Contract with government

Nick Straughan made this Freedom of Information request to Ministry of Justice

The request was partially successful.

From: Nick Straughan

1 May 2010

Dear Ministry of Justice,

I am interested in finding out if you have any evidence of a claim
of authority over human beings on the landmass commonly known as
the United Kingdom.

1. Do you have any recorded information that I have consented to be
governed, or any evidence that I have consented to obey acts of
parliaments? If so please provide me with this evidence. If you
need specific personal information from me, in order to check your
records, please tell me what information I need to supply you with
in order to check you recorded information.

2. If you do not have evidence that I have requested or consented
to be governed please supply me with any recorded information
showing a claim by the government that the government has the
authority to force me to comply with acts of parliament.

3. If a person, born on the land commonly known as the United
Kingdom, does not vote in a general election, what evidence is
there showing that the government (including the Ministry of
Justice, the Police, Law Courts, Civil Courts and other branches of
government) has authority to force that person to adhere to any
acts of parliament?

4. Is there any recorded information evidencing the granting of
authority to the European Union (to force me to obey their rules,
acts or statutes) or any other organisation outside the United
Kingdom?

If not please direct me to the department responsible for keeping
these records, if they exist.

Yours faithfully,

Nick: Straughan

Link to this

From: Data Access & Compliance Unit
Ministry of Justice

1 May 2010

This is an Auto Reply from the Data Access & Compliance Unit.

Thank you for your e-mail.

If your message was a request for information please be advised that your
request is being dealt with and you will receive a written acknowledgement
shortly.

Data Access & Compliance Unit

Information Directorate

Ministry of Justice
6th Floor, Zone B, Postal Point 6.23
102 Petty France
London
SW1H 9AJ

Fax: 0203 334 2245

E-mail: [email address]

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of
the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage or copying
is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all
copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message
could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in
mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message
by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be
monitored, recorded and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail
monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be
read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not
broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

show quoted sections

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or
recorded for legal purposes.

Link to this

From: Over, Darren \(ARU\)
Ministry of Justice

4 May 2010

Freedom of Information Request FOI/64933/10

Data Access & Compliance Unit
Information Directorate
Zone 6 B
Post point 6.25
102 Petty France
London
SW1H 9AJ

T 020 3334 3251
F 020 3334 2245
E [email address]

www.justice.gov.uk

04-MAY-10 Our Ref:FOI/64933/10

Dear Nick Straughan,

SUBJECT: Freedom of Information Request

Thank you for your correspondence of May 1, 2010, in which you asked
for information about consenting to British Laws under the Freedom of
Information Act 2000 (FOIA) from the Ministry of Justice (MoJ).

You will receive a response from us by June 2, 2010. Your request has
been passed to the appropriate business unit within the MoJ, and they
will write to you with their decision by this date.

The FOIA does provide a number of exemptions. A qualified exemption
requires that before relying on it we must consider the public interest
test. If the information you have requested is covered by a qualified
exemption(s) under FOIA, the Department is allowed to take longer than
20 working days to respond. This is because in such circumstances we are
required to consider the public interest issues when deciding whether or
not to disclose the information requested.

If more time is needed to consider the public interest issues under a
qualified exemption(s), we will write to you and inform you of the
revised date you can expect to receive a response to your request.

If you have any queries regarding this request please do not hesitate to
contact us. Please quote ref: FOI/64933/10 in all future correspondence.

Yours sincerely,

Darren Over
(Sent on behalf of Caroline Banjo)
Data Access and Compliance Unit

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of
the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage or copying
is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all
copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message
could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in
mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message
by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be
monitored, recorded and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail
monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be
read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not
broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

show quoted sections

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or
recorded for legal purposes.

Link to this

From: Nick Straughan

2 June 2010

Dear Over, Darren (ARU),

Freedom of Information Request FOI/64933/10

I am writing to ask for an internal review as I have only received
an 'Auto Reply from the Data Access & Compliance Unit' to my FOI
request and it is now overdue. By Law, the Ministry of Justice
should normally have responded by 1st June 2010.

