- Chapter Fourteen`
Private
International Law and Treaties are Based Upon the Sovereign Laws of Nations.
INTERNATIONAL` LAW`
by Johnny Liberty`
Dedicated
to the thousands of pioneers` who came before and contributed to the research` and
creation of this handbook.
International Law of Nations`
"...
Citizens of a State, having yielded them in part` to the
sovereign, do not enjoy them to their full` and absolute extent [except in a
Republic].
But the whole body of the Nation, the State, so` long as it has
not voluntarily submitted to other` men or other nations, remains absolutely
free` and independent.”
— Emer De Vattel,`
The Law of Nations or the Principles of Natural` Law 1`
Editor’s
Note: The following is excerpted from the` Sovereign
by Johnny Liberty, thus` the references to the
The founding
documents of the
Both nations were
founded on spiritual principles and the` maxims of Common law. With regards to
sovereignty and` the principles of self-government, power does not come` from
the top-down, but from the bottom-up.
Most people still
believe that the government gives us our` civil "rights" and has the
power to control our actions. That` is so only in "democratic" or
“socialist” forms of` government. In a "republican" form of
government, power` rises up from the heart, the soul and the political will of
the` individual and is based on the unalienable "rights" of We the`
People.
To demonstrate how
the principles of self-government work` in a republican form of government
based on individual` sovereignty, such as the
Twelve to
twenty-four sovereign individuals can gather and` organize a jural society, a
constitutional Common law court,` a grand jury, or a
township.
Each of these sovereign
individuals retains their full judicial` power and has not contracted any of
their unalienable rights` to any government or corporation. Each of these
sovereign` individuals are spiritually, emotionally, legally, politically` and
economically sovereign. They have no liens or` encumbrances upon their name or
property.
These are the basic
buildings blocks of self-government and` a republican form of government.
Twelve to twenty-four` sovereign individuals gather and form a jural society,
then a` township, then the townships form counties which in turn` form
sovereign states which in turn form Unions of` sovereign states (e.g., Articles
of Confederation, Constitution` for the united states of America).
From this sovereign
process , there and only there does the` federal
The Constitution
for the
Both the American
and the
"In pursuance of the Law of Nations, and` recognition set
forth in Public Law 103-150, 107` Stat. 1510, at page 1513, and in pursuance`
of the recognized impaired Constitution for the` Kingdom of Hawai'i, all
authorities are derived` from the same said sources as foundation` for
proceeding to reinstate the Nation.”
— John B. Nelson 2`
Both the
Constitution for the united states of America and` the Constitution for the
Kingdom of Hawai'i consummated` by Kamehameha III were recognized and created
under the` Law of Nations.”
The essential
nature of the Law of Nations is well` established. We are to understand the
code of public` instruction that defines the rights and prescribes the duties`
of nations in their intercourse with each other. The faithful` observance of
this law is essential to national character and` the happiness of mankind.”3` "Congress shall
have Power...
To provide for define and punish Piracies and` Felonies
committed on the high Seas, and` Offenses against the Law of Nations...”
— Constitution for the
Treaties involving changes in the Tariff` or in any law of the
Kingdom, shall be referred` for approval to the Legislature.
The King appoints Public Ministers, who shall` be commissioned,
accredited and instructed` agreeably to the usage and Law of Nations.”
— Constitution for the
The “Law of
Nations” is the private international law` between sovereign individuals,
families, tribes, courts, grand` juries, townships, counties, states and
nations.
This has been well
established under various international` conventions for thousands of years.
All the administrative` rules and regulations, statutes and the Uniform
Commercial` Code (UCC), and constitutions of various countries are` based ul
The “Law of
Nations” is the “Law of Sovereigns,” derived` from the principles of natural
law.
It is from the “Law
of Nations” that constitutions are created` and lawful de jure governments
consummated. Any` government that portends to hold power and wields` authority
without being answerable to these Laws are de` facto and unlawful governments
ruling by occupation,` usurpation and exploitation.
De facto
governments justify their existence by the rule of` force and coercion instead
of the rule of Law.
Legi
The federal United
States government is presently a de facto` government ruling by occupation,
usurpation and` exploitation.
Not only is the
federal United States government bankrupt,` but it has usurped its limited
authority and jurisdiction, not` only in the united states of America but in
the Kingdom of` Hawai'i.
The federal United
States government is desperately in want` of lawful authority and dominion, but
it can have none` without the consent of the inherent sovereign people.
The sovereign
American people created the federal` government through the Constitution and
the organic law` that preceded it. It is a universal rule of the Law of
Nations` that the Created (i.e., the government) can never be greater` than the
Creator (i.e., the sovereign).
The federal United
States government bases its entire` existence upon the political will of the
sovereign people.
Having obtained no
consent to supercede its authority, such` a government will self-destruct.
Such a principle
has been universally accepted and followed` in at least the following cases as
of the date of the` O’Donoghue case (April/May 1933): Benner v. Porter, 9` How.
