We would not give supreme ultimate legal power to the Supreme Court that could in anyway compromise the decision making process and the application of justice, the Supreme Court must consider the law and abide by the rule of law and due process in order to maintain it power when making a judgement. Failure to do so, failure to avoid conflicts of interest and arbitrary whimsical actions would result in the destruction of the integrity of such a court.
It is only the integrity of the actions of a Court or Regulatory Enforcement agency and the strict adherence to the Rule of Law and due process that maintain its power in the law. Without such integrity any Court of Law or Regulatory Enforcement agency is simply nothing more then a schoolyard bully on steroids acting in his own interests not the interest of the those who may have something to lose. A king or dictator acting by decree.
For an example in regard to a conflict of interest consider this, the Supreme Court judge does not have to worry about his job as he is funded by taxpaying dollars. The BC Securities Commission on the other hand receives no tax money, it gains its revenue through creating regulations that need to be broken in order for the BC Securities Commission to get funded and continue its existence. As per
You can see Section 15 of the Securities Act in relation to the above for more info.
How can the BC Securities Commission operate in a fair an unbiased manner when they must meet funding targets in order to fund the continuation of the BCSC?
Used to be in places like Brooklyn business owners used to pay a 'fee' to a large group of people who dedicated themselves to keeping the neighborhood 'safe' and charged a 'fee' to do so.
Today do we have a government agency acting in the same manner?
How can such an agency have any credibility in any court, tribunal, legal proceeding, or any other form of the administration of justice when even its own policy manuals are so self-serving, corrupted and contrary to the Rule of Law that they are Criminal?!
To make it very clear what they are stating in BCSC Policy 15-601 is that if I have a concern in regards to the BC Securities Commission contravening the Criminal Code, committing criminal acts, and violating my Constitutional rights that the BC Securities Commission will decide the validity of such a complaint.
The BC Securities Commission would likely point to the Securities Act Section 4.3 in regards the application of the Administrative Tribunals Act as evidence of its discretion to determine the law. I ask you however, how does this adhere to the concept of the Rule of Law on which this nation was founded? To be clear on what the rule of law is I have included a copy of the definition from Duhaimes Legal Dictionary:
Duhaime's Law Dictionary
Rule of Law Definition:
- That individuals, persons and government shall submit to, obey and be regulated by law, and not arbitrary action by an individual or a group of individuals.
So what if its written in Legislation? Its a conflict of interest. If the BC Securities Commission Tribunal would ever find Criminal wrong doing in the actions of the BC Securities Commission how long do you think they would last as Tribunal members?
These conflicts of interest only increase the odds of members of the BC Securities Commission trying to make a case that's just is not there and committing Criminal Offenses to do so. We understand the need for the BC Securities Commission to have the powers they do under the Act as there is a need to police the financial markets for sure. Our problem with how the BC Securities Commission operates is that it pays no adherence to the rule of law or due process.
The provisions in the Securities Act (1996 rsbc) that give BCSC officials some leeway and protection from prosecution for possible criminal offenses committed during an investigation or prosecution only apply if the BCSC and its staff have acted in "Good Faith".
We ask you, is will-full deceit for seven months on the part of the BC Securities Commission and our first contact with them considered 'Good Faith'?
Why did the Commission wait so long to tell us they had no jurisdiction over Spyru?
Why did the Commission still try to prosecute us for Spryu and fraud when it knew not only were we guilty of neither, legally it couldn't prosecute us for Spryu even if we were guilty! How are any of these actions considered to be undertaken in good faith?
Is it considered an act of "Good Faith" to hold Hearings without records?
Is perjury on behalf of the sole investigators testimony good faith?
What about continuing prosecution after you can prove the investigator lied under oath, is that covered under good faith?
Is posting private banking details on the BC Securities Commission website for the public to see considered good faith? What about when they told us the webmaster could not pull the numbers off the internet, once something is posted up its up forever. Is that the type of good faith a financial regulatory agency should display?
What about nine months later after our lawyer got them to take said private bank accounts down from your website and the BC Securities Commission decided to post them on its website AGAIN!
Is that an agency acting in good faith?
Was it in good faith they tried to pin fraud on the Respondents regardless of the evidence?
To be clear the BC Securities Commission is not interested in the truth, it simply serves its own agenda. How can such a biased and arbitrary Regulatory and Enforcement agency make any credible legal decision? It cannot.
To ensure that it is understood that the BC Securities Commission has no legal right to proceed in such a manner against us I refer to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms Specifically sections 1, 7, 11, and 32.
**************************************
Canadian Constitution Act of 1982
Charter of rights and freedoms
empowered by a Consolidated Act
Of Canadian Parliament
Section 1.
“The Canadian
Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set
out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as
can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.”
Section 11
- (a) to be informed without unreasonable delay
of the specific offence;
- (d) to be presumed innocent until proven guilty
according to law in a fair and public hearing by an independent and
impartial tribunal;
Section 32
- This Charter applies
- (a) to the Parliament and government of Canada
in respect of all matters within the authority of Parliament
including all matters relating to the Yukon Territory and Northwest
Territories; and
- (b) to the legislature and government of each province in respect of all matters within the authority of the legislature of each province.
- (a) to the Parliament and government of Canada
in respect of all matters within the authority of Parliament
including all matters relating to the Yukon Territory and Northwest
Territories; and
Marginal note:Life, liberty and security of person
Section 7. Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice.
**********************************
The BCSC operates through the BC Securities Act which is a legislative Act of the BC Government, The BC Securities Commission must operate in compliance with the Act and the BC Securities Act must fall in line with the rights set out in the Canadian Constitution as no specific act of Canadian Parliment says otherwise. Section 32 of the Charter outlines this fact.
The Tribunals Act and the Securities Act give the BCSC some power but they do not legislate the right to criminally abuse people and deny the truth in order to prosecute citizens. Section 11 of the Administrative Tribunals act which would give the BC Securities Commission the right to run its courts as it pleases and without transcripts does NOT apply to the BC Securities Commission as per Section 4.1 of the Securities Act.
For more evidence to back our position on how the BC Securities Commission is in constant contravention of law see below from the BCSC Policy Manual 15-601, their policy manuals state that they must adhere to the rules of natural justice set out by the courts, does this not include due process and adherence to the Rule of Law?
How can the BCSC on one hand say they can run their courts and tribunals as they wish, that they are "masters of their own procedure" when clearly Provincial and Federal Legislation indicates that it is not. The BCSC must adhere to Supreme Court rules. In the same paragraph that the BCSC says it may do as it pleases in regards to running its hearings and legal proceedings it also maintains that the Commission considers the rules of natural justice set by the courts, it must simply throw them out after consideration!
If the BCSC truly did consider the rules of natural justice as set by the courts then surely it would not attempt to prosecute citizens for a crime the BCSC is aware they did not commit.
If the BCSC considered the rules of natural justice would it allow perjury in its courts, tampering, fraudulent concealment?
Again these are just a few of the reasons we do not trust the BC Securities Commission, how can they make a fair judgement when its clear they have attempted to deny the truth and railroad us from the beginning.
As always more to come.
Christopher Burke
Peter Harris
No comments:
Post a Comment