My request can be seen at:
http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/co...

Yours sincerely,

Nick Straughan

Link to this

From: Banjo, Caroline
Ministry of Justice

2 June 2010


Attachment Nick Straughan.DOC.doc
54K Download View as HTML


Dear Mr Straughan,

Please find attached our response to your Freedom of Information Request.

Kind regards

Caroline Banjo
Data Access and Compliance Unit

<<Nick Straughan.DOC>>

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of
the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage or copying
is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all
copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message
could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in
mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message
by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be
monitored, recorded and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail
monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be
read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not
broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

show quoted sections

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or
recorded for legal purposes.

Link to this

From: Nick Straughan

9 June 2010

Dear Caroline Banjo, Data Access and Compliance Unit, Information
Directorate and Ministry of Justice,

This is an FOI Request and should be treated as such. Ref:
FO64933/10

Thanks for your reply but the words you wrote only cause confusion,
as they do not answer in any substance and there are
contradictions.

To recap, your last reply (Your Ref: FO64933/10) says:

a) You logged my ‘correspondence’ as an FOI request when you should
not have, and were sorry about that. This is very strange because
it IS an FOI request, as you are fully aware.

b) You say that the Ministry of Justice should reply to my FOI
request “within 40 calendar days of receipt of the necessary
information such as proof of identity and the prescribed fee”, yet
you do not specify that you actually require me to supply you with
further proof of identification, nor do you ask me to pay a fee, or
tell me how I would supply and identification or pay a fee.

c) You go on to say you “will not be able to answer your request
without further clarification.” Yet you do not ask me to supply any
clarification of anything specifically.

d) Then you quote “Section 12 of the FOIA” (even though the first
thing you wrote is that you shouldn’t have logged my request as an
FOI request; which suggests you know this is an FOI request)
stating my questions (given that you have so far only mentioned
question1 and 2 of 4 I assume you are only referring to question 1
and 2 here) will take too long to answer, and under FOI Rules you
don’t have to answer. You are the highest available authority to
determine how long it should take to answer my questions and your
best estimate is that it will take one person “in excess of 3.5
working days to determine appropriate material within the scope of
your request, and locate, retrieve and extract that information”.
Given that if you are able to answer my very first question with a
positive result, then that is the ONLY question you need to answer,
it seems quite obvious that you have no idea where to find the
recorded information I request, perhaps because it does not exist?

e) You do not answer my questions 3 and 4 from my original FOI
request. (FOI/64933/10). If this helps you to reduce your costs
incurred and therefore brings the costs under the £600 limit, and
you answer questions 1 in substance then I am happy for you to
continue to ignore questions 3 and 4 this time. If you are unable
to supply the recorded information to question 1 then question 2
still stands as an FOI request too.

f) You state “The Freedom of Information Act (2000) gives
individuals and organisations the right of access to all types of
recorded information held” which is great because that is exactly
what I am asking for – RECORDED INFORMATION.

g) You go on to say “On occasion, Data Access and Compliance Unit
receives requests for information that do not ask for a copy of
recorded information (questions 3 and 4)” however my questions 3
specifically asks what “evidence” is there and question 4
specifically asks for “recorded information evidencing”. However as
I stated, for the purpose of getting an answer to question 1 (if
not then question 2) the Ministry of Justice can ignore questions 3
and 4 this time.

h) You suggest that the Ministry of Justice “believe the issues
raised fall within the remit of Constitutional Directorate and we
have therefore passed your letter to them for them to reply to you
direct.” I assume you are referring to questions 3 and 4 here, in
which case I thank you for passing it on to the correct department.
This still leaves questions 1 and 2 for you to answer.

i) You say I “may wish contact them” only inserting the words
“email address”, but without actually supplying their email address
or any other method of contact. Please supply me with this contact
information because a search on the governments own directory of
departments
http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Dl1/Director...
shows no such department or other search results. The closest
mention is “The Department for Constitutional Affairs (DCA) is now
part of the Ministry of Justice and has taken over all the
responsibilities of the DCA. Use the link below to access the DCA
website which is now an archive”

Let me remind you that you have a legal obligation, under The
Freedom of Information Act (2000), to answer my FOI request for
recorded information. If you do actually require me to provide you
with any or all of...

j) further clarification of my questions;

k) proof of identity;

l) payment of a fee.

