Docstoc

Attorney General Education

Document Sample
Attorney General Education Powered By Docstoc
					                                   Hospitals & Asylums

                                 Attorney General Ethics

To amend Chapter 2 Soldier‟s and Airmen‟s Home, the American Legal System has
failed, lawyers are either behind bars or drunk on power, a civil law system must be
instituted by lowering law school entrance to high school graduates and the bar exam to
BA and terminate the licenses of all lawyers who are elected or appointed to public,
commercial or social office, a Civil-law Amendment III to the Annotated United States
Constitution will establish 4 year terms for federal judges, with a two term limit for
justices, and one year term for chief justice, to repeal the constitutional right to bear arms
and quartering of troops in people‟s homes, to change the name of prosecutor to district
attorney, elect licensed social workers to adjudicate traffic, divorce, mental illness,
substance abuse, tenant-landlord and small claims, and funeral directors to avoid Probate,
to abolish the death penalty, to change the name of the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA)
to Drug Evaluation Agency (DEA) and transfer to the Food and Drug Administration
(FDA), to change the name of the Court of International Trade of the United States
(CoITUS) to Customs Court (CC), to change the name of the Office of Violence Against
Women to Office of Women‟s Rights and transfer to Social Work Administration (SWA)
when established, to ratify Optional Human Rights Protocols, to transfer the Justice
Assistance Grant (JAG) and other extra-jurisdictional finance entirely to halfway house
programs, primarily financed by up to 7.7% of the Supplemental Security Income (SSI)
program for poor people on probation and parole, to safely reduce the jail and prison
population to less than 250 per 100,000 residents legal limit within a decade.

          Be the Democratic and Republican (DR) prosecution party Dissolved

                Ninth Annual Independence Day Draft of 13 August 2011

Art. 1 Judicial Philosophy

§41    The American Legal System
§41a   Balance of Prisoners
§41b   Civil Law Amendment to the Constitution
§41c   Customs Court Amendments
§41d   Drugs or Poison?
§41e   Independence of the Judiciary
§41f   Judiciary Committees
§41g   Term Limits

Art. 2 Legal Defenses

§42    Civil Rights
§42a   Habeas Corpus
§42b   Immunity
§42c   Compensation for False Arrest and Torture

                                                                                          219
§42d    Freedom from Unlawful Search and Seizure
§42fe   Right to an Attorney
§42f    Right to a Fair Trial
§42g    Bankruptcy and Insolvency Trials

Art. 3 Questions of International Justice

§43 International Trade Deficit
§43a Undocumented Migration
§43b Accession to the International Criminal Court

Art. 4 Human Rights

§44     Council on Human Rights
§44a    High Commissioner of Human Rights
§44b    Human Rights Committee
§44c    Committee on Migrant Workers
§44d    Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights
§44e    Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women
§44f    Committee on the Rights of the Child
§44g    Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination
§44h    Committee against Torture

Art. 5 International Courts

§45     International Bar Association
§45a    International Court of Arbitration
§45b    International Court of Justice
§45c    International Criminal Court

Art. 6 Regional Courts

§46     European Court of Justice
§46a    Inter-American Court of Human Rights
§46b    African Court of Human and People’s Rights
§46c    Islamic Court of Justice

Art. 7 US Courts

§47     Supreme Court of the United States
§48     American Bar Association
§49     Federal Judiciary
§49a    Circuit Court of Appeal
§49b    District Court
§49c    Bankruptcy Court
§49d    US Sentencing Commission

                                                                       220
§50    Tax Court
§51    Customs Court
§52    Court of Federal Claims

Art. 8 Ministry of Justice

§53    Department of Justice
§53a   Office of the Attorney General
§53b   Office of the Deputy Attorney General
§53c   Office of the Associate Attorney General
§53d   Office of the Solicitor General

Art. 9 Offices

§54    Office of Legal Counsel
§54a   Office of Legislative Affairs
§54b   Office of Professional Responsibility
§54c   Office of Legal Policy
§54d   Office of Public Affairs
§54e   Office of the Pardon Attorney
§54f   Office of Intelligence Policy Review

Art. 10 Executives

§55    Executive Office for Immigration Review
§55a   Community Relations Service
§55b   Executive Office for US Attorneys
§55c   Executive Office for US Trustees
§55d   INTERPOL
§55e   Community Oriented Policing Services
§55f   Foreign Claims Settlement Commission
§55g   United States Parole Commission

Art. 11 Programs

§56 Office of Justice Programs
§56a National Institute of Justice
§56b Bureau of Justice Statistics
§56c Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention
§58d Bureau of Justice Assistance

Art. 12 Divisions

§57 Justice Divisions
§57a Anti-Trust Division
§57b Civil Division

                                                             221
§57c Civil Rights Division
§57d Criminal Division
§57e Environment and Natural Resources Division
§57f Tax Division
§57g Justice Management Division

Art. 13 Armed Forces

§58 Federal Bureau of Investigation
§58a Bureau of Prisons
§58b United States Marshall Service

Art. 14 State Courts

§59    State Supreme Courts
§59a   County Courts
§59b   Criminal Division
§59c   Civil Division
§59d   Traffic Division
§59e   Municipal Court
§59f   Juvenile Court
§59g   Appellate Court

Art. 15 Social Division

§60 Probate Court
§60a Family Court
§60b Mental Health Court
§60c Drug Court

Art. 16 Employees

§61    Clerk
§62    Police
§63    Pre-Trial
§64    District Attorney
§65    Public Defender
§66    Prisoners
§67    Judges
§68    Probation and Parole
§69    Witnesses
§70    Jurists




                                                  222
Fig. 2.1: Adult Correctional Population 1980-2006
Fig. 2.2: Direct Expenditures of Criminal Justice by Function 1982-2004
Fig. 2.3: Direct Expenditure by Level of Government 1982-2004
Fig. 2.4: State by State Detention and Community Corrections Estimates 2005
Fig. 2.5: Cost of Bankruptcy Proceedings in Selected Economies
Fig. 2.6: International Trade in millions of $ and number of Detainees 1980-2005

Bibliography

Art. 1 Judicial Philosophy

§41 The American Legal System

A.This Chapter replaces Title 24 US Code Chapter 2 §41-70 Soldier‟s and Airmen‟s
Home that has been completely repealed by Pub. L. 101-510, Div. A, Title Xv, Sec. 1532
of Nov. 5, 1990 104 Stat. 1733; Pub. L. 101-189, Div. A, Title Iii, Sec. 347, Nov. 29,
1989, 103 Stat. 1422; Pub. L. 94-454, Sec. 2, Oct. 2, 1976, 90 Stat. 1518 and Aug. 10,
1956, Ch. 1041, Sec. 53, 70a Stat. 641. This Act may be cited as the Socializing Civil
Law Act.

1.The primary objective of this Chapter is to bring the U.S. incarceration rate below the
legal limit of 250 detainees per 100,000 pursuant to Blakely v. Washington No. 02-1632
of 24 June 2004 as applied in Brown, Governor of California, et al v. Marciana & Plata
et al USSC No. 09–1233 of May 23, 2011 when the Court ordered 40,000 prisoners to be
released and qualified the mentally and physically disabled parolees for Eligibility for
SSI Benefits in Sec. 1611 of Title XVI of the Social Security Act 42USC(7)XVI§1382
(E)(1)(A). Released prisoners who meet guidelines pertaining to an income of less than
$674 a month income and resource guidelines of less than $2,000 must be helped to file
for SSI to pay room and board at a halfway house under 18USC(227)§3563 (b)(11).

2. The first and foremost consideration of the judiciary must be the protection and
compensation of the victims of crime and abuses of power. The Declaration of Basic
Principles of Justice for Victims of Crime and Abuse of Power of 29 November 1985 and
the Basic Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Remedy and Reparation for Victims
of Gross Violations of International Human Rights Law and Serious Violations of
International Humanitarian Law of 16 December 2005 are fundamental to the judiciary.

3. The American Legal System would no longer be construed as having failed to provide
for the equal protection of the laws if they merely adopted a civil law system. The
methods are twofold. First, convert the American Legal System from a quasi-common
law system to a civil law system. This will lower law school entrance to admit high
school graduates and the bar exam to BAs, furthermore civil law relies not upon the
precedent of the Supreme Court but the portrayal of the actions of real life people under
the civil code. Second, not to forfeit judicial independence to international civil law
systems this Act goes beyond natural law philosophy for the foolproof implementation of
socialist ideals in the legal system by electing licensed social workers to all civil and

                                                                                     223
administrative law judgeships, traffic, divorce, family, small claims, substance abuse and
mental health and licensed funeral director to avoid Probate. To successfully convert
from a common law system to a civil law system and to sustain their independence in the
face of adversity the judicial officers of the American Legal System must never lose sight
of the fundamental principles of Common Law enumerated in human rights statute
below.

a. Common Article 1 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights of 23
March 1976 and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights of 3
January 1976 provides (1) All peoples have the right of self-determination. By virtue of
that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic,
social and cultural development. (2) All peoples may, for their own ends, freely dispose
of their natural wealth and resources without prejudice to any obligations arising out of
international economic co-operation, based upon the principle of mutual benefit, and
international law. In no case may a people be deprived of its own means of subsistence.

b. Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions provides Persons taking no active part
in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and
those placed hors de combat by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause, shall in
all circumstances be treated humanely, without any adverse distinction founded on race,
color, religion or faith, sex, birth or wealth, or any other similar criteria.

c. And, as a matter of common cents, material proof of legal responsibility, on the part of
the judiciary:

i.Article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights of 23 March 1976,
states at paragraph 6, “when a person has by a final decision been convicted of a criminal
offence and when subsequently his conviction has been reversed or he has been pardoned
on the ground that a new or newly discovered fact shows conclusively that there has been
a miscarriage of justice, the person who has suffered punishment as a result of such
conviction shall be compensated according to law”.

ii. Article 14 of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading
Treatment or Punishment of 26 June 1987 “the State shall ensure in its legal system that
the victim of an act of torture obtains redress and has an enforceable right to fair and
adequate compensation, including the means for as full rehabilitation as possible.”

4. Whereas there are high rates of divorce and absolute corruption in the state civil courts
and affiliated practices of law – primarily probate, domestic relations, mental health and
substance abuse and also small-claims, labor and commercial law – this Chapter arranges
for the election of licensed social workers to serve as the judges and practitioners of
traffic, domestic relations, mental health, substance abuse and on an equal basis with
lawyers, and funeral directors as judges of Probate avoidance. For effective judicial
reform the new, 20th century, social work profession, sworn to help the poor against
oppression, needs to fully assume their duties to civil law. Legislatures must facilitate
this transfer of civil judgeships to licensed social workers and funeral directors by

                                                                                        224
creating statutory provisions for a social division from the judiciary, with right of appeal
to courts of general jurisdiction, and facilitating the popular election of social workers,
ostensibly with the support of the Socialist Party. The undisputed dominance of social
workers in civil judgeships will dramatically decrease the incompetence and corruption
evident in U.S. domestic policy and by lightening the burden on the judiciary; improve
the efficiency of the criminal justice system. Social workers will prove their literacy,
society will be less adversarial and relate their disputes, the needy will benefit and
everyone will be happier.

B. The American Legal System is only a part of American Society and judicial officers
must not allow their enthusiasm for the law to malevolently intrude into or dominate
society. Lawyers dispute the years in prison the law is so liberal with. $1 trillion is a
good estimate of the economic clout of the US legal system in any given year. The
majority of the 93 million judicial cases filed in 2001 were processed by 15,555 state trial
courts operating operated by 29,266 judges. 14.1 million criminal cases were filed. 15.8
million cases were filed with the civil division. Tort filings regarding medical
malpractice, defamation, insurance premiums and claims against the state have hovered
around 250,000 yearly. 57% of automobile insurance premium cases resulted in a +/-
$18,000 settlement whereas on 27% of medical malpractice cases resulted in +/-287,000
compensation. There are roughly 250,000 contract cases in any given year that deal with
breach of contract. In 2001 the highest settlement was a $28 billion tobacco product
liability tort. In the United States there are an estimated 1 million police officers,
450,000 corrections officers, 450,000 lawyers and 75,000 probation officers.

C. The American Legal System is a unique balance of the civil and common law systems.
Civil law is the dominant legal tradition today in most of Europe, all of Central and South
America, parts of Asia and Africa, and even some discrete areas of the common-law
world (e.g., Louisiana, Quebec, and Puerto Rico). The common law follows an
“adversarial” model which gives most responsibility to the lawyers while civil law is
more “inquisitorial,” civil law that is “code-based,” and civil-law judges do not interpret
the law but instead follow predetermined legal rules. Whereas the American Legal
System has become hopelessly corrupt, with the balance of prisoners exceeding the legal
of 250 per 100,000, by three times, around 750 per 100,000 since 2007, it behooves the
American Legal System to officially convert from a quasi-common law system, to a civil
law system, dedicated to the democratic ideals of freedom and human rights, in order to
eliminate the corruption that is preventing the safe reduction of the penal population to
within the reasonable limit of 250 prisoners per 100,000 residents.

1.Codification of the law dates to the Hammurabi Code (1790 BC) the civil-law system,
jus civile, had its origins in the Roman Republic, before the beginning of the Empire, in
the second century B.C. By the end of the Republic, in 27 B.C., a body of legal experts,
or jurists, had gained prominence within the legal system, separate and apart from the
courts of law. Jurists were the prototype of the lawyer, not referring to judges, but upper
class legal experts interested in and volunteering their time to the interpretation of
questions of law. In the Roman legal system there were two types of civil judges: the
democratically elected magistrate, or praetor, and the judge selected for the trial, or

                                                                                         225
judex. Emperor Justinian ended reliance upon judicial precedent in the encyclopedic
work commissioned by him, the Corpus Juris Civilis, with the dictum “non exemplis sed
legibus judicandum est” (decisions should be rendered in accordance, not with examples,
but with the law). The law underwent further evolution in later periods of the Empire,
culminating in a comprehensive statement of private law prepared by the jurist Gaius in
the latter half of the second century A.D. Gaius‟s Institutes were an extensive collection
of legal principles and rules covering matters ranging from the rights of citizenship and
the manumission of slaves to the preservation of estates and the rules of intestate
succession.

2. The Corpus Juris Civilis was the primary guide for civil law throughout the middle
ages and the basis for the formulation of contemporary codices of civil law at the
beginning of the modern era in the 18th century. From the eleventh to the fifteenth
centuries, northern Italy witnessed the rise of a jurist class almost as prominent and
significant as its Roman predecessor. In medieval Italy the jurists, known as glossators,
were primarily teachers, members of the law faculties of the universities, drawn not from
the nobility but from the general public. They generally carried the title of doctor. Their
basic technique was the “gloss,” an interpretation or addition to the text of the Corpus
Juris Civilis, first made between the lines and later in the margins. They also used some
of the substance and argumentative techniques of medieval theology. The “Great Gloss”
of the leading glossator of the period, the Accursian Gloss (1220-1260) totaled over
96,000 commentaries to the entire text of the Corpus Juris Civilis. The lay judges were
generally not highly educated or specially trained.

3. Two distinct forms of civil law, independent of the judiciary, evolved during the
medieval period, canon law and customs. Canon law had been developing since the
eleventh century, when the Bishop of Worms (Germany) collected scattered rules and
regulations of the church into a series of twenty books known as his Decretum. From
1130 to 1150, an Italian ecclesiastical jurist, Gratian, along with others produced the
Concordia Discordantium Canonum, a monumental work that became the basis for
almost all canon law. Capitulare navium (Shipping Rules) were first published in Venice
in 1205 and republished in expanded form as the Statuta et Ordinamenta super Navibus
(Statutes and Regulations on Shipping) in 1255. Compiled in Barcelona, Spain, and
containing over 330 articles, the Consolato Del Mare covered such maritime matters as
construction of vessels, circumstances requiring assistance to other vessels in distress,
general average (a maritime principle for allocating damages), employment of pilots, and
privateering. The independence of social and commercial law from the judiciary must be
re-asserted.

4. The reception of Roman law into Spain, resulted in the preparation of a comprehensive
Spanish digest, the Codigo de Las Siete Partidas (The Code of the Seven Parts of the
Law). The digest was prepared by the monarch Alfonso the Learned in the latter part of
the thirteenth century. This monumental work was the foundation of Spanish private law
until 1889, when it was replaced by a code that is still in force, the Codigo Civil (Civil
Code). Modern codification processes in Latin American countries did not really begin
until the middle part of the nineteenth century. The process in Chile was started, in the
civil-law tradition, by an inspiring jurist, Andres Bello who eventually completed, with
                                                                                        226
but modest assistance from his legislative colleagues, an entire new civil code that was
given legislative approval in 1856 and went into force in 1857. Even today the Chilean
code and the legal system on which it is based are viewed as the most advanced and
influential among the Spanish-speaking countries of Central and South America. The
modern codification process began in Brazil in the mid-nineteenth century with the
adoption of a penal code in 1830, a code of criminal procedure in 1833, a commercial
code in 1850, and the new civil code in 1916.

5. The Enlightenment was based on a belief in the fundamental importance of reason as a
liberating force in intellectual life and in how society was organized, a belief that grew
out of the precepts of the natural law school. In Europe the effects and influence of the
Enlightenment provided the final stimulation for the creation of the modern
comprehensive codes of the different European states. Codification in the sixteenth
century differed from the codification process during the Enlightenment and post-
Enlightenment periods of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. The former was
“codification as a restatement of the law” while the latter involved “a rationally organized
statement of the whole field of law.”

6. Humanism was an intellectual movement that had its origins in sixteenth century
France, a time and place of great upheaval. It encouraged scholarly examination of law,
particularly the nature and function of law, and in the process the science of
jurisprudence was founded. The school of natural law was an outgrowth of humanism.
The origins of natural law are several, but the writings of Hugo de Groot (better known as
Grotius) stand out as the real starting point in the development of the natural law school.
Although Grotius (1583–1645), a Dutchman, is better known as the father of public
international law, attempted, through several seminal writings, especially De Jure Belli
ac Pacis (On the Law of War and Peace), to develop universal concepts of law that
transcended national boundaries and were not dependent on any one legal system. He
advocated ideas such as law being based on human experiences and desires, particularly
the desire for an orderly and peaceful society and the maintenance of that society based
on reason. He argued for a rational approach to the structure of law and the resolution of
disputes. He supported the systematic arrangement of legal materials, such as the
treatment of property and obligations, and of specific rules within those systematic
arrangements. In sum, “Grotius was . . . a starting point for the codifying lawyers of the
Enlightenment and a support for an increasingly mercantile society, in which good order
and a clearly defined system of rules of property and obligation were seen as highly
desirable.” Samuel Pufendorf and Christopher Wolff in Germany attempted to build a
legal system using the scientific methods of Galileo and Descartes. This approach was
characterized by the assertion of axioms from which particular rules were logically
deduced and then tested by experience and observation.