235, 242-244; Clinton v. Englebrecht, 13 Wall. 434,` 447; Hornbuckle v. Toombs,
18 Wall, 648, 655; Good v. Martin, 95 US 90, 98; Reynolds v. United States, 98
US 145,` 154; The City of Panama, 101 US 453, 460; McAllister v. United States,
141 US 174, 180 et seq.; United States v. McMilan, 165 US 504, 510; and Romeu
v. Todd, 206 US` 358, 368.
Under international
law, Jus cogens are "rules universally` recognized and so firmly
recognized and so firmly` established as to need no justification and are
binding on all` nations belonging to the community of nations.”
The binding,
peremptory nature of jus cogens does not allow` for derogation. Once an
international norm becomes jus` cogens, it is absolutely binding on all states,
whether they` have persistently objected or not.
Even though the
United States was not a signatory to the` Vienna Convention, the principle of
jus cogens is binding` upon the United States.4`
Counter-Claims and Cross-Libels` in Admiralty / Mari
In International
law, as in commerce, contracts of specific` performance can only be agreed to
by parties capable of` making such a contract, or through representatives with`
power of attorney. A slave or subject cannot enter into a` contract without the
consent of the master.
If you are indeed a
sovereign “state” Citizen, with your full` and complete right to contract
unhindered by any contract` with the government, then the “Law of Nations” is
the code` of behavior between sovereigns, nations, and other free` entities.
The willingness to
fight and defend what is yours is a` requirement of keeping your sovereignty.
The rights to
property determine sovereignty. The sovereign,` on land, has rights of
property, and the right to acquire` property by hard work. No one owns the sea.
Landless corporate
governments are only able to act under` the rules of an Admiralty/Mari
You can rest
assured that any court actions in revenue,` traffic, or insurance are
Admiralty/Mari
The ever-present,
gold-fringe (badge) around the Military` (ensign) flag, falsely believed to be
the American flag,` confirms the jurisdiction and the presence of an`
international contract.
There are three
causes for an Admiralty/Mari
Instead of the
damaged party swearing out a complaint, a` “proctor” acting for the damaged
party produces an` “information” and bond to the clerk who then registers a`
“Notice of Claim” against the “vessel,” or “vassal.”
Thus the vessel, or
vassal is “arrested,” like in drug forfeiture` and other property seizures,
thus establishing the` jurisdiction of the court by virtue of the seizure.
I have good reason
to believe that the “war on drugs,” and` “war on crime” forfeitures are in fact
the prizes (on sea) or` booty (on land) under Admiralty law.
The RICO statutes
and forfeiture laws are used to justify the` arrest of the property. If seized
property is claimed as a prize` of war, there must be solid evidence that the
property is a` man-ofwar, or that there is contraband cargo to verify the`
seizure. They must have found “drugs” or contraband on the` property, and that
is the only evidence that can be entered into the proceeding to justify a claim
based on a prize. All` this is being done in an Admiralty/Mari
The “proctors” are
either another judge, the prosecuting` attorneys, the City Manager, or the U.S.
Attorney acting on` behalf of the international principals/creditors (i.e.,`
International Monetary Fund) who are not present.
A “Notice of
Seizure” is published to notify all claimants to` come forward and file a claim
against the vessel, or vassal,` by the U.S. Marshall.
Then a “special
master” (U.S. Attorney) recommends to the` judge what should be done, either
(1) dismissing the claim;` (2) an auction of the vessel; (3) the claimants are
satisfied by` the owners offer of payment.
So how does all
this relate to you as a sovereign “state” Citizen, or a vassal (U.S. citizen)
of the federal government` (ship of state)? To initiate an action, the police
officer at a` traffic stop, or prosecuting attorney presumes that you are a` “vessel”
of the federal United States having been enrolled via` a birth certificate,
duly registered with a Title (Capitalized` NAME), with a certificate of a date
of birth (launching).
Action begins with
an information (presentment or citation)` filed with the clerk of the court,
and the government` absolves itself of posting bond if the accused (presumed
to` be a U.S. citizen and federal government employee) is in` government
service. A “Notice to Appear” is given to the` accused. If he/she fails to appear
to defend claims against` the vessel, an arrest, attachment or garnishment of
property` is recommended.
There is no sworn
affidavit, nor evidence of contract entered` into the court at this point
because the presumption stands` that the vessel, or vassal has no rights.
The court wants the
owner (you) of the property (person or` legal fiction) to be in the possession
of the court to establish` jurisdiction. When your property (your body) is
arrested` under an Admiralty proceeding, you cannot argue` jurisdiction.
You have granted
jurisdiction by your appearance, and by` virtue of the fact that your property
has been seized. Once` jurisdiction has been established by the appearance of
the` owner, the proceeding shifts from Admiralty to Equity.
In Admiralty, the
original, signed contract must be placed` into evidence before an action can
conclude. In Equity, a` quasi-contract can establish a claim. Under Equity
rules,` you’re faced with defending yourself against a quasi-claim to` specific
performance.
It’s your signature
on the traffic citation, or on the driver’s` license that compels you to
perform.