...please tell me

m) how to pay the fee (and how much to pay),

n) exactly what proof of identity and/or information you require
from me in order for you to check, reference, search or cross-check
your recorded information in order to fulfil your legal obligation
to answer my FOI request in substance.

If you do not have the recorded information I request, or do not
know where to find it, or know that it does not exist then
answering with something like ‘We, the Ministry of Justice for the
United Kingdom, do not have any recorded information evidencing any
authority or statutory authority over you Nick Straughan’ will
suffice.

If you can answer my original questions 1 and 2 in substance then
great, I would like to read the answers. If, however, you are
having trouble identifying what I am requesting access to in my
original questions 1 and 2, please allow me to assist by rephrasing
my question:

5. I request a copy of, or access to, any primary Act of Parliament
that is part of Statute Law which details as part of its purpose of
enactment the remit of government, or the right of the government
to rule the people of the UK, or a statement affirming the Rule of
Law as the cornerstone of our system of governance. (Please note
that I am aware a bill’ is not a primary Act of Parliament.) Given
that I am requesting information which is the foundation for
governance, I’m quite sure a learned colleague will know where to
look, if such a thing exists.

It’s quite easy really. Either you have evidence of authority over
me or you do not.

I see 3 possibilities:

o) [Hiding evidence] The Ministry of Justice has evidence of lawful
authority over me but will not provide it to me and is therefore
breaking its own laws, which in turn negates any claimed authority.
The chance of the Ministry of Justice (or any other Government
agency) having such information recorded (or otherwise) is
basically 0 (zero). I was born free and I do not consent to
slavery.

p) [I’m a slave] The Ministry of Justice and its agents knows that
it does not have any evidence of authority over me, and therefore
knows that it does not have any lawful authority to force any
Government policies, Statutes or Acts of Parliament upon me. But
the Ministry of Justice will still attempt to enforce the UK
Governments policies, Statutes and Acts of Parliaments upon me.
This is unlawful use of force to coerce me against my will and
tantamount to slavery, which apart from being totally immoral has
been abolished in the UK in a number of ways, including the Slavery
Trade Act 1807, the Slave Trade Act 1824, the Abolition of Slavery
Act 1833, the Slave Trade Act 1843, the Slave Trade Act 1873, the
British and Foreign Anti-Slavery Society and Anti-Slavery
International.

q) [I am free] The Ministry of Justice and its agents knows that it
does not have any evidence of authority over me, and knows that it
does not have any lawful authority to force its policies, Statutes
and Acts upon me. And I am free to go about my life lawfully,
without interruption, as long as I cause no harm or loss to another
human, nor be fraudulent in my agreements. Furthermore I can live
my life and without any obligation to follow the policies, Statues
and Acts of Parliament that the United Kingdom Government pass into
what it calls ‘Law’.

If you chose to ignore, deflect, pass the buck, wriggle or in any
way fail to fulfil your legal, lawful and moral obligations in
answering the fundamental question of whether or not the Ministry
of Justice (and in turn the United Kingdom Government and its
agencies) has any claim of authority over me, then you must take in
to account the ramifications of such a dishonourable and cowardly
act. Evidence of your responses or lack thereof is publicly
available for all to see. If I am ever in need to go to a court to
defend myself against any claim by the United Kingdom Government
(or one of its agents) that I have ‘broken’ some Act of Parliament
(or other rule) then I will most certainly be asking what claim of
authority they have over me and I will be citing this FOI request
as evidence of a clear lack of such a claim. If the MINISTRY OF
JUSTICE is unable to perform the simple task evidencing any claim
of authority to administer justice, at best it might look a bit
strange attempting to enforce its rules upon those people over
which it has no provable authority.