7. Napoleon regarded the creation of the Code Civil as his greatest achievement,
overshadowing even his great military victories. During his exile on St. Helena he
remarked, “My true glory is not that I have won forty battles. Waterloo will blow away
the memory of these victories. What nothing can blow away and will live eternally is my
Civil Code.” In 1800, Napoleon appointed four senior practitioners of law to develop a

                                                                                        227
comprehensive legal code. These four practitioners were experienced jurists who had
studied Grotius, Pufendorf, and the other great writers of the natural law school. The
commission held 102 sessions, all in the relatively short period of four years, devoted to
drafting the code. The final product was presented to and promptly passed by the French
legislative body. This code, officially designated the Code Civil des Français, was issued
in 1804 in the form of three books with 2,281 articles. Later it came to be known as the
Code Napoléon, but in its present form is called simply the Code Civil. The modern code
in Germany, still in effect, resulted from the creation of a commission by statute in 1873
to codify German civil law. The result was a comprehensive code, known as the
Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch, or BGB, approved in 1896.

8. Civil law entered the United States rather late and was never fully accepted. The
acceptance of a civil law system remains a breaking point in the Senate. When a law is
enacted in the United States, it is passed by the House and the Senate and signed by the
President, it is then given a public law number reflecting when it was passed, which
“Congress”, and the order it came within that Congress. For example, Pub. L. No. 108-1
was the first law of the 108th Congress. Laws are published in chronological order in
United States Statutes at Large (Stat.). The first official codification of federal laws was
the Revised Statutes of the United States that was enacted in 1873. 69 errors were caught
during publication and another 183 over the next few years. Then in 1919, a team began
work on new code that would encompass all the laws currently in force. In 1920 and
1921 the Code was passed unanimously in the House but rejected by the Senate. Then, in
1924 after the Senate Committee found 600 alleged errors a compromise was reached on
a “twilight zone” whereby the United States Code self-referentially provided that it is
“prima facie” evidence of the general and permanent laws in force at a given date, except
that the titles that have been enacted as positive law are “legal evidence of the laws
therein contained”, while the Statutes at Large are “legal evidence of laws”. Thus, U.S.
statute was first codified in the Revised Statutes of the United States in 1873, and again
into the 50 titles of the United States Code, which serves as the basis of civil law in the
United States.

D. Empirical proof that the American Common Law legal system has failed is evident in
the census of the U.S. prison population. A review of the World Prison Brief maintained
by the International Centre for Prison Statistics reveals the United States – 2,299,116 -
has both the most prisoners, more than China - 1,565,771 (2007), and highest
concentration of prisoners, at 748 per 100,000 residents (2009), more than runner up, the
Russian Federation - 628 (2007), in the world. Although previously not unusual, the
prison population has exploded since the 1980s mandatory minimum sentencing
legislation, including steep penalties for drugs instead of the secret laboratory poisons
populating the hospitals and cemeteries with torture victims. As the result of mandatory
minimum sentencing legislation, the Bureau of Justice Statistics reports that the prison
population has quadrupled from 503,586 prisoners (220 per 100,000) in 1980 to
2,085,620 (707 per 100,000) in 2004. In 2005, 7 million people, one in every 32
American adults, were behind bars, on probation or on parole. 2.2 million were in prison
or jail, more than 4.1 million people were on probation and 784,208 were on parole.
During the 12 months that ended June 2007, the nation‟s prison and jail custody

                                                                                        228
populations increased by 46,887 inmates (up 2.1 percent) to reach 2,299,116 inmates. In
2009, in response to the economic recession state prison populations declined slightly,
however federal prison population continued to increase.

1. The ABA Kennedy Commission Recommendations of 2003-2004 made great progress
admitting to the prison overpopulation problem. The recommendations led directly to the
US Supreme Court to redress the prison overpopulation problem in the decision Blakely
v. Washington No. 02-1632 of June 24, 2004 that “eliminated sentencing guidelines
schemes and, 20 years of sentencing reform. Sentences imposed under such guidelines in
cases currently pending on direct appeal, or in cold habeas petitions, are in jeopardy. In
both legislative and litigate practice Criminal sentences must be adjusted downward
rather than upward, mandatory minimum schemes eliminated and acquittals the norm for
most crimes where there are significant mitigating factors”. Chief Justice Rehnquist died
shortly thereafter and since United States v. Booker No. 04-104 (2005) that provided a
temporary injunction against drug sentencing the United States has made no further
progress on the critical issue of prison overpopulation.

2. The prison over-population problem cuts to the core of the integrity of the judiciary
and the legal system whose singular purpose is to prosecute and punish crime without
being as cruel and unusual as to be a crime of its own right. As it stands, with both the
largest and most concentrated prison population in the world, the U.S. judiciary must be
condemned, avoided and most importantly reformed. The American Legal System has
failed. To achieve the equal protection of the law with nations with respectable legal
systems, of humble petitioners, there must be construed a legal limit of 250 prisoners per
100,000 residents. The United States is three times over this limit with 748 detainees per
100,000 residents in 2009. Immediate and sustained action must be taken to redress
prison overpopulation, mostly by ceasing to prosecute harmless drug offenders, reducing
sentences to meet international norms and commuting the sentences of non-dangerous
prisoners to halfway houses; dramatically expanding the halfway house system.

4. The concept of a legal limit for the number of detainees holds true to the principles of
the bar association whose jus cogens is that “a lawyer is either behind bars or drunk on
power”. To effectively reform the judiciary to achieve the primary goal of being under
the legal limit of 250 detainees per 100,000 prisoners the American Legal System is
going to have to give criminal justice their 100% and cease to spread their contagion to
society through the adjudication of social, commercial and political matters that must be
referred to literate and responsible executive agencies without interference. The role of
the lawyer, the prosecutor and the judiciary must be limited to criminal matters. The
integrity of this role must be enforced by “honorably” disbarring those lawyers whose
clientele are civil, commercial, social or political in nature to dissociate them from the
Bar Association whose members must be fully dedicated to redressing the injustice in the
criminal justice system, mostly by establishing halfway houses for Probation and Parole.

5. The decadence that precipitated and made the degradation of the American Legal
System unstoppable began in 1973 with the creation of the Drug Enforcement Agency
(DEA) ultra vires the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) that seized all the

                                                                                       229
practitioners of the medical establishment without regard for the disease pathogens they
are armed with, and the judicial burglars deliver, totally destroyed the reputation of the
legal system with the establishment of the Court of International Trade of the United
States (CoITUS) in the Customs Court Act of 1980. To redress these fatal flaws the DEA
must change their name to Drug Evaluation Agency (DEA) and be transferred to the FDA
and COITUS must change their name to Customs Court (CC). Normalizing the
American Judiciary under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, adopted
by the United Nations Diplomatic Conference of Plenipotentiaries on the Establishment
of an International Criminal Court (ICC) on July 17, 1998 can be done by repealing
Chapter 81 of Title 22 with reservations regarding the criminal trademark infringement of
the ICC on the International Chamber of Commerce is due process for similarly
sabotaging the civil law system and socio-economy.

6. To fully extend the protection of human rights to individual US citizens and safeguard
the integrity of public programs performing these functions the United States the
President must furthermore ratify the following Optional Protocols.

a. Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil an Political Rights of 23
March 1976 relating to the Human Rights Committee.

b. Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
aiming at the abolition of the death penalty of 15 December 1989. The death penalty is
the most flagrant human rights abuse of the judiciary whereby justice kills a combatant
who has laid down their arms and surrendered. The death penalty is obviously a fatal
flaw in the legal system, that all civilized countries have abolished. The major problem
with the death penalty is that unabashed killers, who do so in full view of the public, and
speak in such a censurable manner as to willfully kill, are freely elected to positions of
public trust.

c. Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of all Discrimination against
Women of 22 December 2000. The failure to ratify this Optional Protocol can be
attributed to the sexist and poisonous pig immortalized in COITUS. Later the Violence
Against Women Act of 1994 created the Office of Violence Against Women in the
Department of Justice although this language is bold facedly threatening women with
organized violence and covertly organizing women as toxic militants against their family
and cohabitants. The Centers for Medicare Medicaid and SCHIP (CMS) of 2001 creating
raised the hysteria of the sexual discrimination against women to point where the 9-11
suicide attack could occur. To ratify this Optional Protocol in good faith the Department
of Justice should change the name of Office of Violence Against Women to Office of
Women‟s Rights but may do so unobligated.

d. Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or
Degrading Treatment or Punishment of 4 February 2003. The tort of negligence in this
regard has been the undoing of the government that engages in nothing but torture, hires
the most flagrant torturers ever witnessed and has repealed all criminal and civil penalties



                                                                                        230
for acts of torture committed in the United States essentially nullifying the entire legal
system that operates mostly on the theory of the tort claim.

7. The underlying judicial philosophy conveyed in the official text of Title 24 of the
United States Code, pertains to the original sin of the legal system - Probate Court, as
indicated by its name, is on probation for the horrible crimes of murder, torture and
slavery, and it has not officially stopped slaving the alleged mentally ill (ami) in cahoots
with psychiatrists from the medical establishment. Under this Chapter graduation from
the National College of Probate Judges (NCPJ) would occur on the condition that
Probate Court be adjudicated by a licensed social worker and cease to slave the mentally
ill and leave the adjudication of the State Mental Institution Library Education (SMILE)
buildings, and mental illness in general, to a social worker employed by the Community
Mental Health Board as recommended by the United Kingdom Parliament Joint
Committee on Human Rights Fourth Report of 4 February 2007 on the Mental Health
Bill 2006-07 that advocates the Bournewood safeguards "appropriate treatment" test
whereby it will not be possible for patients to be compulsorily detained if they are
rational enough to voice their objection. At 57 & 58, in pursuit of greater independence
for the court, the report reveals “a need for some external safeguard of liberty that is more
accessible than judicial review…We consider that the principal legitimate aim for which
psychiatric treatment may be imposed is mental health wherefore a patient should be
entitled to seek review of the conditions before a Mental Health Review Tribunal”. This
Tribunal should be staffed by licensed and specially trained mental health professionals
under the supervision of the State and County Boards of Mental Health and at least one
bar certified lawyer, not employed by the judiciary, to separate the criminals. This
tribunal should be overseen by a Social Work Administration, to ensure that the only sane
professional in all of the judiciary and health is dominant. The same concept of social
worker judges holds true to Drug Courts. Funeral directors have provided a dignified
alternative to Probate since the Civil War.

8. Divorce Court, Domestic Relations Court and Family Court and Tenant Landlord
Trials would also greatly benefit from being judged and advocated, if needed, exclusively
by licensed social workers. The adversarial system and criminal associations of the
judges and lawyers, unnecessarily complicate and corrupt these Courts. The family or
household, particularly one considering divorce, or comprised of unrelated individuals, is
very vulnerable to the corrupting influence of the Bar, as many thrice married lawyers
(and social workers) will tell you. As the nucleus of society the family is a major source
of power to everyone, of greater importance to the well-being of individuals than the
government, State or law. To give family troubles due process it behooves the State to
employ professionals licensed and trained in family affairs and the special needs of the
poor in a manner that is sensitive to their emotions – the 20th century social worker. Why
treat all domestic cases to the criminal justice system of the legal profession as if un-
remedial domestic violence cannot be stopped on demand? Does the automatic
appointment of lawyers only serve to escalate domestic conflict and violence to the
felonious levels the Bar serves? Whereas divorce rates have soared while the legal
profession‟s reputation has been soiled, and the alternative, the social worker, is
available, it is logical that the nearly the entire civil division would be replaced with

                                                                                             231
social workers. To study this problem it was written, Family Opinions on the AMA Code
of Medical Ethics Patient Physician Relationship HA-14-4-11

E. A shift to a civil law system would make dramatic changes to law school. Were the
licenses of lawyers terminated to relieve the burdens of civil society from the judiciary,
the number of bar certified lawyers would decrease dramatically from an estimated
650,000 to probably around 150,000 criminal defense attorneys, prosecutors and judges.
This shortfall explains the hard times the judiciary has fallen to. There are few lawyers
practicing law in the legal system. They have chosen nice, high paying jobs corrupting
civil society, commerce and politics with their bi-annual bribe to the Supreme Court,
incessant search warrants and organized criminal conspiracies to blind the judges with
commercial litigation every time there is a real person who must be recognized before the
law and/or case that must be settled. To make up for this shortfall, now obvious, the pre-
requisites for entrance to law school must be lowered to high school and the law school
combined with the so called criminal justice degree to produce bachelors capable of
passing the bar exam and representing the criminally accused in Court and on the force.

1.The number of law schools and law school graduates should increase dramatically, as
should the number of disillusioned lawyers being “honorably disbarred” because they
have found paying work in a more pleasant field. In most, maybe all other countries, a
person may enter law school after completing high school and may take the Bar exam
after earning a baccalaureate degree (BA) and passing the Bar exam may earn an honest
living representing clients before the court and be appointed and paid by the State to
represent people free of charge who would not otherwise be able to afford legal counsel.
Lawyers may of course pursue more advanced degrees to be senior partner, judge,
prosecutor or attorney general. The rationale for this radical raising of the bar to young
adults is that most of the offenders tried in the courts are typically young, poor and
uneducated and the purpose of the law degree is to be better than crime, not better than
other people, with whom we enjoy equal rights, compromised by class struggle.

F. Finally, the life sentence to the federal bench is offensive as a symbol of the excessive
sentences US citizens must serve and die for. The judiciary and legal system desperately
needs to evolve to one that better promotes the rights and freedoms essential to a
democratic society. The election of federal judges must be accelerated by limiting their
terms to five years and allowing for a competitive process whereby other qualified
lawyers may challenge them, without fear of armed combat or retaliation. A two term
limit would be set for the desirable office of justice of the Supreme Court. To better
serve the public due consideration must be given to electing federal judges and justices in
general elections in their respective jurisdictions. The Bar and Congress would
coordinate to keep the slates competitive and vet the candidates to ensure they are
striving for the American dream of a prison population less than 250 per 100,000.

1.The filing fees upon which the Court is entirely reliant for their judgment, are bribes,
and must be eliminated to create a system that is based on merit, and therefore biased
towards the poor. To eliminate the big bribe in the sky, enforce the doctrine of separation
of powers and the First Amendment freedoms of expression and right to sue the

                                                                                        232
government for a redress of grievances, the economy is reliant upon, one law stands out
as being obstructive to judicial independence and Congressional power, and in need of
amendment, to provide direct payment to the authors/editors of the US Code without
interception, monopolization, bribery and most of all assassination by the “powerful”
Judiciary Committee under Art. 2(4) of the Berne Convention. (Strike $6,500) and insert,
More than $10,000, annual appropriations for the preparation and editing of the Code and
Supplemental of the United States and District of Columbia are made available to the
(strike Judiciary Committee) and insert, author/editor, under 1USC(3)§213. Courts
likewise need to pay and consult with the authors in question, instead of random lawyers
and contemporary glossators professing in law school.

2. To regulate the State Courts a Constitutional Amendment is proposed to replace the
Second Amendment with a Balanced Budget Amendment and the Third Amendment
with a Civil Law Amendment that would, set forth term limits for federal judges, ensure
that wills, divorces, mental illness and substance abuse are adjudicated by social workers,
change the name of prosecutor to district attorneys in all jurisdictions in the USA,
achieve international norms in prison population, abolish the death penalty and punish
human right violation by federal officials.

§41a Balance of Prisoners

A.To properly respect judicial power it is imperative to thoroughly study the balance of
prisoners at the federal, state and county levels. The balance of prisoners properly
reflects the balance of the power of the judiciary which serves to properly prejudice the
jurists as to whether the jurisdiction they judge is over the arbitrary legal limit, of 250
detainees per 100,000 residents, and by how much, so as to anticipate the extent of false
arrest, repression of dissidents, use of people under legal supervision as soldiers, seizure
of political power and need for halfway houses.

1. To determine the total number of detainees in a county, one must contact the county
judiciary to discover how many people are detained in local jails, the state department of
corrections to determine how many state prisoners hail from the county in question, and
the federal court to determine how many federal prisoners are from that county and add
for the total number of detainees from that county. Multiply the total number of prisoners
by 100,000 and divide by the total population of the county to determine how many
prisoners there are per 100,000. Using this ratio one can determine how overpopulated
the penal system is and how many halfway house beds are needed to safely release these
offenders to the community.

B. In 2005, 7 million people, one in every 32 American adults, were behind bars, on
probation or on parole. 2.2 million were in prison or jail, more than 4.1 million people
were on probation and 784,208 were on parole. Prison population has quadrupled from
503,586 prisoners (220 per 100,000) in 1980 to 2,085,620 (707 per 100,000) in 2004.
During the 12 months that ended June 2007, the nation‟s prison and jail custody
populations increased by 46,887 inmates (up 2.1 percent) to reach 2,299,116 inmates.
Prison releases are increasing, but admissions are increasing more.

                                                                                         233
1.In 2005 the female population in state or federal prison increased 2.6 percent while the
number of male inmates rose 1.9 percent. By year's end, 7% of all inmates were women.
Racial disparities among prisoners persist. In the 25-29 age group, 8.1% of black men -
about one in 13 – were behind bars, compared with 2.6% of Hispanic men and 1.1% of
white men. It's not much different among women. A considerable amount of the increase
is the result of the sentencing for drug crimes. From 1995 to 2003, inmates in federal
prison for drug offenses have accounted for 49% of total prison population growth.

