With lawful excuse -Taking back authority from government. A presentation of thoughts and activities of Freeman-on-the-Land Robert Menard, Canada.

Every society must have its protectors and its critics. If protectors have to much power abuse and stagnation will inevitably result. If the critics have too much power the stability required for a flourishing society is lost. Only when both work together does a societal structure thrive. (From Henry David Thoreau)

How can a group of people or individuals taking the role as critics in society empower themselves in relation to government and legal authorities by knowing and using the law and the judicial system? From a Master-Subordinate to Equals!

How do authorities gain legitimate power?

Words and Discourses!

How do authorities gain legitimate power? Words and Discourses! How can we create a more equal relation?

How do authorities gain legitimate power? Words and Discourses! How can we create a more equal relation? Questioning Words and deconstructing Discourses!

Some fundamentals: Don’t be deceived by words! Ask for clarification (if they can´t clarify they lose power) Question/deconstruct words revealing their ambiguous meaning

Example: Criminal code of Canada, section 127 (1): “Everyone who, without lawful excuse, disobeys a lawful order made by court or justice or by a person or body or persons authorized by any Act to make or give the order, other than an order for the payment of money, is, unless a punishment or other mode of proceeding is expressly provided bu law, guilty of: (a) an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years; or (b) an offence punishable on summary conviction.

Example: Criminal code of Canada, section 127 (1): “Everyone who, without lawful excuse, disobeys a lawful order made by court or justice or by a person or body or persons authorized by any Act to make or give the order, other than an order for the payment of money, is, unless a punishment or other mode of proceeding is expressly provided bu law, guilty of: (a) an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years; or (b) an offence punishable on summary conviction.

What is “Lawful excuse”? E.g. Killing an animal out of mercy Defending children, animals or lawful property Honest belief (mistake of fact) Necessity (saving or protecting life) Entrapment, provocation, duress Defence with claim of right

What is “Lawful excuse”? E.g. Killing an animal out of mercy Defending children, animals or lawful property Honest belief (mistake of fact) Necessity (saving or protecting life) Entrapment, provocation, duress Defence with claim of right

What is “Lawful excuse”? E.g. Killing an animal out of mercy Defending children, animals or lawful property Honest belief (mistake of fact) Necessity (saving or protecting life) Entrapment, provocation, duress Defence with claim of right

What is “Defence with claim of right”? 39 (1) Everyone who in peacable posession of personal property under a claim of right, and every one acting under his authority, is protected from criminal responsibility for defending that posession, even against a person entitled by law to posession of it, if he uses no more force than is necessary.

Notary Public and Claim of Right Create a letter of understanding and intent. Create a Claim of Right. If not protested the notary signs a certificate forever barring the other party or their agents from the rights just claimed and established.

Winning the game by not entering What are the options in a conflict? 1)Ignoring the Other 2)Rejecting the others position/claim 3)Accepting the others position/claim 4)Engaging in a dialogue a)Asking questions b)Conditional acceptance

Winning the game by not entering What are the options in a conflict? 1)Ignoring the Other

Winning the game by not entering What are the options in a conflict? 1)Ignoring the Other 2)Rejecting the others position/claim

Winning the game by not entering What are the options in a conflict? 1)Ignoring the Other 2)Rejecting the others position/claim 3)Accepting the others position/claim

Winning the game by not entering What are the options in a conflict? 1)Ignoring the Other 2)Rejecting the others position/claim 3)Accepting the others position/claim 4)Engaging in a dialogue a)Asking questions b)Conditional acceptance

Example one: Plougshare action Creating a letter of understanding and intent Creating a claim of right. (Use a Notary or at least witnesses) The other party is compelled to respond, if not, your position is much stronger when doing the action

Example two: IPRED Deconstructing the law by identifying ambiguities. I f information about traffic is stored, there is an obligation according to IPRED to give it out after a court order. However, according to the law concerning electronic communication there is no obligation for the operator to store information about traffic. (E.g. Bahnhof Broadband) There is also no law against providing a service anonymizing the IP-adresses used in communication. Finally there is no law prohibiting PIRATE BAY and other providers of torrets and trackers to provide this service to Swedish citizens if the service is legal in the country of origin.

Comparing Sweden and Canada Basic ideas apply, but needs to be contextualised. No strong legal Rights tradition (but Sweden have ratified all charters on human rights)