Your answers or lack thereof will confirm whether I am free or, in
the eyes of the Ministry of Justice, a slave. Ultimately I am
seeking: remedy from what I see as an oppressive and invasive
government, which some might call: FREEDOM.

I sincerely hope that from one human being to another you see
reason to answer my questions in substance once, and for all.

Kind regards,

Nick Straughan

Link to this

From: Banjo, Caroline
Ministry of Justice

9 June 2010

Dear Sender

Thank you for your e-mail, I am out of the office from 8th and 9th June
2010. Therefore if you have any urgent queries, please redirect your
e-mail to [email address].

Kind regards,

Caroline Banjo

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of
the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage or copying
is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all
copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message
could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in
mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message
by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be
monitored, recorded and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail
monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be
read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not
broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

show quoted sections

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or
recorded for legal purposes.

Link to this

From: Davies, Roger
Ministry of Justice

11 June 2010

11 June 2010 Our Ref:IR/65663/10

Dear Mr Straughan
Thank you for your correspondence of June 9, 2010, in which you asked for
an Internal Review into handling of your request for information with
reference number FOI/64933 .

Your request for an Internal Review is being handled in accordance with
the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and will be passed to the Unit that
will carry out this process.

You will be contacted separately by the person conducting the review but
in the meantime please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any
queries. Please quote Ref: IR/65663/10 in all future correspondence.

Yours sincerely,

Roger Davies
(Sent on behalf of Hannah Wright)
Data Access and Compliance Unit

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of
the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage or copying
is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all
copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message
could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in
mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message
by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be
monitored, recorded and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail
monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be
read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not
broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

show quoted sections

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or
recorded for legal purposes.

Link to this

From: Nick Straughan

5 July 2010

Dear Davies, Roger,

Ref:FO64933/10 and Ref:IR/65663/10

I am writting to ask if an internal review is still being completed
or if there is a problem with sourcing the information I requested?

I was informed that it should take less than 20 days to complete
but I have not heard anything in response to my requests.

I look forward to your response.

Yours sincerely,

Nick Straughan

Link to this

From: Evans, Michael
Ministry of Justice

8 July 2010


Attachment 65663 IR Nick Straughan.doc
66K Download View as HTML


<<65663-IR-Nick Straughan.doc>>

Mr Nick Straughan

E-mail: [1][FOI #34538 email]

Dear Mr Straughan,

Freedom of Information Act 2000 - Outcome of internal review

Please see the attached letter.

Kind Regards,

M Evans

Michael Evans | Internal Review Case Adviser
Data Access & Compliance Unit | Ministry of Justice 6th Floor, point 6.23
| 102 Petty France | London | SW1H 9AJ
Tel: 020 3334 3237
E-mail: [email address]

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of
the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage or copying
is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy
all
copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message
could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in
mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message
by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be
monitored, recorded and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail
monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be
read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not
broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

show quoted sections

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or
recorded for legal purposes.

References

Visible links
1. mailto:[FOI #34538 email]

Link to this

From: Nick Straughan

20 July 2010

Dear Evans, Michael,

Ref: FOI #34538 and Ref:IR/65663/10

Thanks for your reply.

It is very interesting to note that you give 2 opposing and
conflict reasons why you cannot answer my questions.

On the one hand you state that under the FOIA rules my questions do
not need answering because they exceed the cost allowance. Then on
the other hand you state that you don't need to answer them because
my questions do not fall under the FOIA remit. It's almost as if
you are trying to give as many reasons not to answer in the hope
that I will not pursue this further.

There is a third reason you cannot answer questions 3 & 4 claiming
that I did not ask for "recorded information", even though you
quote my question in the letter in which I ask for "recorded
information" (Q3) and "evidence" (Q3) which is generally considered
to be the same as recorded information by virtually all English
speaking people. Given that in my letter on the 9th June I pointed
out the exact same 'error', in which I asked you to investigate, I
fail to see that your claim that I did not request recorded
information as anything but a blatant lie by you.

Thanks for the information regarding SAR and links to some
constitution information.