2.Two-thirds of the nation‟s custody population was in a state or federal prison
(1,518,535), and the other one-third was held in local jails (780,581). At midyear 2007,
there were an estimated 762 persons per 100,000 U.S. residents in prison or jail, up from
684 at year end 2000. The US has both the densest and largest prison population in the
world, the next most populous were Russia with 808,500 prisoners (566 per 100,000) and
China with 1.5 million prisoners (118 per 100,000). To set an international norm for
prison population one can estimate that 250 prisoners per 100,000 citizens and no death
penalty is the legal limit.

3. The Second Chance Act of 2005 HR1704 reported nearly 650,000 people are released
from incarceration to communities each year. There are over 3,200 jails throughout the
United States, the vast majority of which are operated by county governments. Each
year, these jails will release in excess of 10,000,000, 3.3% of the population, back into
the community.

4. According to the 2001 national data from the Bureau of Justice Statistics, 3,500,0000
parents were supervised by the correctional system. Prior to incarceration, 64 percent of
females prisons and 44 percent of male prisoners in State facilities lived with their
children. Between 1991 and 1999, the number of children with a parent in a Federal or
State correctional facility increased by more than 100 percent, from approximately
900,000 to approximately 2,000,000.



                                                                                      234
5. Nearly two thirds of released State prisoners are rearrested for a felony or serious
misdemeanor within three years after release. Supervised living provided by qualified
social workers, probation and parole officers is the safest method for eliminating
recidivism; halfway houses are less corrupting than incarceration, particularly when
accompanied with equal employment opportunity counseling to ensure offenders become
productive citizens.

6. In 2005 Certain states saw more significant changes in prison population. In South
Dakota, the number of inmates increased 11% over the past year, more than any other
state. Montana and Kentucky were next in line with increases of 10.4% and 7.9%,
respectively. Georgia had the biggest decrease, losing 4.6%, followed by Maryland with a
2.4% decrease and Louisiana with a 2.3% drop.

C. In fiscal 2004 Federal, State, and local governments spent an estimated $193 billion
for police protection, corrections and judicial and legal activities, a 4% increase over the
previous year. Per capita expenditure across the three government types and criminal
justice functions was approximately $660.




                            Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics

1. The Federal government spent more than $34 billion on direct expenditures for
criminal and civil justice in fiscal year 2004. State governments spent over $61 billion
and local governments spent over $97 billion.




                                                                                           235
                            Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics

D. To achieve the objective of meeting international minimum standards for the treatment
of prisoners the United States must cut their prison population in half in pursuit of
achieving a normal concentration of prisoners, less than 250 per 100,000 residents.

1. The key federal reform is the $3.3 billion Justice Assistance Grant (JAG), the largest
grant provided by the Office of Justice Programs, must be commuted, in its entirety, from
the police and prosecutors to probation and parole services for the establishment of
halfway houses and community based corrections boards amongst authorized judges and
supervised living providers for the convicted populace. It is wrong to finance the local
police from afar. The right thing for the federal government to do is to finance only
halfway house programs with the JAG Block Grant and other federal judicial financial
programs… Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez v. Director of Justice Programs
Domingo S. Herraiz HA-8-4-05

2. Community shelter supervision costs an average of $6,000 a year whereas
incarceration costs $24,000. By commuting people convicted of felonies and
misdemeanors, who do not pose a serious threat to society, to serve their sentence under
community supervision, departments of corrections could save 75% on individual cases.
If fully implemented for all drug, misdemeanor and felony offenders who do not present
a threat to the community departments of corrections could save as much as 25% on their
operating costs. The pay in community correctional shelters must be competitive with, or
superior to, correctional officers. It is expected that greater respect for dignity offered by
halfway houses will dramatically reduce rates of recidivism.

3. To supervise the forfeiture of jails and prisons federally it is highly recommended to.

a. Act expeditiously to accelerated to facilitate the transfer of real property for
community reuse.
b. Fully utilize all appropriate means to transfer property. Including public benefit
transfers, economic development conveyances at cost and no cost, negotiated sale to state
                                                                                          236
or local government, conservation conveyances, and public sale, by which to transfer on
closed or realigned installations.
c. Rely on and leverage market forces. Community redevelopment plans and conveyance
plans should be integrated to the extent practical and should take account of any
anticipated demand for surplus judicial land and facilities.
d. Collaborate effectively. Only by collaborating with the local community and local
researchers can the Department of Justice close and transfer property in a timely manner
and provide a foundation for solid economic redevelopment. Judicial-community
partnerships need to be flexible enough to adapt to the specific market forces and other
circumstances at each location.
e. Speak with one voice. Timely information regarding facility and environmental
conditions and closure and realignment schedules are critically important. In the past,
when communities spoke with one voice about their reuse goals and activities, the
Department was better positioned to consider local redevelopment plans.

E. Community Based Corrections Boards comprised of authorized judges, supervised
living providers, probation, parole officers, social workers, reformed convicts advocating
the rights of prisoners and members of the Bar should be established in every jurisdiction
with a population greater than 250,000. The community corrections board will commute
sentences to terms of probation, parole or conditional release and invest in halfway
houses and employment programs.

1. "Halfway house organization" means a private, nonprofit organization or a
governmental agency that provides programs or activities in areas directly concerned
with housing and monitoring offenders who are under the community supervision of the
department of rehabilitation and correction or whom a court places in a halfway house.
Social workers are an important component of the halfway house staff that also includes
corrections officers, clergy, social workers, probation and parole officers.

2. To remedy the national penal problem we will need to reduce the prison population to
not more than 250 per 100,000- 725,000 nationally in order to meet international norms.
For the US to achieve the international norm (250 per 100,000) the total number of local
jail, state and federal prison beds must be limited to less than 740,000. This means that
we must release more than half of those people detained.

3. It would be reasonable to expect the national government to purchase more than
25,000 halfway houses a year towards a ten year goal of 250,000 halfway houses with 2.5
million beds, and 24 hour staff with a staff to resident ratio of 3-8 per resident, 500,000
new criminal justice and human services jobs.

4. 1 million jail beds is a good national goal at both ends of the stick – (1) the number of
new beds needed by the community correctional houses and (2) the number of prison
beds considered to be the legal limit for the USA. This means the forfeiture of an
estimated 1,000 detention facilities nationally and commutation to community programs.




                                                                                         237
         Fig. 2.4: State by State Detention and Demand for Community Corrections
                                           30.6.2005

Rank    Correction       Total     State    Local Jail  per   Executions     Estimated
         Agency         Prison    Prison    Population 00,000 since 1976     Need for
                       Pop. in     Pop.                                     Community
                         1999                                               Beds/Houses
        US Military     25,000                                    0 yes
          Federal      179,220     N/a         N/a        58        3
 1         Maine         3,608    2,063       1,545      273        0          303/12
 2      Minnesota       15,422    8,399       7,023      300        0        2,570/102
 3     Rhode Island      3,364     N/a         N/a       313      0 yes        677/27
 4       Vermont         1,975     N/a         N/a       317        0          417/17
 5          New          4,184    2,456       1,728      319        0          905/36
        Hampshire
  6    Massachusetts   22,778     10,159     12,619      356         0        6,782/271
  7    North Dakota     2,288      1,344       944       359         0          695/28
  8        Iowa        12,215      8,578      3,637      412         0        4,803/192
  9      Nebraska       7,406      4,308      3,098      421         3        3,008/120
 10    West Virginia    8,043      3,966      4,077      443         0        3,504/140
 11       Hawaii        5,705       N/a        N/a       447         0        2,614/101
 12     Washington     29,225     16,532     12,693      465         4       13,512/541
 13        Utah        11,514      4,775      6,739      466         6        5,337/214
 14     New York       92,769     63,234     29,535      482       0 yes    44,652/1,786
 15       Illinois     64,735     44,669     20,066      507        12      32,814/1,313
 16      Montana        4,923      2,658      2,265      526         2        2,583/103
 17       Oregon       19,318     12,769      6,549      531         2       10,223/409
 18     New Jersey     46,411     28,790     17,621      532       0 yes     24,601/984
 19     Connecticut    19,087       N/a        N/a       544          1      10,315/413
 20        Ohio        65,123     44,270     19,853      559        19      35,998/1,440
 21       Kansas       15,972      9,068      6,904      582      0 yes       9,111/365
 22    Pennsylvania    75,507     41,052     34,455      607          3     44,409/1,776
 23        North       53,854     36,683     17,171      620        39      32,139/1,286
         Carolina
 24    South Dakota     4,827      3,395      1,432      622      0 yes       2,887/115
 25      Maryland      35,601     23,215     12,386      636        5        21,606/864
 26       Indiana      39,959     22,392     17,567      637       16        24,277/971
 27      District of    3,552       N/a        N/a       645         0         2,175/87
         Columbia
 28     Wisconsin       36,154    21,850     14,304      653        0        22,313/893
 29      Michigan       67,132    49,014     18,118      663        0       41,818/1,673
 30      Arkansas       18,693    12,568      6,125      673       27        11,749/470
 31      California    246,317   164,179     82,138      682       11      156,025/6,241
 32      Wyoming         3,515     1,964      1,551      690       1           2,242/90
 33       Alaska         4,678     4,613        65       705        0         3,019/120

                                                                                   238
34       Missouri          41,461       31,000        10,461       715         66         26,964/1,079
35       Kentucky          30,034       13,273        16,761       720           2         19,605/784
36       Colorado          33,955       20,317        13,638       728           1         22,295/892
37       Tennessee         43,678       19,445        24,233       732           1        28,761/1,150
38        Nevada           18,265       11,155         7,110       756         11          12,225/489
39        Virginia         57,444       31,020        26,424       759         94         38,523/1,541
40      New Mexico         15,081        6,567         8,514       782           1         10,260/410
41         Idaho           11,206        7,419         3,787       784           1          7,633/305
42        Arizona          47,974       32,495        15,479       808          22        33,131/1,325
43       Delaware           6,916         N/a           N/a        820          14          4,808/192
44         South           35,298       23,072        12,226       830          35         24,666/987
          Carolina
45        Florida         148,521    84,901           63,620       835          60       104,054/4,162
46       Alabama           40,561    25,418           15,143       890          34        29,168/1,167
47       Oklahoma          32,593    23,008            9,585       919          79         23,727/949
48      Mississippi        27,902    16,480           11,422       955           6         20,597/824
49         Texas          223,195   156,661           66,534       976         355       166,024/6,641
50        Georgia          92,647    47,682           44,965      1,021         39        69,962/2,799
51       Louisiana         51,458    19,591           31,867      1,138         27        40,154/1,606
         US Totals       2,193,798 1,259,905         747,529       737     1002 as of      1,449,633/
                                                                             6 Dec.          57,985
                                                                              2005

     Source: International Centre for Prison Studies, World Prison Brief, USA State by State

     5. Brown v. Marciana & Plata (2011) is the largest liberation in history. Of the 46,000
     prisoners ordered to be released under only 9,000 had been released before the U.S.
     Supreme Court heard the case. California is a demonstration project for establishing an
     SSI financed halfway house system around the nation and to keep the nation posted on
     the experience the Commissioner should send a report to the Ways and Means
     Committee under Sec. 234 of Title II of the Social Security Act 42USC(7)II§432.
     California‟s medical marijuana laws may help to ease the transition and many released
     offenders will be able to enjoy life, without hard drugs, or breaking the law. State
     Sherriff's auctions should be able to provide real estate at no or little cost for use as non-
     profit halfway houses. Staff, utilities and taxes could be afforded with the deduction of
     $500 a month from mentally or physically disabled Social Security beneficiaries making
     no less than $700, or more if they made significant contributions. Released prisoners
     would also be eligible for $170 or so in food stamps. Making $400-$500 a month per
     resident a supervised halfway house/group home could earn $2,000-$2,500 a month
     caring for 5 residents. As apartment buildings are in demand and small and medium size
     homes are foreclosed left and right it would probably be easier to get smaller homes of
     two to four bedrooms, for free from Sheriff's auctions, or purchased with back pay and
     pay for professional supervision corporations in lieu of rent, in an ad hoc $400-$500
     fashion. An S corporation of three to five could provide 24-hour supervision to halfway
     houses with 10-25 residents, and command taxable incomes of $2,500 a month, work
     reasonable hours and afford their own home, with profits from $12,500 a month. If this

                                                                                                239
program were implemented nationwide in one year it would cost SSI an estimated $12.6-
$13 billion at the $700 a month rate. However if done slowly, over the course of a
decade, would cost only $1.3 billion in extra SSI costs annually. The cost of settling
40,000 detainees released from California is estimated to be $28 million a month or $336
million a year. With 1.1 million applications approved out of 2.4 million applications
and 7.7 million SSI beneficiaries in 2010 expedited benefits for released detainees would
only increase costs about 7% if done gradually or 26% if all drug offenders and non-
dangerous offenders were released all at once. With administrative costs for draconian
repressive measures skyrocketing to 7.7% of SSI program $50 billion costs in FY2011
this money would be better appropriated by Probation Offices.

6. Martinez et al v. Astrue No. Cal. No 08-CV-48735-CW of August 11, 2009, led to the
passage of No Social Security Benefits for Prisoners Act of 2009, Public Law 111-115
which reinforced the prohibition of retroactive payments to individuals during periods for
which such individuals are prisoners, probation or parole violators, or fugitive felons
written in Eligibility for SSI Benefits in Sec. 1611 of Title XVI of the Social Security Act
42USC(7)XVI§1382(E)(1)(A) and OASDI in Sec. 202 of Title II of the Social Security
Act 42USC(7)II§402(x)(1)(a). Eligibility for SSI Benefits may however continue while a
person is detained in public institution if such person needs to continue to maintain and
provide for the expenses of the home or living arrangement to which he or she may return
upon leaving the institution or facility, usually for a period not to exceed 3 months under
Sec. 1611 of Title XVI of the Social Security Act 42USC(7)XVI§1382 (E)(1)(G). The
Commissioner has proven himself a remorseless prosecutor. When an individual is
released from a public institution they are due the reinstatement of their benefits and if
their conviction is ultimately overturned back payments to the date their social security
benefits were terminated under Bloom v. Social Security Administration (10th Cir.) No.
02-3362 (2003). The Commissioner of Social Security has been ordered to develop a
Pre-release procedure for institutionalized persons under which an individual can apply
for supplemental security income benefits prior to the discharge or release of the
individual from a public institution under Sec. 1631 of Title XVI of the Social Security
Act 42USC(7)XVI§1383(m).

7. Released prisoners who meet guidelines pertaining to income of less than $674 a
month income and resource guidelines of less than $2,000 must be either given the
paperwork to file for SSI or be automatically filed. Because of the medical negligence
evident in California prisons the burden of proving disability shall be lightened to show
that they have been unable to earn a substantial gainful income outside of prison for a
period of 12 months. It is hoped that the release will be conducted in an orderly fashion
and corrections officers will expedite applications for SSI in their monthly reports to the
Social Security Administration under Sec. 1611 of Title XVI of the Social Security Act
42USC(7)XVI§1382 (E)(1)(H)(I)(i)(I) when the date of release has been finally
determined. The majority of prisoners should receive SSI the first month they are
released. This time the US will be fair, the US will pay benefits, in return persons
receiving benefits will be expected to uphold the law and abide by any terms of probation
imposed upon their release under 18USC(227)§3563. In the case of any individual
whose benefits are paid to a representative payee because of a drug and alcohol problem
rendering them incapable of managing their benefits makes it in their best interest, the
                                                                                        240
Commissioner shall refer such individual to the appropriate State agency administering
the State plan for substance abuse treatment services approved under Sec. 1636 of Title
XVI of the Social Security Act 42USC(7)(XVI)(B)§1383e. Probation has enough
authority to collect rent from people staying in halfway houses under 18USC(227)§3563
(b)(11). Probation must be indemnified against Penalties for Fraud under Sec. 208 of
Title II of the Social Security Act 42USC(7)II§408 and Sec. 1632 of Title XVI of the
Social Security Act 42USC(7)XVI§1383a.

§41b Civil Law Amendment to the Third Amendment to the Constitution

Section 1 The American legal system is a civil-law system based upon written briefs that
cite the civil code and human rights.

Section 2 Federal Judges shall be elected to terms of four years in general elections in
their respective districts.

Section 3 Justices of the Supreme Court shall be limited to two terms.

Section 4 Associate Justices shall choose a new Chief, from amongst themselves, every
year.

Section 5 Government officials convicted of crimes against humanity shall be removed
from office.

Section 6 States shall elect district attorneys.

Section 7 States shall elect licensed social workers to judge divorce, mental illness,
substance abuse courts and ethic committees and licensed funeral directors to avoid
probate.

Section 8 States shall probate and parole criminal offenders to halfway houses to safely
meet international minimum standards of detention below the legal limit of 250 detainees
per 100,000 residents.

Section 9 the death penalty is abolished.

Section 10 Disputes of an international character shall be adjudicated by the Customs
Court in New York City.

§41c Customs Court Amendments

1. Title 22 US Code Foreign Relations and Intercourse (a-FRaI-d) to Foreign Relations
(FR-ee)
2. Chapter 11 of Title 28 on the Judiciary on the Organization of the Court of
International Trade (COIT) to Customs Court (CC)
a. reference to the COIT in 28USCI(11)§251(a&b), §252, §253(a), §254, §255(a), §257,
and §258(a)(1) to Customs Court (CC).
                                                                                           241
b. Chapter 55 on Court Officers of COIT in §871 and §872 to CC.
c. Chapter 95 on the Jurisdiction and Venue of the COIT in §1581(a-j), §1582, §1583,
§1584, and §1585 to CC.
d. Chapter 169 on COIT Procedure in §2631(a-j), §2632(a-d), §2633(a-c), §2634,
§2635(a-d), §2636(a-i), §2637(a-d), §2638, §2639(a&c), §2640(a,b,c&e), §2641(a&b),
§2642, §2643(a-d), §2644, §2645(a-c), and §2646 to CC.
e. Any other reference to COIT that might be discovered at a later date, such as
18USCV(601)§6001(4) to CC.

§41d Drugs or Poison?

