
a well-defined group of approximately 600,000 people in Canada
share the same identifiable stigma, the same Mark of Cain-like stain,
the same concerns about carrying around 'a criminal record'
related to some 'pot' crime...
this well-defined, isolated, idiocyncratic group can apply to be certified as a class
naming a representative plaintiff - a spokesman or a spokeswoman -
the group can easily identify the common interest and the common effect
of having been declared 'criminals' even though they have not committed any
'crime'
for the word 'crime' does not lend itself so elastically to be extended to those
who at first possessed, or grew, or cultivated pot plants... those who took the
word 'crime' from its original context in Papers Concerning British Columbia
1858 - and applied it to 'victimless' crimes - acted outside their power to write laws...
the BNA Act, 1867 allows Provinces and Parliament to write laws... each has their
little crib, their little playpen and inside that playpen they can write laws... but
not every law they write will be acceptable... the Constitutional Question Act and
the Judicial Review Procedure Act and B.C.Supreme Court Rule 31 form a triumverate
of ways people can lodge their claims against policy and policing and discretion and indiscretion by politicians or those holding public office
those who attack Income Tax Laws... can easily manouever their arguments and the judges
into a new way of seeing by isolating the separate and distinct law making powers distributed between Parliament and Provinces
the BNA Act, 1867 calls all Provinces, Sovereign
yet it says The Queen [i.e. a Province] may make laws...
yes it does... it says the Province or Parliament may make laws
subject to this Act
the 'right' to make laws declaring pot possession, growing, cultivation a 'crime'
does not come to Parliament via the BNA Act, 1867... that Act clearly
isolates what constitutes a 'crime' = a felony [bodily harm] a property crime or attaintment of treason, so says section 31
The Papers Concerning British Columbia 1858 form the prenuptual agreement - the conditions on which B.C. entered a confederation of Sovereigns... each with exclusive law making power over Administration of Justice...
Each province can apply principle of equity, recognizing the Queen's Oath on the 1611 King James Bible and the principles that recognize the existence of God, entail using Scripture to
support any case against taxation, i.e. usury
'd'
['d' is karl-heintz eisbrenner -- a lawyer from British Columbia, Canada. he died tragically a couple of years ago]