In being helpful and answering question 3, you claim "Whether you
vote or not in general elections in the United Kingdom the state
has jurisdiction of you." I am not challenging the legality of
this, but please show me what RECORDED INFORMATION you have which
evidences this. If you do not have any RECORDED INFORMATION, and
the MoJ's claim is that: Nobody consented to our jurisdiction, it's
just the way it is, live with it... Then please be so kind as to
say so, in order that I need not hassle you with further
clarification.

I would appreciate it if you or the next person to handle my
request actually reads the request and replies in substance and
truthfully.

I will certainly be contacting the Information Commission, as well
as some others so thank you for the information about how I can get
the information you should have given me in the first place.

To be helpful to you and your colleagues you might be interested to
know that the governments ‘membership’ of the EU is a treasonous
act, when compared to the definition of treason. As far as I can
make out, assisting in treason gets life in prison, but I guess
your department should know about the rules on this. If you wish to
conform to any claimed legality of the EU and their jurisdiction in
England then I would advise you seek legal advice.

Yours sincerely, without ill will, vexation or frivolity,

Nick Straughan

Link to this

From: Nick Straughan

21 July 2010

Dear Evans, Michael,

Ref: FOI #34538 and Ref:IR/65663/10

Further to my reply yesterday I would like to point out an error I
made, for which I apologise.

I don't think following orders from a foreign power (the EU) is an
act of treason. It was the UK's government that signed the 6 EU
treaties since 1972 that were acts of treason. Hopefully the MoJ is
investigating this as they are no doubt entrusted with
administering justice on behalf of the sovereignty of the UK,
rather than giving our sovereignty away?

I'm sorry for any confusion, but I thought I had best clear it up
as quickly as possible.

Either way, it may still be wise to seek legal advise on this
matter.

Yours sincerely,

Nick Straughan

Link to this

From: Evans, Michael
Ministry of Justice

21 July 2010


Attachment Re 65663 IR Nick Straughan.doc.txt
5K Download View as HTML

Attachment 65663 IR Nick Straughan 4.doc
56K Download View as HTML


<<65663-IR-Nick Straughan (4).doc>> Mr Nick Straughan

E-mail:

Our Ref: 65663
Date: 21 July 2010

Dear Mr Straughan,

Please see the attached reply.

Kind Regards,

M Evans

Michael Evans | Internal Review Case Adviser
Data Access & Compliance Unit | Ministry of Justice 6th Floor, point
6.23 | 102 Petty France | London | SW1H 9AJ
Tel: 020 3334 3237
E-mail: [email address]

show quoted sections

Link to this

m james left an annotation ( 4 August 2010)

Quote-marks Well ive been reading through numerous FOI requests for about an hour tonight and its pretty plain to see that the United Kingdom corporation is a covert fascist dictatorship.

This site is full of unanswered requests,late responses, constant obstructions, blatant dodging of answers, and in my view only further highlights just how corrupt the state actually is.

Perfectly reasonable and legitimate requests concerning our freedom are not being answered, and for what reason.
Well it's patently obvious,because if genuine answers were given it would be clear for all to see that we are not free but merely the chattle property of the state.

Link to this

Nick Straughan left an annotation (26 August 2011)

Quote-marks After all the requests for evidence, internal review and re-clarifications the best the MoJ came up with was an opinion...

"Whether you vote or not in general elections in the United Kingdom the state has jurisdiction of you."

Dues to this lack of evidence I can only sumise that their claim of authority is based on Force alone, although of course it was not admited in such plain English. As Marc Stevens pointed out 'the Law is the opinion of men (or body of men) backed by a gun'.

Link to this

Things to do with this request

Anyone:
Ministry of Justice only:

Follow this request

There are 3 people following this request

Offensive? Unsuitable?

Requests for personal information and vexatious requests are not considered valid for FOI purposes (read more).

If you believe this request is not suitable, you can report it for attention by the site administrators

Report this request

Act on what you've learnt

Similar requests

More similar requests

Event history details

Are you the owner of any commercial copyright on this page?