A.The federal judiciary is fatally flawed in regards to their drug jurisdiction, eg. Rhymes
with drug addiction. It was a fatal mistake to make the Drug Enforcement
Administration (DEA) an agency of the Department of Justice (DoJ) in 1970, completely
undermining any independence from the international conspiracy to conceal poison and
poison weapons won by the Controlled Substances Act of 1970. The Strasbourg
Agreement Concerning International Patent Classification of March 24, 1971was ratified
in the same town where the Strasbourg Agreement of 1675 between France and the Holy
Roman Empire was the first treaty to ban the use of chemical weapons, the Strasbourg
Agreement of 1971, and the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) done at Washington on
June 19, 1970, open for business in 1978 amended on September 28, 1979, modified on
February 3, 1984, and October 3, 2001 (as in force from April 1, 2002) for that matter,
totally omits mention of the special category of toxic substances, disease pathogens, that
are possibly the only inventions in need of patenting and government control. By seizing
a commercial and medical issue politically, the Department of Justice became overtly
corrupt defending a medical interest. Society was undermined to the detriment of the
system of medical torts resulting in a grossly over-financed and corrupt medical system,
rising income inequalities between rich and poor, concealment of the issue of medical
justice – poison - a government by torturers and sado-masochists against harmless
hedonists. The fundamental error of judgment is that drugs and pharmacy are an issue of
medical judgment and any such specialized pharmaceutical regulatory agency should be
in the Department of Health to serve as the consumer protection arm of the Food and
Drug Administration capable of inspecting and arresting unethical bio-medical
researchers.

1.That drug companies and abusers frequently come before the courts is not surprising
because drugs are of such concern to hundreds of millions of consumers and the Courts
are forum conveniun for many non-licensed medical professionals otherwise excluded by
conflict of interest from peer review. The issue of merit to the Courts is however not so
much one of drugs but whether the drugs or their abuse constitute poison, or if a
controlled substance (laboratory supply) without therapeutic value is abused as poison, is
detrimental to the health and life, and whether its abuse is motivated by medical lucre or
legal will. Noting the judicial weakness of will, to go to war on illicit psychotropic
drugs, at a time the Probate Judge began enforcing dangerous psychiatric drugs as no
self-respecting street drug pusher would, against a person‟s will, without informed
consent, seriously perverted the justice system as it intersects with the health system, so

                                                                                        242
as to undermine social discipline even more than the socio-pathic international treaties of
the time or underlying ill will. After a decade this corruption caused the Department of
Health and Human Services (DHHS) to drop out of the Department of Health Education
and Welfare (DHEW) without earning their degree of Public Health Department (PHD).
To do the freedom of expression justice the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) needs to
change its name to Drug Evaluation Agency (DEA) and be transferred to the Health
Department to serve as a pharmaceutical regulator, disease pathogen laboratory inspector
and consumer protection arm of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

2. The creation of DHHS occurred as a double whammy with the perverse Court of
International Trade of the United States (CoITUS) in 1980. As the probable cause of the
HIV/AIDS epidemic CoITUS must change their name to Customs Court. This is to be
done on dishonorable terms whereas an injunction against the obscenity proved
insufficient to elicit any State Responsibility for Internationally Wrongful Acts pursuant
to Human Rights Campaign (HRC), Citizens Commission on Human Rights (CCHR), et
al, plaintiffs v. US Presidential Candidates Barack Obama and John McCain whose
foreign policies fail Asia and the Near East (ANE), US Congress in defense of Title 22
Foreign Relations and Intercourse (a-FRaI-d) and the Court of International Trade
(CoITUS), defendants HA-28-7-08. A Customs Court is a legitimate judicial institution
but a Court of International Trade is an infringement upon the free market. US Customs
Agents are for the most part armed and take people and goods into custody, giving rise to
legal issues. In the absence of crime, international trade and trade disputes are not legal
issues, but commercial and economic issues. Customs, on the other hand, is an elegant
and professional term for protecting the border, documenting migration and regulating
international trade, mostly against poison as a means of international warfare.

B. The law in general is particularly weak on the issue of poisons, toxins and disease
pathogens and for every step forward in scientific legislation the law, at least in the last
quarter of the 20th century, takes two steps backward. Disregarding the greedy, medically
prejudiced will, the judiciary is particularly prone to the abuse of poison for three
reasons.

1.The judiciary acts as a floodgate for poison, like crime in general, as the primary
decider of what is right and wrong. If the greedy rich peer reviewed medical poisoners
and inheritors make certain poisons out to be undetectable fair game and the judiciary
closes their eyes to the truth by asking victims for bribes and taking them from the
wealthy perpetrators then self-interested humans, including judicial officers, will avail of
the poison to be relatively rich at the expense of the overall economy because they have
no fear of the law.

2. The judiciary is a skilled burglar by reason of trying such offenders and is furthermore
legally entitled to issue warrants for search and seizure and flexes its superiority to
abusively hire family, friends, neighbors, landladies and co-workers to conduct secret
investigations. The frivolous use of search warrants and prosecutorial powers is a
gateway “drug” that must be reprimanded before poison renders felonious invasions a
matter of life and death. Judicial officers abusing search warrants and investigative

                                                                                         243
powers to hire insiders to deliver poisons must be publicly tried and removed from office,
jail considered and the victims compensated. First Amendment Privacy Protection at
42USC(21A) IA §2000aa(b)(2) protects people from unreasonable search and seizure
unless, there is reason to believe that the immediate seizure of such materials is necessary
to prevent the death of, or serious bodily injury to, a human being.

3. The unauthorized practice of law, ultra vires in Latin, that means “without statutory
authority” is a term abused by State Bar Associations to monopolize the practice of law
for paying members of the Bar with dire threats against cooperating with unlicensed legal
researchers, namely authors, without requiring them to hire authors, completely
undermining equity and authorship in the legal system. To be scholarly professionals,
rather than illiterate hit men, State Bar Associations need incorporate reference to the
author in their rule pertaining to the unauthorized practice of law. The international
meaning of the term ultra vires involves acting without statutory authorization. In
practice, the term ultra vires aptly describes the illiterate civilian soldier/whores hired
and/or defended by lawyers to assassinate the imagined adversaries of their clients,
usually by poison, the preferred drink of the Bar. Lawyers must not take money to abet
people they know to be poisoning. The lawyer must seek to arrest such behavior by
counsel against and by informing the criminally persecuted victim who is the real person
entitled to attorney client privilege, confidentiality. The lawyer may represent clients
accused of poisoning but must not take unfair advantage of the absolute corruption of the
law of toxic substances and are criminally liable for any conspiracies to torture or murder
they engage in. The term ultra vires best expresses the epidemiological danger of
pathogen delivery posed by the legal system.

C. The problem with poison is that it is, in many diseases, a concealed weapon.
Essentially there are disease pathogens that have been identified and can be treated by
general practitioners and there are unidentified disease pathogens whose victims are
referred to specialists for expensive and dangerous medical treatment. In the modern age,
since the discovery of penicillin and various immunizations, there has been a dramatic
increase in the number of deaths from heart disease, cancer and other diseases of the
internal organs caused by the censured pathogens used to cause diseases in university
animal laboratory research of the American Journal of Physiology. Cancer (can-sir), a
very deadly disease, so often attributed to cigarette smoking and other household
carcinogens, is more accurately attributed to specific carcinogens used to cause cancer in
laboratory animals and is epidemiologically linked to domestic abuse by bar certified
lawyers. There are also corporate, profit motivated, bio-security leaks by vaccine nd
pharmaceutical manufactureres. Modern day epidemiology is however mostly an issue of
university and corporate bio-security to regulate all toxic substances and of bio-safety to
prevent accidental spills and protect against government corruption more succinctly than
Protection of Human Test Subjects. National Research Act. July 12, 1974. Title II, Public
Law 93-348 45 CFR 46 that closes its IRB to massive federal research financing.

1.The beneficiary and usual perpetrator of bio-security leaks is of course the medical
establishment. This is nothing new. The very English language cautions against putting
one‟s trust in health theology. For the last half a century, since the Nuremburg Code

                                                                                        244
Trials of War Criminals before the Nuremberg Military Tribunals under Control Council
Law No. 10, medical science has not progressed as fast as the deadly and expensive
diseases upon younger populations and more and more people are chronically sick, obese
and disabled usually as the result of the malevolent distribution of laboratory supply. A
medical rebellion was codified in Protocol (III) Additional to the Geneva Conventions
relating the Adoption of a New Distinctive Emblem of 8 December 2005 that is
unnecessary and unjustified without reference to the Geneva Protocol (to the Hague
Conventions) for the Prohibition of the Use in War of Asphyxiating, Poisonous or other
Gases, and of Bacteriological Methods of Warfare 17 June 1925 in Art. 6 pertaining to
Prevention and Repression of Misuse.

2. To create a bio-security regime that is safe there are two international and one national
issue.

a.WHO drafted a Working Paper on Patent Issues related to Influenza Viruses and their
Genes, revealing that in their attempts to patent Influenza HA and NA genes and gene
products that specifically claim or may encompass H5N1 sequences they were forced to
choose from 6 patent families, vectors or cells containing influenza genes and vaccines
containing influenza products 18 patent families and siRNA and antisense directed to
H5N1, also oligonucelotides having H5N1 sequence 12 patent families. These families
of medically useful knowledge and control of toxic substances are located in neither
Section A(61) Human Necessities: Medical or Veterinary Science; Hygiene nor Section
C(07-08) Chemistry; Metallurgy: Organic Compounds, but are left open and all influenza
virus patents are reported to have been denied. The Strasbourg Agreements to do not
agree. The PCT must adopt a special classification for disease pathogens in cooperation
with the Office for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) as their Search Office.

b. The Headquarters of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons is
located in the Hague, Netherlands. The fundamental obligations of States Parties to the
Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) of 1997 are set out in its very first article. Each
State Party undertakes never under any circumstances: (a) To develop, produce,
otherwise acquire, stockpile or retain chemical weapons, or transfer, directly or
indirectly, chemical weapons to anyone; (b) To use chemical weapons; (c) To engage in
any military preparations to use chemical weapons; (d) To assist, encourage or induce, in
any way, anyone to engage in any activity prohibited to a State Party under this
Convention. (Article 1, paragraph 1). Each State Party undertakes to destroy all chemical
weapons and all chemical weapons production facilities that it owns or possesses or that
are located in any place under its jurisdiction and control, as well as to destroy all
chemical weapons that it abandoned on the territory of another State Party. As it is
written the Convention is fatally flawed at Art. II(2) in the definition of Toxic Chemical -
any chemical which through its chemical action on life processes can cause death,
temporary incapacitation or permanent harm to humans or animals. To be completely
effective the word “disease” needs to be included in the definition so that Toxic Chemical
means - any chemical which through its chemical action on life processes can cause
disease, death, temporary incapacitation or permanent harm to humans or animals.
Organization is striving to include pharmaceutical interests in their next conference. In

                                                                                         245
the absence of scientific vindication of the unnaturalness of the leading causes of death
Courts should rely more on the Convention on the Prohibition of Development,
Production and Stockpiling of Bacteriologic (Biologic) and Toxin Weapons and Their
Destruction (BTWC) of 1972 that entered into force on 26 March 1975 when choosing
between torture victims, forensic scientists and epidemiologists.

c. The distinctly American phenomenon is that the Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS; half high school) cannot receive their degree of Public Health
Department (PHD) until they have amended the schedules of the Controlled Substances
Act (CSA) of 1971 to include pathologic agents of disease to the satisfaction of the
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) that must create an
Education Division (ED) to do the job without advocating propaganda.

§41e Independence of the Judiciary

A. Independence Day is celebrated in the United States with fireworks to commemorate
the signing of the Declaration of Independence that was ratified by the a Congress of the
15 states with 56 signatories on 4 July 1776 after the document was drafted by Thomas
Jefferson between 11 June and 28 June 1776 to declare the colonies independent of King
George III. To properly dedicate this Chapter on the judiciary to the spirit of
independence this document is revised annually for the 4th of July.

1. The core of the document states - When in the Course of human events, it becomes
necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands, which have connected them with
another, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the
causes which impel them to the separation.

a. We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are
endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life,
Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.-

b. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just
powers from the consent of the governed.

c. That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the
Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government.

d. The document goes on to formally list the grievances of the American people against
the tyrant King George as legal briefs should.

B. The legal system is based on the principle that an independent, fair and competent
judiciary will interpret and apply the laws. Judges, individually and collectively, must
respect and honor the judicial office as a public trust and strive to enhance and maintain
confidence that the legal system is representing liberty interests. The judge is an arbiter of
facts and law for the resolution of disputes and a highly visible symbol of government



                                                                                            246
under the rule of law. Jurists are also vested with the authority to rule on the facts and the
law and to nullify unjust laws by returning a not guilty verdict.

1. The 2004 edition of the ABA Model Code of Judicial Conduct is intended to establish
standards for ethical conduct of judges. It consists of broad statements called Canons. It
was adopted by the House of Delegates of the American Bar Association on August 16,
1972 and underwent three revisions. The Code replaced the Canons of Judicial Ethics,
which had been formulated almost 50 years earlier.

CANON 1 A judge shall uphold the integrity and independence of the judiciary.

CANON 2 A judge shall avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety in
all of the judge‟s activities.

CANON 3 A judge shall perform the duties of judicial office impartially and
diligently.

CANON 4 A judge shall so conduct the judge‟s extra-judicial activities as to
minimize the risk of conflict with judicial obligations.

CANON 5 A judge or judicial candidate shall refrain from inappropriate political
activity.

C. The purpose of the Basic Principles of the Independence of the Judiciary of 6
September 1985, is to establish conditions under which justice can be maintained to
achieve international co-operation in promoting and encourage respect for human rights
and fundamental freedoms without any discrimination. The Universal Declaration of
Human Rights enshrines in particular the principles of equality before the law, of the
presumption of innocence and of the right to a fair and public hearing by a competent,
independent and impartial tribunal established by law. The fundamental premise is that
the judiciary shall decide matters before them impartially, on the basis of facts and in
accordance with the law, without any restrictions, improper influences, inducements,
pressures, threats or interferences, direct or indirect, from any quarter or for any reason.

1. The Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct as revised at the Round Table Meeting
of Chief Justice at Peace Palace, the Hague, 25-16 November 2002 explains, a judge shall
exercise the judicial function independently on the basis of the judge's assessment of the
facts and in accordance with a conscientious understanding of the law, free of any
extraneous influences, inducements, pressures, threats or interference, direct or indirect,
from any quarter or for any reason. A judge shall not only be free from inappropriate
connections with, and influence by, the executive and legislative branches of government,
but must also appear to a reasonable observer to be free there from.

D. The independence of tribunals is rooted in the separation of powers in a democratic
society. The judiciary shall have jurisdiction over all issues of a judicial nature.
Protection of the independence of the judiciary requires that people are selected as judges

                                                                                          247
on the basis of their legal training and experience. Judges should not be selected for
"improper motives" and should be properly qualified. Promotion of judges should be
based on objective factors, particularly ability, integrity and experience. States must
provide adequate resources to enable the judiciary to perform its functions, and to ensure
adequate salaries and pensions for judges.

1. As a procedural safeguards to protect individuals against any "misjudgments and
professional lapses" Judges and lawyers may be subjected to disciplinary procedures and
sanctions for misconduct, including suspension and removal. The state may also be liable
to pay compensation for judicial misconduct. However, judges should enjoy personal
immunity from civil suits for damages for improper acts or omissions in the exercise of
their judicial functions. Judges shall be subject to suspension or removal only for reasons
of incapacity or behavior that renders them unfit to discharge their duties.

2. The right to an impartial tribunal requires that judges and jurors have no interest or
stake in a particular case and do not have pre-formed opinions about it. Judges must not
harbor preconceptions about the matter put before them, and that they must not act in
ways that promote the interests of one of the parties. Decisions about facts must be made
solely on the evidence, and the facts must be applied to the applicable laws. There must
be no interference, restriction, inducements, pressure, or threats from any quarter.

E. As Alexander Hamilton explained, “the independence of the judges once destroyed,
the constitution is gone, it is a dead letter; it is a vapor which the breath of faction in a
moment may dissipate”. More than any other branch of the government the judiciary
must deny the government, the use of force, intimidation and coercion. The judiciary
must frequently abolish unwarranted programs that unnecessarily infringe upon the
liberties of the people.

1. The judiciary applies the rule of law to the behavior of the armed forces in the
adjudication of crime. The judiciary is therefore an armed force in their own right and
must be careful not to dominate or subvert civil and political affairs. Justice is reserved
for the prevention and punishment of crime and is prone to be a dangerous and repressive
organ. The judiciary should not be integrated into society at large by incorporation with
other branches of government or corporate databases to prevent coups.

2. Settling torts, infractions of the law, on a daily basis, the judiciary is a fine venue for
giving due process to disputes, peaceful revolution and small changes within the
government and amongst private parties on a case-by-case basis, in writing. Litigants are
however referred to the unarmed power of parliamentary democracy in their pursuit of
social progress and secure in their equal access to justice should they be denied. As a
rule of thumb recourse to the judiciary should be limited to redressing the judiciary.

F. Independence is a double-edged sword. The Judiciary must not only prevent its
officers from infiltrating civil and political society but must prevent the legislature and
executive branches of the government from infringing upon the independence and
impartiality of the judiciary to enlist them to commit or abet slavery or other crimes

                                                                                            248
against humanity. While courts of law are reliant upon the legislature for the laws that
they interpret and apply to the facts of the case the judiciary is an independent branch of
government that must not be forced to apply sweeping and unwise legislative measures to
individual cases. To protect their independence, the independence of the nation, and the
freedom of the people, the judiciary has the power to rule laws unconstitutional.

1. Peace, justice and nonviolence are fundamental to the Rule of Law. The golden rule is
that one should do unto others as one would have done unto your self. An unjust law
however is no law at all. What is the difference between the two? How does one
determine when a law is just or unjust? A just law is a man made code that squares with
the moral law. An unjust law is one that is out of harmony with God, the constitution or
human rights. An unjust law is a human law that is not routed in eternal law and natural
law. Any law that degrades human personality or is born in false witness is unjust. John
Locke wrote in the 17th century: "The end of law is not to abolish or restrain, but to
preserve and enlarge freedom."

2. The rule of law is a foundational principle of our constitutional structure that lies at the
root of our system of government. Constitutional rights and freedoms are subject only to
such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and
democratic society. According to British Columbia (Attorney General) v. Christie 2007
SCC 21 25 May: The rule of law embraces at least three principles.

