Vancouver International Airport, sits upon Musqueam land, originally taken in 1931 by moving Musquem people…
This article has 2 comments
admin
Thanks for the info. I’m not sure the conclusion you make is correct, but good to hear 1st hand experience.
Any administrative decision can and should be challenged on it’s face, probably by a judicial review process.
Government lawyers often do whatever they want and claim it is allowed ONLY because they know people will not complain, or not know proper way to challenge it, ultimately gov’t wins by default or procedural games, not by law or right. It’s the bully tactic.
Keith
Confiscation of pensions, all is not as it seems, I had 100% CPP taken by Statutory Setoff, I complained and got this reply “under section 224.1 ITA the minister demands he gets, the crown is not bound by the exemptions 65.1 CPP Act. This is duality at its worst.
There is also the Trust and Benefit Act of 1985 resulting from the Haque Convention on Trusts of that year, the CPP is Trust with favourable tax status. The Trust and Benefit Act covers CPP OAS and military pensions.
So what is the problem, firstly I you and all around are the ‘natural person without legal right’, that’s right you are money slaves. Secondly, the Statutory Setoff is an Administrative procedure under section 224 ITA that such demands are in obiter dicta and thus such demands do not depend on a judgement or even a certificate that has the effect of a judgement and are a measure which “allows” the Minister of National Revenue to issue his own garnishee without having to go to court or any kind of court. This constitutes “nothing more or less than a statutory non-judicial instrument of garnishment.
Anyone hit this way has no equitable recourse to a court as it is purely an administrative decision.
One route for recompense I am looking at as the Trust and Benefit Act is based on a Haque Convention, we are accorded no rights refer to the Crimes Against Humanity and War crimes Act also from a Haque Convention, “slavery in any form is illegal”. Formal complaint to the Haque Court!!!!!
Thanks for the info. I’m not sure the conclusion you make is correct, but good to hear 1st hand experience.
Any administrative decision can and should be challenged on it’s face, probably by a judicial review process.
Government lawyers often do whatever they want and claim it is allowed ONLY because they know people will not complain, or not know proper way to challenge it, ultimately gov’t wins by default or procedural games, not by law or right. It’s the bully tactic.
Confiscation of pensions, all is not as it seems, I had 100% CPP taken by Statutory Setoff, I complained and got this reply “under section 224.1 ITA the minister demands he gets, the crown is not bound by the exemptions 65.1 CPP Act. This is duality at its worst.
There is also the Trust and Benefit Act of 1985 resulting from the Haque Convention on Trusts of that year, the CPP is Trust with favourable tax status. The Trust and Benefit Act covers CPP OAS and military pensions.
So what is the problem, firstly I you and all around are the ‘natural person without legal right’, that’s right you are money slaves. Secondly, the Statutory Setoff is an Administrative procedure under section 224 ITA that such demands are in obiter dicta and thus such demands do not depend on a judgement or even a certificate that has the effect of a judgement and are a measure which “allows” the Minister of National Revenue to issue his own garnishee without having to go to court or any kind of court. This constitutes “nothing more or less than a statutory non-judicial instrument of garnishment.
Anyone hit this way has no equitable recourse to a court as it is purely an administrative decision.
One route for recompense I am looking at as the Trust and Benefit Act is based on a Haque Convention, we are accorded no rights refer to the Crimes Against Humanity and War crimes Act also from a Haque Convention, “slavery in any form is illegal”. Formal complaint to the Haque Court!!!!!