Judges or Magistrate oath of office and Allegiance as testimony into the record of the case.

Blaise Tchoula made this Freedom of Information request to Ministry of Justice This request has been closed to new correspondence. Contact us if you think it should be reopened.

The request was refused by Ministry of Justice.

Dear Ministry of Justice,

Would you please provide to the public the following information.

1) Would you please tell the public your definition of the following words or title and what is the role and the jurisdiction of the holder of this title and who are they pay by?

1)(a) A "Magistrate"
1)(b) A "County Court Judge" ("Circuit judge" "District judge" "Deputy District Judge")
1)(c) A High Court "Master".
1)(d) A High Court Judge
1)(e) A "Recorder"
1)(f) A "Delivery Manager" has he got any judicial power regarding default judgement?
1)(g) A "Prosecutor"
1)(h) A "Office Clerk"
1)(i) A "Court Clerk"
1)(j) A "Court"
1)(k) A "Commercial Court" "Commerce"
1)(l) Queen Bench division

2) When in official business which ones the above are required to hold and operate under their Oath of Office and Allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II in respect of her covenant (contract) with the people?
2)(a)When in official business are they always require to operate under their Oath of Office and Allegiance to Her Majesty?
2)(b) Are there any known circumstances when there are not during a court proceeding or when dealing with the business regarding court, where they are not obliged to respect their official oath and allegiance?

3) Would any court order or/and a decision made without this authority being on the file or record of the case be void ab nitio?

4) What information are they obliged to provide to members of the public in showing that they are operating under their oath of office and allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II covenant with the people?

4)(a) Which information should we the people expect to find into the "CASEMAN" or Computerised Court Record or Court Record (from HMCTS) documents that show that when they were making their order or/and decision, this/these was/were done under an within such authority?

5) Would you please provide us with a copy of a sample of Oath of Office and Allegiance to Her Majesty for each one of the position in paragraph 1.?

6) Would you please tell the public where they can find the details and all the necessary information regarding the signed oath of office and allegiance to Her Majesty for the following individuals who have presented and acted under their alleged Oath of Office and have failed to show proof such oath and allegiance?

6)(a) or just because they are occupying the alleged sit or office are we supposed to just accept that they have the authority and are operating under it?

Acting and making decisions and orders at the Queen Bench Division of the High Court in London, i: would like for you to tell the public how to make arrangement to verify that these people are who they say they are and have the authority to do what they are doing or/and what they have done.
a) Master Eastman
b) Master McCloud
c) Master Fountain
d) Master Kay

e) Mr Justice Steward
f) Mrs Justice Cox
g) Mr Justice Edis

h) District judge Zimmels (Lambeth County Court)
i) Deputy District Judge Rea Clerkenwell and Shoreditch
j) District Judge Sterlini Clerkenwell and Shoreditch

7) Are “Magistrate” or/and “Judge” people supposed to put their oath of office and allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II into the record as the testimony of their authority before dealing with the file or any case?
7)(a) What is the procedure in place for finding out about this.

Please note that you must provide me with a wet ink signed response posted to my given address (which must is not to be published) and email here for the public to be also informed.

Yours
Blaise: of the Family Tchoula
Creditor in commerce.
2018_09September_07.

Dear Ministry of Justice,

This appears to have been reported as being vexatious.

i have now reviewed some of the questions and remove the name of the individual.
Please confirm that you are going to deal with the questions or provide your reasons.

For the sake of clarity i do not agreed that is is vexatious to try and find out the information that i am seeking. And even if it was not all my questions are vexatious. they are some which are not. And be more specific in pointing out the one that you deemed vexatious.

Would you please provide to the public the following information.

1) Would you please tell the public your definition of the following words or title and what is the role and the jurisdiction of the holder of this title and who are they pay by?

1)(a) A "Magistrate"
1)(b) A "County Court Judge" ("Circuit judge" "District judge" "Deputy District Judge")
1)(c) A High Court "Master".
1)(d) A High Court Judge
1)(e) A "Recorder"
1)(f) A "Delivery Manager" has he got any judicial power regarding default judgement?
1)(g) A "Prosecutor"
1)(h) A "Office Clerk"
1)(i) A "Court Clerk"
1)(j) A "Court"
1)(k) A "Commercial Court" "Commerce"
1)(l) Queen Bench division

2) When in official business which ones the above are required to hold and operate under their Oath of Office and Allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II in respect of her covenant (contract) with the people?
2)(a)When in official business are they always require to operate under their Oath of Office and Allegiance to Her Majesty?
2)(b) Are there any known circumstances when there are not during a court proceeding or when dealing with the business regarding court, where they are not obliged to respect their official oath and allegiance?

3) Would any court order or/and a decision made without this authority being on the file or record of the case be void ab nitio?

4) What information are they obliged to provide to members of the public in showing that they are operating under their oath of office and allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II covenant with the people?

4)(a) Which information should we the people expect to find into the "CASEMAN" or Computerised Court Record or Court Record (from HMCTS) documents that show that when they were making their order or/and decision, this/these was/were done under an within such authority?

5) Would you please provide us with a copy of a sample of Oath of Office and Allegiance to Her Majesty for each one of the position in paragraph 1.?

6) Would you please tell the public where they can find the details and all the necessary information regarding the signed oath of office and allegiance to Her Majesty for the following individuals who have presented and acted under their alleged Oath of Office and have failed to show proof such oath and allegiance?