The first principle is that the “law is supreme over officials of the government as well as
private individuals and thereby preclusive of the influence of arbitrary power”:

The second principle “requires the creation and maintenance of an actual order of
positive laws which preserves and embodies the more general principle of normative
order”:

The third principle requires that “the relationship between the state and the individual
shall be regulated by law”:

G. In light of the particular statutory provision on the principle of deference a broad
statement of the deference that courts owe to municipal governments. In large part, this
deference is founded upon the democratic character of municipal decisions. Deference to
municipal decisions “adheres to the fundamental axiom that courts must accord proper
respect to the democratic responsibilities of elected municipal officials and the rights of
those who elect them.” Municipal law requires that municipal governments hold
meetings that are open to the public, in order to imbue municipal governments with a
robust democratic legitimacy. The democratic legitimacy of municipal decisions does
not spring solely from periodic elections, but also from a decision-making process that is
transparent, accessible to the public, and mandated by law London (City) v. RSJ Holdings
Inc. 2007 SCC 29 June 21. In certain circumstances, however, the powers of one level of
government must be protected against intrusions, even incidental ones, by the other
level. For this purpose, the courts have developed the doctrines of inter jurisdictional



                                                                                           249
immunity and federal paramountcy in Canadian Western Bank v. Alberta 2007 SCC 22
May 21

1. The doctrine of inter-jurisdictional immunity recognizes that our Constitution is based
on an allocation of exclusive powers to both levels of government, not concurrent
powers, although these powers are bound to interact in the realities of the life of our
Constitution. It is a doctrine of limited application, which should be restricted to its
proper limit. Inter-jurisdictional immunity should in general be reserved for situations
already covered by precedent. This means, in practice, that it will be largely reserved for
those heads of power that deal with federal things, persons or undertakings, or where in
the past its application has been considered absolutely indispensable or necessary to
enable Parliament or a provincial legislature to achieve the purpose for which exclusive
legislative jurisdiction was conferred, as discerned from the constitutional division of
powers as a whole. While in theory a consideration of inter-jurisdictional immunity is
apt for consideration after the pith and substance analysis, in practice the absence of prior
case law favouring its application to the subject matter at hand will generally justify a
court proceeding directly to the consideration of federal paramountcy.

2. According to the doctrine of federal paramountcy, when the operational effects of
provincial legislation are incompatible with federal legislation, the federal legislation
must prevail and the provincial legislation is rendered inoperative to the extent of the
incompatibility. The doctrine applies not only to cases in which the provincial legislature
has legislated pursuant to its ancillary power to trench on an area of federal jurisdiction,
but also to situations in which the provincial legislature acts within its primary powers,
and Parliament pursuant to its ancillary powers. In order to trigger the application of the
doctrine, the onus is on the party relying on the doctrine of federal paramountcy to
demonstrate that the federal and provincial laws are in fact incompatible by establishing
either that it is impossible to comply with both laws or that to apply the provincial law
would frustrate the purpose of the federal law.

3. All constitutional legal challenges to legislation should follow the same approach.
First, the pith and substance of the state and the federal law should be examined to ensure
that they are both validly enacted laws and to determine the nature of the overlap, if any,
between them. Second, the applicability of the state law to the federal undertaking or
matter in question must be resolved with reference to the doctrine of inter-jurisdictional
immunity. Third, only if both the state law and the federal law have been found to be
valid pieces of legislation, and only if the state law is found to be applicable to the federal
matter in question, then both statutes must be compared to determine whether the overlap
between them constitutes a conflict sufficient to trigger the application of the doctrine of
federal paramountcy.

H. Even federal legislation can be ruled unconstitutional by the Court using the Oakes
test according to Canada Attorney General v. Hislop 2007 SCC 10 March 1. If the
legislation fails under any one of four tests it cannot be justified.

1. Is the objective of the legislation pressing and substantial?

                                                                                           250
2. Is there a rational connection between the government‟s legislation and its objective?

3. Does the government‟s legislation minimally impair the constitutional right or freedom
at stake?

4. Is the delirious effect of the Constitutional violation outweighed by the salutary effect
of the legislation?

I. The Constitution of a country is a statement of the will of the people to be governed in
accordance with certain principles held as fundamental and certain prescriptions
restrictive of the powers of the legislature and government. It is the “supreme law” of the
nation, unalterable by the normal legislative process, and un-suffering of laws
inconsistent with it. The duty of the judiciary is to interpret and apply the laws of the
nation to each of the states, and it is thus our duty to ensure that the constitutional law
prevails.

1. The text of the Constitution establishes the broad confines of the supreme law, but it is
up to the courts to interpret and apply the Constitution in any given context. The
inviolability of the Constitution ensures that our nation‟s most cherished values are
preserved, while the role of the courts in applying the Constitution ensures that the law is
sufficiently flexible to change over time to reflect advances in human understanding. But
it also means that the Constitution, at any snapshot in time, is only as robust as the court
interpreting it. If the judiciary errs or is slow to recognize that previous interpretations of
the Constitution no longer correspond to social realities, it must change the
unconstitutional law. We consider that restrictions on conduct be proportionate and that
conditions may not be imposed which collectively amount to a deprivation of liberty
should be enshrined in the statute.

2. National laws are not a defense against serious violations of internationally recognized
human rights. Under Art. 32 of the Draft Articles of State Responsibility for
Internationally Wrongful Acts of 2001 “the responsible State may not rely on the
provisions of its internal law as justification for failure to comply with its obligations”.
Under paragraph 2 of the Basic Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Remedy and
Reparation for Victims of Gross Violations of International Human Rights Law and
Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law of 16 December 2005 if they have
not already done so, States shall, as required under international law, ensure that their
domestic law is consistent with their international legal obligations by:

(a) Incorporating norms of international human rights law and international humanitarian
law into their domestic law, or otherwise implementing them in their domestic legal
system;

(b) Adopting appropriate and effective legislative and administrative procedures and
other appropriate measures that provide fair, effective and prompt access to justice;



                                                                                           251
(c) Making available adequate, effective, prompt and appropriate remedies, including
reparation, as defined below;

(d) Ensuring that their domestic law provides at least the same level of protection for
victims as that required by their international obligations. International law is therefore
superior to national laws, using common sense, even outdated provisions of the national
constitution.

3. Judges can and should adapt the common law to reflect the changing social, moral and
economic fabric of the country. Judges should not be quick to perpetuate rules whose
social foundation has long since disappeared. Nonetheless, there are significant
constraints on the power of the judiciary to change the law. In a constitutional
democracy such as ours it is the legislature and not the courts, which has the major
responsibility for law reform; and for any changes to the law, which may have complex
ramifications, however necessary, or desirable such changes may be, they should be left
to the legislature. The judiciary should confine itself to the justness of the application of
the law and those incremental changes which are necessary to keep the common law in
step with the dynamic and evolving fabric of our society pursuant to Her Majesty the
Queen v. Couture 2007 SCC 28 June 15

§41f Judiciary Committees

A. There is a Congressional and a Senate Judiciary Committee. Any substantive
legislation that carries a possibility for criminal or civil penalties can be referred to the
Committee on the Judiciary. In the Federalist Papers the founding fathers of the US
Constitution foresaw a Judiciary Committee that would try the indiscretions of the
criminal judges to protect the rights of the citizens from oppression.

1. On June 3, 1813, a standing Committee on the Judiciary was established by the House
of Representatives to consider legislation relating to judicial proceedings.

2. The Committee on the Judiciary was first authorized on December 10, 1816. The
Committee has one of the broadest jurisdictions. Senator Dudley Chase of Vermont,
became the first Chairman of the Committee on December 13, 1816.

3. The longest sitting chairman, before limits were established, was Senator James O.
Eastland of Mississippi who served 22 years from 1956 through 1978.

B. The Senate Judiciary Committee is responsible for the nomination and confirmation of
Federal Judges. The Committee holds meetings when called by the Chairman.
Witnesses are expected to report their intention to attend at least 48 hours in advance. At
least 10 members are required for a quorum. Non debatable issues may be brought to a
vote. The Committee Clerk keeps track of attendance.

C. The House Committee on the Judiciary has been called the lawyer for the House of
Representatives because of its jurisdiction over matters relating to the administration of

                                                                                            252
justice in Federal courts, administrative bodies, and law enforcement agencies. Its
infrequent but important role in impeachment proceedings has also brought it much
attention. The legislative jurisdiction of the Judiciary Committees encompasses:

   (a)   Civil liberties.
   (b)   Federal courts & judges.
   (c)   Local courts in the territories & possessions.
   (d)   National penitentiaries.
   (e)   Judicial proceedings generally.

D. Under current law the Judiciary Committee is entitled to $6,500 per year appropriation
for the preparation of the code and supplement for the United States and the District of
Columbia under 1USC(3)§213. There is a five year period for the drafting of new statute
under §202(c). This law unethically monopolizes the power to draft laws in the
Judiciary Committee, a committee singularly unfit for the job. This law subjects
petitioners to unnecessary danger, conflicts with the interests of the legislature and is in
fact a bribe. In a constitutional government it is the author/editor who is paid royalties by
the democratically elected Government, otherwise is to run a corrupt government that
does not reflect the interest of the people to sue the government for a redress of
grievances or in the worst case, as it is, a corrupt government that demands bribes and
assaults upstanding citizens. 1USC(3)§213 needs to be amended to (Strike $6,500) and
insert, More than $10,000, annual appropriations for the preparation and editing of the
Code and Supplemental of the United States and District of Columbia are made available
to the (strike Judiciary Committee) and insert, author/editor. The jurisdiction of the
Judiciary Committee needs to be limited to its intended purpose of judicial discipline.
People and commerce must not be arbitrarily subjected to jurisdiction.

§41g Term Limits

A. The United States is unique in giving their federal judges life tenure to the bench
although this royalty is not written in either the Constitution or Code. Most democracies,
including the states, usually limit their judges to terms of four to ten years. There are
350,000 members of the American Bar Association qualified to fill 875 authorized
federal judgeships, it should not be difficult to arrange for speedier election of federal
judges and justices with cooperation between the Judiciary Committee and Bar
Association.

1. Principle 11 of the Basic Principles on the Independence of the Judiciary states, “the
term of office of judges, their independence, security, adequate remuneration, conditions
of service, pensions and the age of retirement shall be adequately secured by law."

2. Even in the best of times the judiciary, primarily responsible for the conviction and
punishment of criminals, is a cruel job that conflicts with the fundamental freedoms of
constitutional governance, democratic and judicial principles. Judges therefore do need
to be secure in their office, otherwise they would be easily removed as expedient by
political criminals and they must be able to tolerate the discipline needed to reform. On

                                                                                         253
the other hand, as a power, slavery has always been correlated with absolute corruption,
and it would be foolish to allow judges to preside over their follies for their entire lives.

a.For instance, in Sanchez-Llamas v. Oregon 548 US __(2006) the majority opinion of
the US Supreme Court was to allow the execution of prisoners in violation of a direct
order of the International Court of Justice not to kill specific members of a group of
Mexican Nationals, an order not to kill is of such merit that it should be valid when
issued in behalf of anyone who has surrendered, by anyone, let alone the World Court,
who retaliated to corrupt the corruptible with a plague of swine flu H1N1.

3. To improve the democratic institution of the federal judiciary and relieve the burden of
proving judicial misconduct from the uncompensated, unprotected and easily intimidated
members of the public it behooves Congress to set term limits for judges similar to their
own two and six year terms. Five years is recommended. Supreme Court Justices would
be limited to two five-year terms so as to spread the wealth more equally amongst judges.

B. In the past two and half decades, as the result of the judiciary‟s inability to defend
their independence from the Congressional enforcement of mandatory minimum
sentencing and the general acceptance of harsh new sentences by judges and the US
Sentencing Commission, the prison population has quintupled to be the largest and most
concentrated of any nation in the world, severely damaging the reputation of the
American judiciary and government as being fair and rational to the public.

1. Displeasure with the judiciary has led to dissatisfaction with judge‟s salaries. Statistics
show that judges are not performing in their role of defending liberty wherefore their
salaries have not increased much, beyond the annual cost of living increase, in recent
years. On the flip side of the coin, judges are increasingly unhappy with their work and
demand higher salaries to cope with the stress of unjust laws and to compete with
attorneys in private practice.

2. The Chief Justice in the 2006 Year-End-Report of the Federal Judiciary of January 1,
2007 wrote, “Inadequate compensation directly threatens the viability of life tenure…
Inadequate compensation directly threatens the viability of life tenure, Federal judges
rarely left the bench in the past but are now leaving at an increasing rate, 38 in the past
six years, including 17 in the last two years”.

3. Let them quit, in fact help them to quit. America must win this battle of attrition
against the unpopular federal judges. There are a hundred thousand ABA lawyers who
would be happy to do a short stint in a federal judgeship. The federal judges have failed
their duty to pursue justice and defend liberty, let them all be fired by the trial of
democracy.

C. The credibility of the Presidential elections since 2000 have been dubious, if the
Democratic and Republican (DR) part monopoly on power could ever be trusted. In the
2000 elections Bush Jr. defeated Democratic candidate former Vice President Al Gore on
the strength of 31 electoral college states although the Republicans lost the popular

                                                                                           254
election with 50,456,062 votes for Bush and Cheney and 50.996,582 votes for Gore and
Lieberman. The US Supreme Court decided the 2000 election in the case of Bush v.
Gore on 12 December 2000 under the XII Amendment overturning Bush v. Palm Beach
County Canvassing Board on writ of certiorari to the Florida supreme court December 4,
2000 that calls for recounts under Fla. Stat. §102.141(4) (2000). The proper ruling in
such a close election should have been for a completely new vote. It is not genuinely
within the power of the judiciary to decide an election, but they might call for a new vote.

1. In the 2004 Presidential elections Bush Jr. defeated Democratic candidate John F.
Kerry on the strength of 286 electoral college votes to 251. The popular vote was
60,693,281 to 57,355,978. There were widespread instances of intimidation and
misinformation in violation of the Voting Rights Act, the Civil Rights Act of 1968, Equal
Protection, Due Process and the Ohio right to vote according to Ohio Elections: Status
Report of the House Judiciary Committee Staff HA-5-1-05. The popular vote was
however too decisive with a margin of more than 3 million votes, to justify a new
election or substantiate any allegations of fraud and intimidation on the basis of what
occurred to a hundred thousand people in Ohio and continues in Central Committee of the
Hamilton County Republican Party v. Dalton C-060269 Ohio 1st Circuit May 30, 2007.

2. Perhaps it is the federal judges, justices and US Attorneys who need to run for popular
election for Four Year Terms under the Annotated Constitution of the United States, the
Official Constitution of the Hospitals & Asylums Political Party 2011 (HAPPY) People.

Art. 2 Legal Defenses

§42 Civil Rights

A. A civil right is an enforceable right or privilege for an individual, which if interfered
with by another gives rise to an action for injury. Examples of civil rights are freedom of
speech, press, assembly, religion, political opinion, the right to vote, freedom from
slavery and involuntary servitude, and the right to equality in public places.

1. Discrimination occurs when the civil rights and freedoms of an individual are denied
or interfered with because of their membership in a particular group or class.
Discrimination is synonymous with inequality. Statutes have been enacted to prevent
discrimination based on a persons race, sex, religion, age, previous condition of
servitude, physical limitation, national origin, political belief and in some instances
sexual preference. Protection of discrimination needs to be extended to censurable and
unequal behavior between individuals and between the government and individual(s),
namely censorship.

B. A two-part analysis was established for determining whether a violation of a person‟s
freedom has occurred. The first step asks whether the activity is within the protected
sphere of free expression. If the activity conveys or attempts to convey a meaning, it has
expressive content and prima facie falls within the scope of the guarantee. Once it is



                                                                                         255
established that the activity is protected, the second step asks if the impugned legislation
infringes that protection, either in purpose or effect.

1. “Freedom” is defined as “the absence of coercion or constraint”. It is because of the
very nature of freedom that generally imposes a negative obligation on the government
and not a positive obligation of protection or assistance. Usually the government is
requested to cease and desist in an action or law that unfairly limits personal liberty. A
situation might arise in which, in order to make a fundamental freedom meaningful, a
posture of restraint would not be enough, and positive governmental action might be
required. This might, for example, take the form of legislative intervention aimed at
preventing certain conditions, which muzzle expression, or ensuring public access to
certain kinds of information.

2. The state must be accountable for the inability to exercise the fundamental freedom. A
court must proceed in the following way. First it must consider whether the activity for
which the claimant seeks protection is a form of expression. If so, then second, the court
must determine if the claimant claims a positive entitlement to government action, or
simply the right to be free from government interference. If it is a positive rights claim,
then three factors must be considered.

3. These three factors are (1) that the claim is grounded in a fundamental freedom; (2)
that the claimant has demonstrated that exclusion from a statutory regime has the effect
of a substantial interference with their freedom of expression, or has the purpose of
infringing on their freedom and (3) that the government is responsible for the inability to
exercise the fundamental freedom. If the claimant cannot satisfy these criteria then the
claim will fail. If the three factors are satisfied then their rights have been infringed and
they are entitled to relief.

C. Slavery is the most absolute restriction on a person‟s liberty. In the beginning of the
19th Century many Parliaments abolished the slave trade civilly. Great Britain drafted an
Abolition of the Slave Trade in 1807. The Abolition Bill passed British Parliament in
August 1833. The French decree was signed by the Provisional Government in April
1848. The American colonies had been frequently disrupted by slave revolts, or the
threat of revolt as the result of the estimated 10 million Africans who were brought to the
Americas as slaves beginning in the 15th century.

1. In 1854, the Republican Party included the abolition of slavery in its manifesto and the
southern states seceded from the union in rebellion against freedom. When Abraham
Lincoln, the Republican candidate was elected to the presidency in 1860, Lincoln initially
hoped to keep the peace with Confederacy by permitting the practice of slavery.

2. On 22 September 1862, exactly one hundred days before it went into effect, and a year
after the beginning of the Civil War, Lincoln unveiled his preliminary Emancipation
Proclamation to his entire Cabinet that on the first day of January 1863, “all persons held
as slaves within any of the rebel states shall be thenceforth and forever free.”