The
citation/summons gave you notice of the “in rem” action against your property. You must always
explicitly` “Reserve your Rights,” and either refuse to sign, or sign` under
threat, duress and coercion (tdc).
You must file a
rebuttal as a “Cross-Libel,” or as a “Refusal` for Cause, Without Dishonor,”
denying their presumptions` and claims.
You can file your
refusal as a counter-libel in Admiralty,` pursuant to Rule 9(h), special
pleadings of the Federal Rules` of Civil Procedure (FRCP). Otherwise their
presumption will` act against you.
You must not
consent to the binding arbitration, summary` process proceedings, and demand a
competent court of` judicial power to adjudicate your case.
You are not
consenting to the proceedings, but are there by` rule of necessity on orders of
the summons. It is mandatory` to file a “Counter-Claim.”
You give notice and
demand to cure, or demand to show` cause, or demand the original contracts, or
verified` complaints, or demand the identity of the true party who` ordered the
actions that damaged you, or other demands for` a remedy.
If they answer,
determine if the answers are refutable for` failure to substantiate claims,
failure to present original` contracts, failure to produce proof of evidence
that the` seizure of your “booty” is authorized under prize law, or` other
grounds under the rules of evidence.
The courts cannot
give you a Common law remedy until you` file a “Cross-Libel” pursuant to 28
USC§1333, Savings to` Suitor, based on the First Judiciary Act. In your
“Complaint” accuse them of kidnapping
for ransom, “legal” extortion,` perjury, robbery ashore, and other violations
of your person` and property.
This verified
complaint is served upon all known parties that` have damaged you including
their superiors. Subpoena the` names of the superiors so you can join them to
the suit. You` must join all necessary parties.
Failure to enjoin
all necessary parties is grounds for` dismissal of your Cross-Libel. All
parties who fail to answer` your Complaint have granted you grounds for a
“Summary` Judgment.”
If the Cross-Libel
is dismissed without hearing, you can now` claim a discharge of all debts
pursuant to UCC 3-601.
You can now proceed
to file suit against the public officials` who damaged you in their private
capacity, either by Title 42` USC §1983, Common law tort, or Commercial Lien
based` upon violation of their signed oaths of office.5` “Savings to Suitors
clause of 28 U.S.C. 1331(1)` enables Mari
— Pacific Far East Line, Inc. vs. Ogden Corp.,` (1977), ND Cal)
425 F Supp 1239`
Title 18
U.S.C. §1652, Citizens as pirates` Whoever, being a citizen of the United States, commits any` murder
or robbery, or any act of hostility against the United` States, or against any
citizen thereof, on the high seas, under` color of any commission from any
foreign prince, or state, or` on pretense of authority from any person, is a
pirate, and` shall be imprisoned for life. 6`
Title 18
U.S.C.§1661, Robbery ashore` Whoever
being engaged in any piratical cruise or enterprise,` or being of the crew of
any piratical vessel, lands from such` vessel and commits robbery on shore, is
a pirate, and shall` be imprisoned for life.7` In Rem Seizures` [Editor’s Note: This white paper was written by Kimberly` A.
Crawford, J.D., July 1995. Special Agent Crawford is a` legal instructor at the
FBI Academy. Nice stuff they're` teaching those cadets.]` Seizure actions under the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic` Act, 21 U.S.C. 334, are in rem proceedings subject to the`
Supplemental Rules for Certain Admiralty and Mari
I take it that ALL
seizure actions are now in rem proceedings` subject to these Supplemental
Rules.
These Supplemental
Rules are mentioned in FRCP 9(h), but` they are not published in the standard FRCP.
“With respect` to seizures, there is no presumption that the government` needs
a warrant.
To be reasonable
under the fourth amendment, seizures` need only be based on governmental
interests that outweigh` the intrusions upon an individual's privacy rights.” 8` “The officers of the
law,` in the execution of process,` are obligated to know` the requirements of
the law,` and if they mistake them,` whether through ignorance or design,` and
anyone is harmed by their error,` they must respond in damages.”
— Rogers vs. Marshal (United States use of Rogers vs. Conklin) 1
Wall. (US) 644, 17 L ed 714`
Notes and Sources`
INTERNATIONAL LAW`
1. Sourced from
Emer De Vattel, The Law of Nations or` the Principles of Natural Law.
2. Ibid.
3. Sourced from
James Kent.
4. Sourced from
Johnny Liberty, Sovereign Hawai’i(an)s` Handbook (Cascadian Resource Center,
1996)` 5. Sourced from Jeff Ganaposki, Patriot Primer #2,` (Living Word,
pp.19-45).
6. 62 Stat. 774,
Ch. 645, June 25, 1948` 7. Ibid.
8. Quoted from
letter to Michael J. Yamaguchi, U.S. Attorney, 450 Golden Gate Avenue, San
Francisco,` California, from Margaret Jane Porter, Chief Counsel,` Food and
Drug Administration; Submitted by Paul` Andrew Mitchell.
9. See Rogers vs.
Conklin, 1 Wall. (US) 644, 17 L ed 714`