Rhinoceros Party of Canada
$50 million PDF Print E-mail
Written by Brian Salmi   

                                                                Court file number: ___________

 

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA

TRIAL DIVISION

 

Between:

 

SA TAN

 

Plaintiff

 

- and -

 

HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN

 

 

Defendant

 

Statement of Claim to the Defendant

 

 

A LEGAL PROCEEDING HAS BEEN COMMENCED AGAINST YOU by the Plaintiff. The claim made against you is set out in the following pages.

 

IF YOU WISH TO DEFEND THIS PROCEEDING, you or a solicitor acting for you are required to prepare a statement of defence in Form 171B prescribed by the Federal Courts Rules serve it on the plaintiff's solicitor or, where the plaintiff does not have a solicitor, serve it on the plaintiff, and file it, with proof of service, at a local office of this Court, WITHIN 30 DAYS after this statement of claim is served on you, if you are served within Canada.

 

If you are served in the United States of America, the period for serving and filing your statement of defence is forty days. If you are served outside Canada and the United States of America, the period for serving and filing your statement of defence is sixty days.

 

Copies of the Federal Court Rules information concerning the local offices of the Court and other necessary information may be obtained on request to the Administrator of this Court at Ottawa (telephone 613-992-4238) or at any local office.

 

IF YOU FAIL TO DEFEND THIS PROCEEDING, judgment may be given against you in your absence and without further notice to you.

 

 

August 7, 2007

 

 

Issued by:__________________________________

(Registry Officer)

 

Address of local office: 30 McGill Street, Montréal, Quebec, H2Y 3Z7

 

TO: HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN

 

Statement of facts:

 

  1. In 1982 the Government of Canada passed the Constitution Act.

 

  1. Section 3 of the Constitution Act states: “Every citizen of Canada has the right to vote in an election of members of the House of Commons or of a legislative assembly and to be qualified for membership therein.”

 

  1. In 1993 the Government of Canada passed Bill C-114, a Bill to amend the Election Act.

 

  1. One of the provisions of Bill C-114 was that all prospective candidates in a federal election must deposit $1000 to Elections Canada in order to become a candidate for federal election.

 

  1. Section 66 (4) (a) of the Election Act stipulates that all prospective candidates in a federal election must deposit $1000 to Elections Canada in order to become a candidate for federal election.

 

  1. Not all Canadians can afford to pay a $1000 deposit and are therefore denied their democratic right to be candidates in a federal election.

 

  1. Section 66 (4) (a) of the Election Act is inconsistent with Section 3 of the Constitution Act.

 

  1. Section 52 (1) of the Constitution Act states: “The Constitution of Canada is the supreme law of Canada, and any law that is inconsistent with the provisions of the Constitution is, to the extent of the inconsistency, of no force or effect.”

 

  1. Bill C-114 was a de facto malicious attempt to deny Canadians their democratic right, protected under section 3 of the Constitution Act, to be candidates in federal elections and a de facto malicious attempt to destroy small political parties, leaving hundreds of thousands (perhaps millions) of Canadians with no opportunity to vote for candidates of their choice.

 

  1. Section 66 (4) (b) of the Election Act stipulates that a prospective candidate in a federal election must appoint a qualified auditor before being granted his right to be a candidate in a federal election.

 

  1. Qualified auditors are not compelled to agree to be a prospective candidate’s official auditor.

 

  1. Section 66 (4) (b) of the Election Act is inconsistent with section 3 of the Constitution Act.

 

  1. Section 66 (1) (b) of the Election Act stipulates that a prospective candidate in a federal election must be nominated by 100 qualified voters in the riding the prospective candidates hopes to become a candidate in.

 

  1. Qualified voters are not compelled to nominate a prospective candidate.

 

  1. Section 66 (1) (b) is inconsistent with section 3 of the Constitution Act.

 

  1. Since the passing of the Constitution Act no Canadian has been legally compelled to surrender a financial deposit in any amount to exercise the democratic right to be a candidate in a federal election.

 

  1. Since the passing of the Constitution Act in 1982 all candidates in federal elections have been forced to surrender financial deposits in order to exercise their democratic right to be candidates in federal elections.

 

  1. Since the passing of the Constitution Act in 1982 some candidates in federal elections have had the full deposits paid to Elections Canada refunded to them.

 

  1. Since the passing of the Constitution Act in 1982 some candidates in federal elections have not had the full deposits paid to Elections Canada refunded to them.

 

  1. Since the passing of the Constitution Act in 1982 the requirements candidates in federal elections must meet in order to have the deposits paid to Elections Canada fully refunded to them constituted a de facto two-tier system of citizenry.

 

Relief

 

  1. The Plaintiff claims an order from this court to quash, strike down or repeal sections 66 (1) (b), 66 (4) (a) and 66 (4) (b) of the Election Act.

 

  1. The Plaintiff claims an order from this court that compels the Government of Canada establish a fund - in the amount of $50 million dollars – to help the small political parties that were deregistered because of Bill C-114 re-establish themselves.

 

  1. The Plaintiff appeals to this court to stipulate - in the order sought in paragraph 2 of this claim for relief - that the sum of $50 million be taken from the general revenue of the Government of Canada.

 

  1. The Plaintiff appeals to this court to stipulate that the $50 million taken from the  general revenue of the Government of Canada - in the order sought in paragraph 2 of this claim for relief – be “clawed back” from the pensions of all Members of Parliament who voted in favour of Bill C-114 (as a punishment for voting for this malicious attack on the most sacred right a Canadian citizen has) and from the salaries of all members of Parliament, present and future (as a deterrent against ever again attempting to violate the most sacred right a Canadian citizen has).

 

  1. The Plaintiff claims an order from this court for Elections Canada to repay – in full and with interest – all deposit monies not returned to candidates in federal elections since 1982.

 

  1. The Plaintiff claims an order from this court for Elections Canada to surrender unto him 20 dozen quart bottles of Maudite strong red ale.

 

  1. The Plaintiff also seeks costs, and such further relief as this Court considers appropriate and just. 

 

The Plaintiff proposes that the trial of this action be held in the City of Montreal, Quebec at a date to be determined.

 

 

 

 

Sa Tan

Plaintiff
 
[ Back ]