                                                                                          256
3. The United States is unique because our Civil War was fought not because the slaves
revolted but because the slavers did. All told the Civil War took the lives of 364,511
Union and 133,821 Confederate troops (1861-1865). The abolition of slavery – which at
the time concerned approximately 5 million people held in unlawful servitude - became
the 13th Amendment to the Constitution of 6 December 1865 that states,

Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude except as punishment for a crime
whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States of
America, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

Section 2. Congress shall have the power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

D. After the US Civil War blacks had to fight discrimination to enjoy their civil rights to
vote and enjoy public services including schools on an equal basis with whites as
reflected in the passage of the XIV and XV Amendments to the US Constitution.

1. Severer punishments for crimes were imposed on the slave than on free persons guilty
of the same offenses. Congress, by the civil rights bill of 1866, passed in view of the
thirteenth amendment, before the fourteenth was adopted, undertook to wipe out these
burdens and disabilities, the necessary incidents of slavery, constituting its substance and
visible from; and to secure to all citizens of every race and color, and without regard to
previous servitude, those fundamental rights which are the essence of civil freedom,
namely, the same right to make and enforce contracts, to sue, be parties, give evidence,
and to inherit, purchase, lease, sell, and convey property, as is enjoyed by white citizens.
These laws and the Civil Rights Act of 1875 are codified in Chapter 13 of Title 18

2. In 1868 the 14th Amendment was passed to counter the "black codes" and “Jim
Crowe” laws and ensure that no state "shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge
the privileges or immunities of the citizens of the United States or deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property without due process of law, or deny to any person within its
jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

3. In 1870 the 15th Amendment was passed to permanently guarantee that, throughout the
nation, no person shall be denied the right to vote on account of race or color and
assigned federal observers to oversee the conduct of elections. The Amendment took
nearly a century to implement.

F. The Civil Rights Act of 1875 passed March 1, 1875, entitled 'An act to protect all
citizens in their civil and legal rights. The Act Provided: That all persons within the
jurisdiction of the United States shall be entitled to the full and equal enjoyment of the
accommodations, advantages, facilities, and privileges of inns, public conveyances on
land or water, theaters, and other places of public amusement; subject only to the
conditions and limitations established by law, and applicable alike to citizens of every
race and color, regardless of any previous condition of servitude. The Act was tried in the
Civil Rights Cases 109 U.S. 3 (1883) that found that the equal protection of the law does
not extend to the individual or private society.

                                                                                         257
1. The Civil Rights Act of 1957 was the first civil rights legislation since Reconstruction
and was the beginning of the famous nonviolent civil rights movement that fought for
equal rights in public accommodations, transportation and schools. The new act
established a Civil Rights Section of the Justice Department and empowered federal
prosecutors to obtain court injunctions against interference with the right to vote. It also
established a federal Civil Rights Commission with authority to investigate
discriminatory conditions and recommend corrective measures.

2. The Civil Rights Act of 2 July 1964 PL 88-352, is codified, as amended, at 42 USC
Chapter 21 §1981 - §2000h. The Civil Rights Acts were drafted to enforce the
constitutional right to vote, to confer jurisdiction upon the district courts of the United
States to provide injunctive relief against discrimination in public accommodations, to
authorize the Attorney General to institute suits to protect constitutional rights in public
facilities and public education, to extend the Commission on Civil Rights, to prevent
discrimination in federally assisted programs, to establish a Commission on Equal
Employment Opportunity, and for other purposes.

3. The Voting Rights Act, adopted initially in 1965 and extended in 1970, 1975, and
1982, is generally considered the most successful piece of civil rights legislation ever
adopted by the United States Congress. The Act codifies and effectuates the 15th
Amendment of 3 February 1870 permanent guarantee that, throughout the nation, no
person shall be denied the right to vote on account of race or color and assigns federal
observers to oversee the conduct of elections, that took nearly a century to implement.
The women‟s suffrage movement was successful in securing their voting rights in the 19th
Amendment of 18 August 1920. Literacy tests and other poll taxes were abolished in the
24th Amendment of 23 January 1964.

4. Civil Rights Act of 21 November 1991 (Pub. L. 102-166) amended the Civil Rights
Act of 1964 to strengthen and improve Federal civil rights laws, to provide for damages
in cases of intentional employment discrimination, to clarify provisions regarding
disparate impact actions, and for other purposes.

G. Civil rights must evolve to redress the prison population and accept international
standards of human rights. For this purpose two Civil Rights Amendments have been
proposed in Chapter Six of this Title at §270B-1 Human Rights Amendment for insertion
in the first section of Title 42 USC Chapter 21 Subchapter I General Principles §1980 and
§270B-2 10 Year Community Based Corrections Equality Plan Amendment for insertion
in 42 USC Chapter 21 Subchapter I-A Institutionalized Persons §1997k. Civil Rights
Amendment HA-27-8-07

§42a Habeas Corpus

A. Habeas corpus, Latin for, “you may have the body”, is the plea prisoners make to
challenge their detention in applications for a writ of habeas corpus. The Framers viewed
freedom from unlawful restraint as a fundamental precept of liberty, and they understood
the writ of habeas corpus as a vital instrument to secure that freedom. Writs of habeas

                                                                                          258
corpus may be granted by the Supreme Court, any justice thereof, the district courts and
any circuit judge within their respective jurisdictions. The District Court may accept
applications from the state court after state remedies have been exhausted under
28USC(153)§2241.

1. Applications for a writ of habeas corpus shall be in writing, signed by the petitioner,
with reference to the person having custody and are amendable. A Court, justice or judge
entertaining an application for a writ of habeas corpus shall forthwith award the writ or
issue an order directing the respondent to show cause why the writ should not be granted.
The writ, or order to show cause shall be directed to the person having custody of the
person detained. It shall be returned within three days unless for good cause additional
time, not exceeding twenty days, is allowed. The person to whom the writ or order is
directed shall make a return certifying the true cause of the detention. When the writ or
order is returned a day shall be set for hearing, not more than five days after the return
unless for good cause additional time is allowed.

2. Writs shall be granted if the factual predicate for the claim could not have been
discovered previously through the exercise of due diligence; and the facts underlying the
claim, if proven and viewed in light of the evidence as a whole, would be sufficient to
establish by clear and convincing evidence that, but for constitutional error, no reasonable
fact finder would have found the applicant guilty of the underlying offense. Before a
second application can be heard by the District Court a certificate of appeal ability must
be granted by Circuit Court of Appeals. Decisions are final.

3. A prisoner in custody under sentence of a court established by Act of Congress
claiming the right to be released upon the ground that the sentence was imposed in
violation of the Constitution or laws of the United States, or that the court was without
jurisdiction to impose such sentence, or that the sentence was in excess of the maximum
authorized by law, or is otherwise subject to collateral attack, may move the court which
imposed the sentence to vacate, set aside or correct the sentence.

4. A motion attacking a sentence shall be granted unless the files and records of the case
conclusively show that the prisoner is entitled to no relief. The court shall cause notice to
be served upon the United States attorney, grant a prompt hearing thereon, determine the
issues and make findings of fact and conclusions of law. If the court finds that the
judgment was rendered without jurisdiction, or that the sentence imposed was not
authorized by law or otherwise open to collateral attack, or that there has been such a
denial or infringement of the constitutional rights of the prisoner as to render the
judgment vulnerable to collateral attack, the court shall vacate and set the judgment aside
and shall discharge the prisoner or re-sentence him or grant a new trial or correct the
sentence as may appear appropriate. A court may entertain and determine such motion
without the production of the prisoner at the hearing under 28USC(153)§2255

B. The writ of habeas corpus began in England's Runnymede meadow on June 15, 1215,
when dissident English barons forced King John to sign the Magna Carta, at sword point,
limiting the power of the king in exchange for his right to rule. The writ of habeas corpus

                                                                                         259
was among the rights articulated that day, and it has since evolved into the principal
safeguard against arbitrary executive detention, torture and maltreatment of prisoners.
1679 Habeas Corpus Act stated that a writ of habeas corpus requires someone holding a
person in prison to produce the person to a court. Failure of a judge or jailer to comply
resulted in a hefty penalty of £500. Patterned after the habeas corpus clause of the US
Constitution the 1794 Habeas Corpus Suspension Act, suspended Habeas Corpus until
February 1795 after the arrest of leaders of the Constitutional and Corresponding
Societies. It was renewed repeatedly until 1801 - with a possible hiatus in the period
1795/1797. Otherwise the writ of habeas corpus has been respected in Great Britain.

1. Art. I Sec. 9 Clause 2 of the US Constitution states, “The privilege of the writ of
habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the
public safety may require it.” The Suspension Clause is designed to protect against these
cyclical abuses. The Clause protects the rights of the detained by a means consistent with
the essential design of the Constitution. It ensures that, except during periods of formal
suspension, the Judiciary will have a time-tested device, the writ, to maintain the
"delicate balance of governance" that is itself the surest safeguard of liberty. The Clause
protects the rights of the detained by affirming the duty and authority of the Judiciary to
call the jailer to account. The essence of habeas corpus is an attack by a person in
custody upon the legality of that custody".

2. Alexander Hamilton explained that by providing the detainee a judicial forum to
challenge detention, the writ preserves limited government. As he explained in The
Federalist No. 84: "The practice of arbitrary imprisonments, have been, in all ages, the
favorite and most formidable instruments of tyranny. The observations of the judicious
Blackstone ... are well worthy of recital: 'To bereave a man of life ... or by violence to
confiscate his estate, without accusation or trial, would be so gross and notorious an act
of despotism as must at once convey the alarm of tyranny throughout the whole nation;
but confinement of the person, by secretly hurrying him to jail, where his sufferings are
unknown or forgotten, is a less public, a less striking, and therefore a more dangerous
engine of arbitrary government.' And as a remedy for this fatal evil he emphatically
lauded the writ of habeas corpus.

3. There is emerging opinion in international law habeas corpus privilege is an
inalienable human right in all circumstances that may not be suspended because of a
declared state of emergency. Habeas corpus is not a get out of jail free card but a right
for individuals to petition the court to challenge the terms and treatment of their
detention. Habeas corpus is the most important safeguard of liberty, without this right
judicial decisions could not be contested nor would the accused even be given a trial.
Whereas it is these basic liberties that make our nation worth defending it defeats the
purpose to suspend habeas corpus rights in times of war and emergency. Relegating
suspects to torturous interrogations when they could be given due process in a court of
law, is not likely improve the security situation, while a fair and speedy trial will.




                                                                                        260
C. The ACLU Day of Action to Restore Law and Justice HA-26-6-07 bused 4,000 people
to lobby Capitol Hill for an agenda to,

1. Restore habeas corpus and due process.
2. Pass the Restoring the Constitution Act of 2007.
3. End torture and abuse in secret prisons.
4. Stop extraordinary rendition: secretly kidnapping people and sending them to countries
that torture.
5. Close the detention center at Guantánamo Bay and other prisoner of war camps and
give those currently held access to justice.
6. Investigate wrongdoing and ensure those who broke the law are held accountable.
7. Return to the rule of law.

D. Restoring the Constitution Act of 2007 S. 576 and HR 1415 and the Habeas Corpus
Restoration Act of 2007 S.185, H.R.267, H.R.1189, H.R. 2543 and H.R.1416 make
amends to the Military Commissions Act (MCA) of 2006, S. 3930, of October 17, that is
unconstitutional from section 5 on, to uphold the right for these detainees to challenge
their detention in the federal court as ordered in Rasul v. Bush No. 03-334 (2004) that
liberated 200 from Guantánamo Bay. In Boumedine v. Bush No. 06-1195 (2008) the
Supreme Court ruled that MCA §7 was an unconstitutional suspension of the writ of
habeas corpus. The constitutional privilege of habeas corpus, a privilege not to be
withdrawn except in conformance with the Suspension Clause, Art. I, §9, cl. 2.
Questions regarding the legality of the detention are to be resolved in the first instance by
the District Court.

1. Special renditions, the extradition of people to foreign countries where they run the
risk of being tortured is prohibited under the Art. 3 of the International Convention
against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment A/39/51 (1984). The
EU has prohibited member states of accepting detainees for questioning in secret CIA
detention centers under penalty of sanction. It is forbidden to export suspects to foreign
countries for interrogation without just cause and a public trial by a competent tribunal in
both sending and receiving nation. Taking into consideration the condition of the
American judiciary it is also prohibited to import foreign detainees and suspects into the
United States whereas they would be more fairly tried in the nation of arrest.

2. It is customary international law for prisoners of war, who have not been adjudicated
of war crimes, to be released and repatriated to their native country upon the cessation of
hostilities. The United States has dozens of detention centers in Afghanistan and Iraq
that need to be repatriated to the domestic justice system upholding international fair trial
standards pursuant to the Application of Article 118 of the Third Geneva Convention
HA-2-11-04 and Hamdi v. Rumsfield No. 03-6696 (2004).


E. The privilege of the write of habeas corpus logically extends to protect the right of
prisoners to protest torture or the execution of the death penalty. The death penalty was
abolished by the Supreme Court of the United States in Furman v. Georgia 408 U.S. 238

                                                                                         261
(1972) when it was ruled that the then existing laws governing the use of capital
punishment in the USA were unconstitutional. This decision however failed to sway the
legislature and the deviant practice was begun again in 1976 and must again be abolished.
As of 6 Dec. 2005 1002 prisoners had been publicly executed in the USA since 1976.

1. The US was one of the few countries to allow the execution of juveniles in violation to
Art. 6(5) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights 2200A (XXI) 1966
until Roper v. Simmons No. 03-633 Argued October 13, 2004--Decided March 1, 2005
abolished the death penalty for juveniles.

F. The ABA Kennedy Commission Report of June 23, 2004 admitted that the US had the
most prisoners of any nation in the world and that measures would need to be taken to
redress this problem. The next day, in Blakely v. Washington No. 02-1632 of June 24,
2004 the Court eliminated sentencing guidelines schemes.

1. Sentences imposed under such guidelines in cases currently pending on direct appeal,
or in cold habeas petitions, are in jeopardy. In both legislative and litigate practice
Criminal sentences must be adjusted downward rather upward, mandatory minimum
schemes eliminated and acquittals the norm for most crimes where there are significant
mitigating factors. USA v. Booker J. & Fanfan No. 04-104-105 (2005) provided for the
wholesale acquittal of drug convictions.

2. There is an enormous backlog of habeas petitions under the Blakely ruling seeking to
minimize their maximum minimum sentences. The maxim is that justice delayed is
justice denied. The federal judiciary must clearly prioritize granting writs of habeas
corpus for people proving their innocence and for time served.

3. As impartial arbitrators judges and judicial associations must take a de minimis interest
in the popular persecutions demanding harsh sentencing or be liable for disciplinary
action by the Bar. Sentencing must be something that judges limit their interest in.
Judges should issue sentences far less than the statutory maximum in most cases. They
should expect to see the vast majority of guideline sentences commuted to halfway
houses in nearly every case.

4. New rules regarding prisoners serving 85% of their sentence are unconstitutional
whereas the mandatory minimum sentencing regime has already been ruled to be cruel
and unusual punishment. Sentences are supposed to be going down, not up.

5. To make progress with the rule of law it is recommended to use the sentence of the
trial court as a guideline on how long a person must be in custody in both prison and
supervised release. If fully implemented the prison population could go down and
community corrections programs would flourish.

6. Until the US sentencing regime is equal to that imposed in Canada, Mexico and
Europe judges will need to depart dramatically downward in their sentencing. To release
prisoners earlier without jeopardizing the security of the community federal, state and

                                                                                        262
local parole boards will need to make more liberal use of the conservative supervisory
strategy of community corrections.

G. The guiding principles of sentencing under 18USC§3553(a) are to reduce legislative
sentencing through appellate case study, provide certainty and fairness in meeting the
purposes of sentencing, avoid unwarranted sentencing disparities among defendants with
similar records who have been found guilty of similar criminal conduct, maintain
sufficient flexibility to permit individualized sentences when warranted by a
rehabilitative treatment not taken into account in the establishment of general sentencing
practices and to reflect, to the full extent practicable, the advancement of knowledge of
human behavior as it relates to the criminal justice process.

H. The executive is also an important venue for liberation. The President and Governors
are authorized to grant pardons and commutation of sentence. For instance President
Bush spared former White House aide I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby from a 2 1/2-year prison
term in the CIA leak case July 2, 2007. Libby was convicted in March, the highest-
ranking White House official ordered to prison since the Iran-Contra affair. Exodus 14
VS 14 says that "the lord will fight my case and I shall hold my peace".

§42b Immunity

A. Immunity is integral to the defense. Medical immunity is a state of having sufficient
biological defenses to avoid infection, disease, or other unwanted biological invasion, and
is related to the functions of the immune system. Legal immunity confers a status on a
person or body that makes that person or body free from otherwise legal obligations such
as, liability for damages, punishment for criminal acts or unlawful search and seizure.
Any action or proceeding brought against an individual who is entitled to immunity shall
be dismissed. Such immunity may be established upon motion or suggestion by or on
behalf of the individual under 22USC(6)§254d.

B. Article 105 of the Charter of the United Nations provides that the Organization shall
enjoy in the territory of each of its Member such privileges and immunities as are
necessary for the fulfillment of its purposes. Representatives of the Members of the
United Nations and officials of the Organization shall similarly enjoy such privileges and
immunities as are necessary for the independent exercise of their functions in connection
with the Organization. With respect to a nonparty to the Vienna Convention, the mission,
the members of the mission, their families, and diplomatic couriers shall enjoy the
privileges and immunities specified in the Vienna Convention under 22USC(6)§254b.

C. The Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations of April 18, 1961 (T.I.A.S.
numbered 7502; 23 U.S.T. 3227), entered into force with respect to the United States on
December 13, 1972. Article 22 provides, the premises of the mission, their furnishings
and other property thereon and the means of transport of the mission shall be immune
from search, requisition, attachment or execution. Article 31 ensures at 1. A diplomatic
agent shall enjoy immunity from the criminal jurisdiction of the receiving State. He shall
also enjoy immunity from its civil and administrative jurisdiction. Under Article

                                                                                         263
39(1&2) Every person entitled to privileges and immunities shall enjoy them from the
moment he enters the territory of the receiving State on proceeding to take up his post to
when the functions of a person enjoying privileges and immunities have come to an end,
such privileges and immunities shall normally cease at the moment when he leaves the
country. Under Art. 44 the receiving State must, even in case of armed conflict, grant
facilities in order to enable persons enjoying privileges and immunities, it must, in
particular, in case of need, place at their disposal the necessary means of transport for
themselves and their property. States may designate a representative of the mission a
persona non grata and have them prevented from entering or removed from the country.

