{"id":4586,"date":"2014-01-09T09:56:43","date_gmt":"2014-01-09T17:56:43","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/private-person.com\/blog\/?p=4586"},"modified":"2014-01-10T08:20:16","modified_gmt":"2014-01-10T16:20:16","slug":"if-the-crown-the-government-hmtqirobc-is-not-a-person-why-should-you-be","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/private-person.com\/blog\/2014\/01\/if-the-crown-the-government-hmtqirobc-is-not-a-person-why-should-you-be\/","title":{"rendered":"If The Crown – The Government – HMTQiroBC – Is Not A Person, Why Should You Be?"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"keep-calm-cause-i-m-better-than-you\"<\/a>I can hear the wails of patriots\/freedom folk “I’m not a person, and you can’t make me!”.<\/p>\n

That seems only fair, if you consider that “Her Majesty The Queen in right of British Columbia” (HMTQiroBC), aka the “Crown” aka “the government” is not a person and we should not HAVE TO BE if we are all free and equal.<\/p>\n

Wait a second. I thought\u00a0HMTQiroBC was a legal person, with legal status otherwise how can….??<\/p>\n

Hmmm. Really?<\/p>\n

Well if one were to read the Crown Proceeding Act [RSBC 1996] Chapter 89<\/em><\/a> one might discover that there within is admission that HMTQirotPoBC\u00a0is NOT a person….although they will act as if\u00a0HMTQiroBC were a person<\/strong> for certain purposes.<\/p>\n

Go figure.<\/p>\n

I was chatting with a Crown prosecutor to find out the level of ignorance and poor training and I was not disappointed. The tax matter at hand which was in dispute was summarized as “Her Majesty may disagree”.<\/p>\n

I’m really a bit confused as to who these “Crown prosecutors” really represent in court and which of Her Majesty’s MANY legal statuses is represented in federal Income Tax trials.<\/span><\/p>\n

Now that I read HMTQirotPoBC\/the government is not a person… I wonder who “Regina” is as many cases are REGINA v POOR SMUCK.<\/span><\/p>\n

And if you get’em on the run the plaintiff title may be changed to “HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN”. Oh my, there are so many AKA’s and they all appear to be different legal person’s…. oh wait…. HMTQirotPoBC is not a legal person.<\/p>\n

Back to the Crown Proceeding Act [RSBC 1996] Chapter 89<\/em><\/a>\u00a0 – it seems that the phrase “the government” is used often but never defined within the Act – what means “the government”? \u00a0(PDF of Crown Proceeding Act (RSBC)<\/a>). It’s also not defined in the Interpretation Act (BC)<\/em><\/p>\n

Onward,<\/p>\n

Liability of government<\/strong>
\n2 Subject to this Act,<\/p>\n

(c) the government is subject to all the liabilities to which it would be liable if it were a person<\/strong><\/span>, and<\/p>\n

(d) the law relating to indemnity and contribution is enforceable by and against the government for any liability to which it is subject, as if the government were a person<\/span><\/strong>.<\/p>\n

Now for the kicker…<\/p>\n

Designation of government<\/strong>
\n7 In proceedings under this Act, the government must be designated<\/span> “Her Majesty the Queen in right of the<\/span> Province of<\/span> British Columbia”<\/span><\/strong>.<\/p>\n

For all you capitalization-means-nothing-folks please take careful not of the style of\u00a0HMTQiroBC above – it is in quotes and is exactly as it should appear in paperwork BUT ALSO NOTE the addition of a word “the Province of” compared to the definition section…. hmmmm. Typo? Get me an official version please.<\/p>\n

Shall I review what we just learned:<\/p>\n

Act Definitions:<\/p>\n