6)(a) or just because they are occupying the alleged sit or office are we supposed to just accept that they have the authority and are operating under it?

Acting and making decisions and orders at the Queen Bench Division of the High Court in London, i: would like for you to tell the public how to make arrangement to verify that these people are who they say they are and have the authority to do what they are doing or/and what they have done.

7) Are “Magistrate” or/and “Judge” people supposed to put their oath of office and allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II into the record as the testimony of their authority before dealing with the file or any case?
7)(a) What is the procedure in place for finding out about this.

Please note that you must provide me with a wet ink signed response posted to my given address (which must is not to be published) and email here for the public to be also informed.

Yours
Blaise: of the Family Tchoula
Creditor in commerce.
2018_09September_07.

Yours faithfully,

Blaise Tchoula

Disclosure Team, Ministry of Justice

3 Attachments

 

Dear Mr Tchoula,

 

Please find attached the response to your recent enquiry.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

 

 

[1]Ministry of Disclosure Team,
Justice Information Services

Communications and
Information Services

Find out more on
[2]People Finder

Follow us on Twitter
[3]@MoJGovUK
[4]Protecting and advancing the
principles of justice

 

 

 

 

 

show quoted sections

Dear Disclosure Team,

You classified my response as being vexations and i: am morally offended by your position which gives no specific reasons to which i can respond to but rather an abuse of the legislation and/or the FOI process and guideline.

I: therefore do not understand what you are saying and until then i: demand that you comply with the legislation and provide me with the answer to all my question unless you can point to each one of them and as matter of fact and not unfounded and fanciful opinion with no evidence to sustain them. You are the one being vexatious and becoming an obstruction to justice. you may choose to write to me if you do not want to correspond in public.

https://ico.org.uk/media/for-organisatio...

The MoJ considers your request to be vexatious for the following reasons:

• Burden on the authority – this request, (taking into account a number of other requests of similar length and nature), has lead us to believe that the effort required to meet the request will be so grossly oppressive in terms of the strain on time and resources, that the authority cannot reasonably be expected to comply.
====================
Similar means: resembling without being identical.: This is clearly an ambiguous word to use in indicating burden in terms of length and nature. Your belief is rebutted and rejected and you have failed to prove its based and being specific. Hence, unless you put your evidence forward i suggest you process the inquiry. You either have the information and you are hiding it or you do not have it. I do not understand the problem that you are raising and please tell me what remedy you have in store for me.

***************************************************************************************************************
• Frequent or overlapping requests - you submit frequent correspondence about the same issue or send in new requests before we have had an opportunity to address earlier enquiries.
====================
Same issue: i: see no evidence of this, please provide it or proceed in answering the question.

New requests: i: see evidence of new request but they are not about the same issues and have been dealt with by different department. Once again unless you can prove this please process my request. Thanks.

***************************************************************************************************************
Scattergun approach - the request appears to be part of a completely random approach, lacks any clear focus, or seems to have been solely designed for the purpose of ‘fishing’ for information without any idea of what might be revealed.
====================
I am sorry to disappoint you this opinion of your is based and ground less, unless you are a mind reader you have no idea of what i think should be revealed.
I know the question that i have posed goes at the heart of the practice that i have been observing over the years and recently. Where the people naively accepting and without your organisation making the effort to prove it, that anyone that sits on a bench in court is qualified to be there and have its oath of office and allegiance to queen Elizabeth into the record of the case.

My question is perfectly legitimate and your desire to brush them aside have been noticed. I strongly suggest you simply proceed and provide the public with the truth. This truth might be the tools in canceling all procedure where HMCTS might not be able to proof on the record that the Oath of Office and Allegiance was put into the record and that is what you are concern about and therefore keen to find any reason in rejecting so a serious and well-thought request. Please simply process it unless you can bring evidence to substantiate and justify your opinion.

***************************************************************************************************************
• No obvious intent to obtain recorded information – we believe you are abusing your rights of access to information by using the legislation as a means to pursue an agenda of which the MoJ is unaware. Many questions are general in nature (question 1) and relate to information in the public domain and not held by the MoJ. Some questions ask the MoJ to comment on processes, roles, legal matters, and so are also not requests for recorded data. Some questions are closed “yes/no” type questions; these are not requests for recorded information.
====================
I: morally offended by this attempt to avoid answering the questions. The question that i have asked rest within the competence of the MOJ who employ these people and they ought to tell the public what the rule of each one of them is. And the general information about what they suppose to have in the file before being admitted to those important rules where they affect the life of the people greatly whenever they take a decision. Hence it is not a crime to wanting to know in details what the process in place is so that each member of the public will be able to assert his/her rights and make them accountable.

***************************************************************************************************************
• Frivolous requests - the subject matter is often inane or extremely trivial and the request appears to lack any serious purpose – for example, the requests for the MoJ to supply definitions to commonly understood words and phrases.
====================
I am morally offended by this groundless opinion. The MOJ is being morally and intellectually dishonest and it knows that the commonly understood words are not often mean what they say in the oxford dictionary comparatively to the Jowitt Dictionary or Black law dictionary etc…. Hence i want to know the MOJ definition in legalese. So MOJ tries not to insult the people intelligent and answer the questions.

Yours sincerely,

Blaise Tchoula

Disclosure Team, Ministry of Justice

1 Attachment

Dear Blaise Tchoula,

 

Please find attached the response to your request for Internal Review,
under the Freedom of Information Act 2000.

 

Kind regards,

 

Communication and Information Services

 

show quoted sections