D. The Convention on Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations of February 13,
1946 elaborates at section 2 the United Nations, its property and assets wherever located
and by whomsoever held, shall enjoy immunity from every form of legal process except
insofar as in any particular case it has expressly waived its immunity. Under section 3
the premises of the United Nations shall be immune from, requisition, confiscation,
expropriation and any other form of interference, whether by executive, administrative,
judicial or legislative action. Under Section 4 the archives of the United Nations, and in
general all documents belonging to it or held by it, shall be inviolable wherever located.
Section 11(a) assures representatives of Members immunity from personal arrest or
detention and from seizure of their personal baggage, and, in respect of words spoken or
written and all acts done by them in their capacity as representatives, immunity from
legal process of every kind.

1. In order to secure, complete freedom of speech and independence in the discharge of
their duties, the immunity from legal process in respect of words spoken or written and
all acts done by them in discharging their duties shall continue to be accorded,
notwithstanding that the persons concerned are no longer the representatives of Members
under section 12. Privileges and immunities are accorded to the representatives of
Members not for the personal benefit of the individuals themselves, but in order to
safeguard the independent exercise of their functions in connection with the United
Nations. Consequently a Member not only has the right but is under a duty to waive the
immunity of its representative in any case where in the opinion of the Member the
immunity would impede the course of justice under section 14. Under section 20 the
Secretary-General shall have the right and the duty to waive the immunity of any official
in any case where, in his opinion, the immunity would impede the course of justice and
can be waived without prejudice to the interests of the United Nations. In the case of the
Secretary-General, the Security Council shall have the right to waive immunity.

2. United Nations laissez- passer may be issued to its officials under section 24. These
laissez-passer shall be recognized and accepted as valid travel documents by the
authorities of Members. Under section 29 the United Nations shall make provisions for
appropriate modes of settlement of (a) disputes arising out of contracts or other disputes
of a private law character to which the United Nations is a party; (b) Disputes involving
any official of the United Nations who by reason of his official position enjoys immunity,
if immunity has not been waived by the Secretary-General under section 29. Under
section 30 all differences arising out of the interpretation or application of the present

                                                                                       264
convention shall be referred to the international Court of Justice, unless in any case it is
agreed by the parties to have recourse to another mode of settlement. If a difference arises
between the United Nations on the one hand and a Member on the other hand, a request
shall be made for an advisory opinion on any legal question involved in accordance with
Article 96 of the Charter and Article 65 of the Statute of the Court. The opinion given by
the Court shall be accepted as decisive by the parties.

E. Whenever a witness refuses, on the basis of his privilege against self-incrimination, to
testify or provide other information to a Court, Agency or Congress of the United States,
the witness may not refuse to comply with the order on the basis of his privilege against
self-incrimination; but no testimony or other information compelled under the order (or
any information directly or indirectly derived from such testimony or other information)
may be used against the witness in any criminal case, except a prosecution for perjury,
giving a false statement, or otherwise failing to comply with the order under
18USCV(601)§6002. A Court under §6003, Agency under §6004 or Congress under
§6005 may issue an order granting immunity when, (1) the testimony or other
information from such individual may be necessary to the public interest; and (2) such
individual has refused or is likely to refuse to testify or provide other information on the
basis of his privilege against self-incrimination.

F. The Sixth Amendment to the US Constitution is unique in guaranteeing a
constitutional right to confront the witnesses against you. The problem of witness
intimidation is real and prevalent. Witnesses will often not give evidence unless their
identity is withheld from the defense. If they will not give evidence, dangerous criminals
will walk free and both society and the administration of justice will suffer. The
intimidation of witnesses is an age-old and worldwide problem. Witness anonymity and
protection are an essential and fundamental requirement for the kind of fair trial which is
this country‟s constitutional goal (Pointer v Texas 380 US 400, 405 (1965)) and as one of
the fundamental guarantees of life and liberty (Kirby v United States 174 US 47, 55
(1899)). The practical significance of this right was explained in a majority opinion of the
Supreme Court in Smith v Illinois 390 US 129, 131 (1968) where the petitioner was
denied the right to ask the principal prosecution witness either his name or where he
lived, R. v. Davis [2008] UKHL 36 June 18.

1. Under 18USC§3521 the Attorney General may provide for the relocation and other
protection of a witness or a potential witness and/or their family for the Federal
Government or for a State government in an official proceeding concerning an organized
criminal activity or other serious offense, if the family or person may be endangered on
account of the participation of the witness in the judicial proceeding. The Attorney
General may provide, (A) suitable documents to enable the person to establish a new
identity or otherwise protect the person; (B) housing and moving costs; (D) payment to
meet basic living expenses.

G. US Attorney‟s Office upholds Crime Victims‟ Rights under 18USC§3771:
(1) The right to be reasonably protected from the accused.



                                                                                         265
(2) The right to reasonable, accurate, and timely notice of any public court proceeding, or
any parole proceeding, involving the crime or of any release or escape of the accused.
(3) The right not to be excluded from any such public court proceeding, unless the court,
after receiving clear and convincing evidence, determines that testimony by the victim
would be materially altered if the victim heard other testimony at that proceeding.
(4) The right to be reasonably heard at any public proceeding in the district court
involving release, plea, sentencing, or any parole proceeding.
(5) The reasonable right to confer with the attorney for the Government in the case.
(6) The right to full and timely restitution as provided in law.
(7) The right to proceedings free from unreasonable delay.
(8) The right to be treated with fairness and with respect for the victim‟s dignity and
privacy.

§42c Compensation for False Arrest and Torture

A. Victims of miscarriages of justice have the right to compensation from the State.
Courts must routinely pay reasonable compensation to victims of False Arrest and
Torture to effectively regulate the militia.

1.Art. 14(6) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights of 23 March
1976, when a person has by a final decision been convicted of a criminal offence and
when subsequently his conviction has been reversed or he has been pardoned on the
ground that a new or newly discovered fact shows conclusively that there has been a
miscarriage of justice, the person who has suffered punishment as a result of such
conviction shall be compensated according to law.

a. If a person is convicted of a crime as the result of entrapment then that person is not
guilty. Government agents entrapped a person if three things occurred:

i. First, the idea for committing the crime came from the government agents and not from
the person accused of the crime.

ii. Second, the government agents then persuaded or talked the person into committing
the crime. Simply giving a person the opportunity to commit the crime is not the same as
persuading the person to commit the crime.

iii. And third, the person was not ready and willing to commit the crime before the
government agents spoke with that person.

2. Art. 14 of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading
Treatment or Punishment of 26 June 1987 the State shall ensure in its legal system that
the victim of an act of torture obtains redress and has an enforceable right to fair and
adequate compensation, including the means for as full rehabilitation as possible. In the
event of the death of the victim as a result of an act of torture, his dependants shall be
entitled to compensation.



                                                                                         266
3. Witnesses are entitled to the payment of $40 per diem when they attend trial under
28USC§1821(b). Writers are entitled to the equivalent for the time they spend doing
legal research. In 1970 the US Supreme Court remanded Hurtado v. United States 410
US 578 (1973) to the United States Congress requiring and raising the fee to pre-trial
detainees from $20 to $21 a day, irregardless of their guilt or innocence. It is fair to
afford victims of false arrest minimum wage 24 hours a day. Some states afford victims
of false arrest $50,000 a year.

4. Jurists are randomly selected from the people who respond to the solicitation and are
selected by the attorneys on the basis of the potential jurists desire to serve on the jury.
Jurists may serve longer, if they choose to remain in the jury pool, to serve judges on the
Grand Jury and in civil trials regarding multiple claims for money and/or jail time
exceeding the $20 limit set forth in the Seventh Amendment to the US Constitution. A
typical jury consists of 12 people who earn $20 a day, $240 a day. People who want to
be sure to go to trial should volunteer for the Grand Jury.

5. As part of the pre-release procedures for institutionalized persons the Commissioner of
Social Security shall develop a system under which an individual can apply for
supplemental security income benefits prior to the discharge or release of the individual
from a public institution. The Commissioner shall provide notice written in simple and
clear language, that includes the address and telephone number of the local office of the
Social Security Administration which serves the under 42USC(7)XVI(B)§1393(m,n,o).

§42d Freedom from Unlawful Search and Seizure

A. The IV Amendment protects the rights of the people to property and privacy from
unwarranted police “search and seizure”. The “exclusionary” rule is the most effective
defense by preventing evidence gathered without a warrant issued with probable cause
from being used in court. Rule 41 (e) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure
disqualifies evidence when, (1) the property was illegally seized without warrant, (2) the
warrant is insufficient on its face, (3) the property seized is not that described in the
warrant, (4) there was not probable cause for believing the existence of the grounds on
which the warrant was issued, (5) the warrant was illegally executed.

1. Over and again the Court has emphasized that the mandate of the Fourth Amendment
requires adherence to judicial processes, and that searches conducted outside the judicial
process, without prior approval by judge or magistrate are unreasonable. The
requirement of a neutral, disinterested magistrate reflects the fundamental constitutional
premise that executive officers cannot be trusted to police themselves. The right of
privacy was deemed too precious to entrust to the discretion of those whose job is the
detection of crime and the arrest of criminals.

2. Power is a heady thing; and history shows that the police acting on their own cannot be
trusted, nor indeed can Courts and Politicians. Thus, the Constitution requires that the
deliberate, impartial judgment of a judicial officer be interposed between the citizen and
the police Wong Sun v. United States, 371 U.S. 471 (1963). FISA judges have had no

                                                                                         267
difficulty understanding the “delicate and complex decisions that lie behind foreign
intelligence surveillance,” well enough to grant the executive nearly all the warrants it
claimed to need as in United States v. Truong, 629 F.2d 908, 913 (4th Cir. 1980).

B. First Amendment Privacy Protection at 42USC(21A) IA §2000aa protects people from
unreasonable search and seizure unless, there is reason to believe that the immediate
seizure of such materials is necessary to prevent the death of, or serious bodily injury to,
a human being. The mere possession of, even large quantities of, controlled substances
does not qualify as a reasonable justification for search and seizure.

1. To accurately gauge probable cause required by the Fourth Amendment against an
individuals right to privacy officers must not “violate a persons legitimate interest to
privacy”. The warrant requirement is no mere formality, it is a crucial safeguard against
abuses by executive officers.

2. Electronic eavesdropping was found by its very nature to involve an intrusion on
privacy that is broad in scope, thus bears a dangerous similarity to the general warrants
out of which our Revolution sprang. Any search conducted without a warrant is
presumptively unreasonable. Probable cause is the standard by which a particular
decision to search is tested against the constitutional mandate of reasonableness pursuant.

3. Individuals are found to have a constitutionally protected privacy interest in the content
of their telephone calls. The warrant requirement was found to be a constitutionally
mandated safeguard even for wiretaps intended to protect domestic national security.

4. Emergency does not create power. Emergency does not increase granted power or
remove or diminish the restrictions imposed upon power granted or reserved. The
Constitution was adopted in a period of grave emergency. Its grants of power to the
federal government and its limitations of the power of the States were determined in the
light of emergency, and they are not altered by emergency. Even the war power does not
remove constitutional limitations safeguarding essential liberties.

C. Under federal law the interception of communication is regulated by two statutes. The
Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978, 50USC(36)I§1801 that permits the
President to conduct warrant less searches for 15 days following a formal declaration of
war whereupon the investigators must seek the approval of a 11 judge FISA court.

1. To deter unwarranted foreign surveillance 50USC(36)I§1809 provides that a person is
guilty of an offense if he intentionally engages in electronic surveillance under color of
law; or discloses or uses information obtained under color of law by electronic
surveillance punishable by a fine of not more than $10,000 or imprisonment for not more
than five years, or both.

2. Any person who intentionally intercepts, endeavors to intercept, or procures any other
person to intercept or endeavor to intercept, any wire, oral, or electronic communication;
is a first offense for the entitled to appropriate injunctive relief; and a second or

                                                                                            268
subsequent offense shall be subject to a mandatory $500 civil fine for the Recovery of
Civil Damages under 18USC(119)§2520.

3. Hospitals and Asylums Battle Mountain Sanitarium Reserve statute likewise provides
for a $1,000 fine and up to 12 months in jail for unlawful intrusion and violation of the
rules and regulations pertaining to reservations under 24USC(3)V§154.

D. Evidence that has been unlawfully obtained is generally dismissed and may be used
against the perpetrators of the infringement or torture. Any search conducted without a
warrant is presumptively unreasonable. Probable cause is the standard by which a
particular decision to search is tested against the constitutional mandate of
reasonableness.

1. The fact that the out-of-court statement is adduced for its truth should be considered in
the context of the issues in the case so that the court may better assess the reliability of
evidence in its hearsay form.

2. The criterion of reliability is usually met either because of the way in which the
statement came about, that the person who made the statement is well treated, its contents
are trustworthy, or where circumstances permit the ultimate trier of fact to sufficiently
assess its worth Her Majesty the Queen v. Couture 2007 SCC 28 June 15

§42e Right to an Attorney

A. The Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers 27 August to 7 September 1990 obligates
lawyers exclusively to the role of defending the criminally accused and sets forth to
protect them from retaliation.

1. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights enshrines the principles of equality before
the law, the presumption of innocence, the right to a fair and public hearing by an
independent and impartial tribunal, and all the guarantees necessary for the defense of
everyone charged with a penal offence.

2. The Body of Principles for the Protection of All Persons under Any Form of Detention
or Imprisonment provides that a detained person shall be entitled to have the assistance
of, and to communicate and consult with, legal counsel.

3. The Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners recommend, in
particular, that legal assistance and confidential communication with counsel should be
ensured.

B. The purpose of lawyers is to establish conditions under which justice can be
maintained through due process. Courts are difficult and complicated for laymen to work
with. Although people are welcome to act prose, speaking for themselves, and generally
do in small cases, it is wise for parties to judicial proceedings, both plaintiffs and
defendants, to hire a lawyer to represent them. Lawyers work for their clients and may be

                                                                                         269
discharged or may resign if a conflict of interest manifests in which case a lawyer may be
sued to disgorge their profits Strother v. 3464920 Canada Inc. 2007 SCC 24 June 1

1. If a defendant is unable to afford a lawyer a public defender will be appointed.
Plaintiffs can often find lawyers willing to represent them, pro bono, in the public
interest, or on a contingency basis.

2. Many non-governmental organizations and non-lawyers also participate in legal
proceedings by means of the submission of briefs Amices Curie.
3. The defense of liberty is a team effort amongst judges, lawyers, friends, family,
victims and concerned citizens who are counseled to co-operate in pursuit of justice. The
Court must be prepared to pay reasonable legal fees for the preparation of legal briefs in
every case.

C. As a member of a learned profession, a lawyer should cultivate knowledge of the law
beyond its use for clients and employ that knowledge in reform of the law and work to
strengthen legal education in the public interest as best represented in the spirit of the
ABA Model Rules of Professional Responsibility.

1. Legal institutions in a constitutional democracy depend on popular participation and
support to maintain their authority therefore lawyers should further the public's
understanding of and confidence in the rule of law and justice system.

2. A lawyer should be mindful of deficiencies in the administration of justice and
legislature and of the fact that the poor, and sometimes persons who are not poor, cannot
or have not afforded adequate legal assistance and are entitled to free, professionally
literate and friendly legal services nonetheless on a contingency or pro bono basis
whereas it is in the public interest to give all merit worthy claims due process.

D. In the US, where the legal system is in considerable disrepute, lawyers face
considerably more time in school and higher costs there from. In most countries law is a
degree program that people enter after the completion of high school. In the US law
school is only for people who have completed an undergraduate degree. Instead of
creating a higher standard for lawyers the problems of over qualification seem to
outweigh the benefits.

1. Faced with student loans often in excess of $100,000 new lawyers are forced to seek
employment with corporations or prosecuting for the state rather than in fulfilling their
obligation to defend the life and liberty of the often poor, criminally accused.

2. Excessive education leads to elitism that undermines attorney client relations with
class inequality, discrimination and collusion with other rich overeducated people whose
superiority is so often justified only in the peonage of those poorer and wiser.
Specifically, over education undermines the independence of the judiciary by capitalizing
upon the skills of degree holding political scientists, businessmen, psychologists and
other professions in proliferation of the judicial power where it should not extend.

                                                                                        270
Furthermore the 2006 Report of the Secretary of Education on Higher Education finds
that as the result of capitalist discrimination by universities successful college students
are increasingly “rich and dumb” and a dwindling percentage of graduates, 31% rather
than 45% of a decade ago, are even able to write prose documents, the mainstay of the
legal system.

3. For equality with other nations, whose legal systems are performing much better, the
Bar Exam should be extended to bachelor in the law programs so that students could be
Bar certified attorneys, welcome to practice for fees in courts of law, three to four years
after graduating from high school. It is true law is a scholarly profession. Although
respect for human and equal rights is taught in law school it is rarely, if ever, reflected in
the behavior of lawyers. Representing the abused and poor people alleged to be criminals
is not the domain of overeducated elite. A greater understanding would surely be
achieved if lawyers and their clients were not separated by more than one social stratum.

D. Prosecutors are government lawyers who represent the penal interests of the
government in felony cases in criminal courts. Guidelines on the Role of Prosecutors of
27 August-7 September 1990 requires the office of prosecutors to be strictly separated
from judicial functions. The prosecutor investigates the facts of the case and proposes
the maximum sentence authorized by the legislature.

1. Prosecutors carry out their functions impartially and avoid all political, social,
religious, racial, cultural, sexual or any other kind of discrimination.

2. They protect the public interest, act with objectivity, take proper account of the
position of the suspect and the victim, and pay attention to all relevant circumstances,
irrespective of whether they are to the advantage or disadvantage of the suspect.

3. They keep matters in their possession confidential, unless the performance of duty or
the needs of justice require otherwise.

4. They consider the views and concerns of victims when their personal interests are
affected and ensure that victims are informed of their rights in accordance with the
Declaration of Basic Principles of Justice for Victims of Crime and Abuse of Power.

5. Prosecutors shall not initiate or continue prosecution, or shall make every effort to stay
proceedings, when an impartial investigation shows the charge to be unfounded.

6. Prosecutors shall give due attention to the prosecution of crimes committed by public
officials, particularly corruption, abuse of power, grave violations of human rights and
other crimes recognized by international law and, where authorized by law or consistent
with local practice, the investigation of such offences.

7. When prosecutors come into possession of evidence against suspects that they know or
believe on reasonable grounds was obtained through recourse to unlawful methods,
which constitute a grave violation of the suspect's human rights, especially involving

                                                                                           271
torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, or other abuses of human
rights, they shall refuse to use such evidence against anyone other than those who used
such methods, or inform the Court accordingly, and shall take all necessary steps to
ensure that those responsible for using such methods are brought to justice.

8. The prosecutor‟s mission is not so much to secure a conviction as it is to achieve a just
result. The defendant is entitled to a full measure of fairness, and it is as much the
prosecutor‟s duty to see that the accused is not deprived of any statutory or constitutional
rights, as it is to prosecute Young v. United States 481 U.S. 787 (1987)

E. The Attorney General may be summoned to defend a state agency in a properly
constituted court. The role of the Attorney General is two fold, first to defend the
reputation of the state and second to discipline the government and pay victim
compensation.

1. It is generally not appropriate for an Attorney General to use their office to promote
the prosecution of civilians on either a case-by-case basis or en masse, for reason that, to
instill restraint the use of military force, justice is reserved for members of that army, a
state of prosecutors is not different in their need for self discipline of state employees.

2. The Attorney General should appear in behalf of the defendant agency in legal
proceedings when he or she has been asked to defend the state against allegations of
misconduct, abuse, neglect, malfeasance, insolvency or corruption in Court.

3. The Attorney General may institute suits to protect constitutional rights in public
facilities, fundamental freedoms and consumer safety.

§42f Right to a Fair Trial

A. The right to a fair trial is a basic human and constitutional right in all-criminal
prosecutions because it is jeopardized. The right to a fair trial is a fundamental safeguard
to assure that individuals are not unjustly punished. The basic principle in a fair trial is a
right to justice. Every government has the duty to bring to justice those responsible for
crimes. Justice is however based on respect for the rights of every individual. Justice
involves reciprocity between adversaries to satisfactorily settle legal disputes pursuant to
the written judgment of a third part neutral. Justice involves discovering laws or their
application to be unjust or unconstitutional for the pacific resolution of a case or to
request them amended or repealed. Justice requires that criminal defendants who are not
criminals against humanity be acquitted with a determination as to whether or not that
person has been convicted of an offense or directed to make reasonable restitution. The
two elements of a fair trial are truth and decent treatment.

1. The essential principle contained in the actual trial of an illegal act is that reparation
must, as far as possible, wipe out all the consequences of the illegal act and re-establish
the situation which would, in all probability, have existed if that act had not been
committed

                                                                                           272
2. When people are tortured or ill treated by law enforcement officials, when innocent
individuals are convicted, or when trials are manifestly unfair the justice system is
equally liable for being prosecuted for crimes and procedural errors.

3. A judge must therefore be neutral and impartial to either the prosecutor or defendant to
ensure the case is given due process that includes a right to appeal the decision and
complain of trial errors. The decision of a judge can have a significant impact upon a
person‟s life; it is therefore of utmost importance that people enjoy a fair trial.

4. Unless human rights are upheld without discrimination in the police station, the
interrogation room, the detention centre, the court and the prison cell, the authorities have
failed in their duties and betrayed their responsibilities and in many cases the conviction
must be overturned and/or compensation paid to the falsely accused and tortured.

B. The V Amendment to the Constitution ensures that no one will be held to answer for a
capital or infamous crime unless indicted by the grand jury, nor shall anyone be twice put
in jeopardy for the same offense, nor be deprived of life, liberty or property without due
process of law, nor shall private property be taken for public use without just
compensation.

1. The VI Amendment to Constitution ensures that the accused shall enjoy the right to a
speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury. The arrested person must be informed of the
nature and cause of the accusation, to be confronted with the witnesses against him, to
have a compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in their favor and to have the
assistance of a counsel for his defense. The jury is used far more in the United States
than in other countries.

2. States are obligated to promote universal respect for, and observance of, human rights
and freedoms of detainees. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights enshrines the
principles of human dignity, equality before the law, the presumption of innocence, the
right to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, and all the
guarantees necessary for the defense of everyone charged with a penal offence.

3. Governments shall ensure that all persons are immediately informed by the competent
authority of their right to be assisted by a lawyer of their own choice upon arrest or
detention or when charged with a criminal offence. Detained person shall be entitled to
have the assistance of, and to confidential communication and consultation with, legal
counsel.

C. Amnesty International publishes an exhaustive Fair Trials Manual that covers pre-trial
rights, rights at trial and during appeal and special cases. It is fundamental human rights
that everyone has a right to personal liberty. The essential corollary to the right to liberty
is protection against arbitrary or unlawful detention. An individual can only be deprived
of their liberty in on grounds and in accordance with the law and international standards.
Everyone is entitled to a fair hearing. The right to a fair hearing in criminal trials is

                                                                                          273
specified by a number of concrete rights, such as the right to be presumed innocent, the
right to be tried without undue delay, the right to prepare a defense, the right to defend
oneself in person or through counsel, the right to call and examine witnesses and the right
to protection from retroactive criminal laws.

1. A person must be informed of the reason for their arrest. As the result of the
presumption of innocence in most cases it is expected that they will be released on bond
before trial. An accused person is entitled to be notified of their rights including the right
to legal counsel and to silence, in writing and in a language they understand.

2. People held in custody are entitled have access to the outside world in the form of
prompt access to families, lawyers, doctors, a judicial official and, if the detainee is a
foreign national, to consular staff or competent international organization. The person‟s
family can be notified of their detention by the authorities.

3. Everyone deprived of their liberty has the right to challenge the lawfulness of their
detention before a court, and to have the detention reviewed on a regular basis, if the
detention is unlawful to order their release. The right to challenge the lawfulness of
detention, and to seek remedy, is invoked by applying for a writ of habeas corpus.

4. Every person who has been the victim of unlawful arrest or detention has an
enforceable right to reparation, including compensation. Damage incurred because of
acts or omissions by a public official contrary to the rights contained in these principles
shall be compensated according to the applicable rules or liability provided by domestic
law.

5. All persons deprived of their liberty shall be treated with humanity and with respect for
the inherent dignity of the human person. Anyone detained or imprisoned has the right to
request improvements in their treatment or to complain about their treatment. The
authorities must reply promptly, and if the request or complaint is refused, it may be
brought to a judicial or other authority. All detained people have the right to be held only
in an officially recognized place of detention, located if possible near their place of
residence, under a valid order committing them to detention. Accused persons shall, save
in exceptional circumstances, be segregated from convicted persons and shall be subject
to separate treatment appropriate to their status as un-convicted persons.

6. No person under any form of detention or imprisonment shall be subjected to torture or
to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. No circumstance whatever may
be invoked as a justification for torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or
punishment. This right is absolute and non-derogable. It applies to all people. It may
never be suspended even during times of war, threat of war, internal political instability,
or states of emergency.

D. All persons are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to the
equal protection of the law. In this respect, the law shall prohibit any discrimination and
guarantee to all persons equal and effective protection against discrimination on any

                                                                                           274
ground such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or
social origin, property, birth or other status. The right to equality before the law means
that laws must not be discriminatory, and that judges and officials must not act in a
discriminatory fashion in enforcing the law.

1. The primary institutional guarantee of a fair trial is that decisions will not be made by
political institutions but by competent, independent and impartial tribunals established by
law. The judiciary shall decide matters before them impartially, on the basis of facts and
in accordance with the law, without any restrictions, improper influences, inducements,
pressures, threats or interferences, direct or indirect, from any quarter or for any reason.
The defence and the prosecution will be treated in a manner that ensures that both parties
have an equal opportunity to prepare and present their case during the course of the
proceedings Everyone has an equal right to access to the courts, without discrimination.

2. One essential criterion of a fair hearing is the principle of "equality of arms" between
the parties in a case. In criminal trials, where the prosecution has all the machinery of the
state behind it, the principle of equality of arms is an essential guarantee of the right to
defend oneself. The principle of equality of arms ensures that the defence has a
reasonable opportunity to prepare and present its case on a footing equal to that of the
prosecution. Its requirements include the right to adequate time and facilities to prepare a
defence, including disclosure by the prosecution of material information. Its
requirements also include the right to legal counsel, the right to call and examine
witnesses and the right to be present at the trial.

3. Except in narrowly defined circumstances, court hearings and judgments must be
public. The right to a public hearing means that not only the parties in the case, but also
the general public, have the right to be present. The public has a right to know how
justice is administered, and what decisions are reached by the judicial system. The press
and the public may be excluded from all or part of a trial for reasons of morals, public
order (ordre public) or national security in a democratic society, or when the interest of
the private lives of the parties so requires, or where publicity would prejudice the
interests of justice.

4. Everyone has the right to be presumed innocent, and treated as innocent, until and
unless they are convicted according to law in the course of proceedings which meet at
least the minimum prescribed requirements of fairness. The right to be presumed
innocent applies not only to treatment in court and the evaluation of evidence, but also to
treatment before trial. It applies to suspects, before criminal charges are filed prior to
trial, and carries through until a conviction is confirmed following a final appeal.

5. If a person is acquitted of a criminal offence by final judgment of a court, the judgment
is binding on all state authorities. Therefore, the public authorities, particularly
prosecutors and the police, should refrain from implying that the person may have been
guilty, so as not to undermine the presumption of innocence, respect for the judgments of
a court and the rule of law. No one charged with a criminal offence may be compelled to
testify against him or herself or to confess guilt.

                                                                                         275
6. No one may be convicted for an act or an omission which was not an offence at the
time it was committed. This prohibition prevents the retroactive application of criminal
law. It gives rise not only to a prohibition on retroactive prosecutions, but also imposes
an obligation on states to define precisely by law all criminal offences.

7. No one may be tried or punished again in the same jurisdiction for a criminal offence if
they have been finally convicted or acquitted of that offence. This prohibition against
double jeopardy, also known as the principle of ne bis in idem, prevents a person from
being tried or punished more than once for the same crime.

8. Everyone charged with a criminal offence has the right to be tried without undue delay.
The length of time judged reasonable will depend on the circumstances of the case. The
guarantee of prompt trial in criminal proceedings is tied to the right to liberty, the
presumption of innocence and the right to defend oneself. It aims to ensure that an
accused person's fate is determined without undue delay. It is aimed at ensuring that a
person's defense is not undermined by the passage of inordinate amounts of time, during
which witnesses' memories may fade or become distorted, witnesses may become
unavailable, and other evidence may be destroyed or disappear. The right to be tried
promptly encapsulates the maxim that justice delayed is justice denied.

9. Everyone charged with a criminal offence has the right to defend him or herself against
the charges, to defend himself in person or through legal assistance of his own choosing
or, if he has not sufficient means to pay for legal assistance, to be given it free when the
interests of justice so require. Everyone charged with a criminal offence has the right to
defend him or herself in person. The accused may decide to be assisted by defense
counsel, and the court is required to inform the accused of the right to counsel. The right
to legal assistance applies to all stages of the criminal proceedings, including during the
preliminary investigation and before trial.

10. The review by a higher court must be a genuine review of the issues in the case. The
rights to a fair and public trial must be observed during appeal proceedings. The right to
be present during appeals proceedings depends on the nature of those proceedings. In
particular, it depends on whether the appeal court examines issues of fact as well as of
law, and on the manner in which the accused's interests are presented and protected. The
accused has the right to have the free assistance of an interpreter if he cannot understand
or speak the language used in court.

11. Judgments must be made public, with limited exceptions, and everyone tried by a
court of law has the right to be given reasons for the judgment and to be judged only by
decision-makers who have attended the proceedings. A judgment is made public if it is
pronounced orally in a session of the court which is open to the public or if a written
judgment is published. The right to public judgment is violated if judgments are made
accessible only to a certain group of people or when only people having a specific
interest are allowed to inspect a judgment.




                                                                                        276
E. Punishments imposed upon conviction of a crime may only be inflicted on people who
have been convicted after a fair trial. Punishments must be proportionate and may not
violate international standards. Courts may not impose a heavier penalty than the one that
applied when the crime was committed. However, if legal reform reduces the penalty for
an offence, states are obliged to apply retroactively the lighter penalty. The conditions in
which a convicted prisoner is held must not violate international standards that limit time
in solitary, restraints and use of force by officers. Punishment for an offence may be
imposed only on the offender; international standards prohibit the imposition of
collective punishments.

1. The imposition of corporal punishment as a sanction for a criminal or disciplinary
offence violates the prohibition on torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment
and the right to a fair trial by inflicting a penalty which is prohibited under international
law. Everyone convicted of a criminal offence has the right to have the conviction and
sentence reviewed by a higher tribunal.

2. Children are entitled to all the fair trial guarantees and rights which apply to adults, and
to some additional special protection. The juvenile's right to privacy shall be respected at
all stages in order to avoid harm being caused to her or him by undue publicity or by the
process of labelling. In most cases, the best interests of a child are protected by not
separating them from their parents. Children must be segregated from adults. No child
shall be subjected to torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or
punishment. Neither capital punishment nor life imprisonment without possibility of
release shall be imposed for offences committed by persons below eighteen years of age.

3. The right to life is fundamental and absolute. In states that have abolished the death
penalty it should not be reinstated. All states are encouraged to ratify the Second
Optional Protocol aiming at the abolition of the death penalty of 15 December 1989. The
execution of juveniles, pregnant women, the mentally ill, mentally retarded and people
over 70 are prohibited. The death penalty shall be only for the most heinous crimes. In
view of the irreversible nature of the death penalty, trials in capital cases must
scrupulously observe the right to a fair trial. Anyone sentenced to death has the right to
appeal to a court of higher jurisdiction, and steps should be taken to ensure that such
appeals shall become mandatory. Anyone sentenced to death has the right to seek pardon
or commutation of their sentence. There is no guarantee that the executioners will not be
held responsible for crimes against humanity.

4. In times of national emergency some fair trial rights may be suspended. The following
rights may never be suspended: the right to life, the prohibition of torture, the prohibition
of slavery and servitude,; the prohibition of detention for debt; the prohibition of
retroactive criminal laws; the recognition of legal personality Any suspension of rights
must not involve discrimination on grounds of race, color, sex, language, religion or
social origin. There is growing consensus that habeas corpus must never be suspended. A
person may not be found guilty of a penal offence related to the armed conflict except by
a court "respecting the generally recognized principles of regular judicial procedure".



                                                                                           277
5. International humanitarian law, which provides minimum standards of conduct during
armed conflict, contains important fair trial safeguards. These apply to various categories
of people during international wars and internal conflict, including civil wars. The
safeguards set forth in the four Geneva Conventions of 1949 and their Additional
Protocols protect various categories of people, defined as protected persons, in specified
circumstances. The safeguards include guarantees of a fair trial for people charged with
criminal offences.

F. Victims of miscarriages of justice have the right to compensation from the state. In the
United States mandatory restitution is typically administrated as the result of a trial with a
probation officer under 18USC(77)§1593.

1. The Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or
Punishment of 26 June 1987 states at Art. 14, “the State shall ensure in its legal system
that the victim of an act of torture obtains redress and has an enforceable right to fair and
adequate compensation, including the means for as full rehabilitation as possible.”

2. Art. 14(6) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights of 23 March
1976, states, “when a person has by a final decision been convicted of a criminal offence
and when subsequently his conviction has been reversed or he has been pardoned on the
ground that a new or newly discovered fact shows conclusively that there has been a
miscarriage of justice, the person who has suffered punishment as a result of such
conviction shall be compensated according to law”.

42g Bankruptcy and Insolvency Trials

A.Bankruptcy is a legally declared inability or impairment of ability of an individual or
organizations to pay their creditors. Bankruptcy law provides for the development of a
plan that allows a debtor to resolve debts through the division of assets among creditors.
Certain bankruptcy proceedings allow a debtor to stay in business and use revenue
generated to resolve his or her debts. Additionally bankruptcy law allows certain debtors
to free themselves (to be discharged) of the financial obligations they have accumulated,
after their assets are distributed, even if their debts have not been paid in full.

1.In 2002 the number of bankruptcy proceedings was 1.5 million. The number of filings
in the United States bankruptcy courts fell from 1,782,643 cases in 2005 to 1,112,542
cases in 2006.Medical costs have become the leading cause of bankruptcy. In 1981 only
8% of families filing for bankruptcy did so in the aftermath of a serious medical problem.
By 2001 that percentage had increased to 46.2% and by 2007 to 69.1%. While hospital
costs loomed largest for all diagnostic groups, for about one third of patients with
pulmonary, cardiac, or psychiatric illnesses, prescription drugs were the largest expense.
In the United States the average time it takes to litigate a bankruptcy is 1.5 years, the cost
is 7% of the estate and the recovery rate 76.7%. The time, cost and recovery rate of
bankruptcy proceedings vary widely amongst nations.

           Fig. 2.5: Cost of Bankruptcy Proceedings in Selected Economies

                                                                                          278
     Country                  Time               Cost % Estate         Recovery Rate
                              Years                                  Cents on the Dollar
    Argentina                  2.8                    12.0                  29.8
     Austria                   1.1                    18.0                  71.5
      Brazil                   4.0                    12.0                  17.1
     Bulgaria                  3.3                     9.0                  32.1
     Estonia                   3.0                     9.0                  37.5
      France                   1.9                     9.0                  44.7
    Germany                    1.2                     8.0                  52.2
    Hungary                    2.0                    15.0                  38.4
     Iceland                   1.0                     4.0                  76.6
       Italy                   1.8                    22.0                  56.6
      Japan                    0.6                     4.0                  92.5
      Latvia                   3.0                    13.0                  29.0
    Lithuania                  1.7                     7.0                  48.0
    Romania                    3.3                     9.0                  29.\5
      Spain                    1.0                    15.0                  73.2
     Sweden                    2.0                     9.0                  75.1
    Thailand                   2.7                    36.0                  42.4
     Turkey                    3.3                    15.0                  20.2
     Ukraine                   2.9                    42.0                   9.1
 United Kingdom                1.0                     6.0                  84.2
  United States                1.5                     7.0                  76.7

Source: Laeven, Luc; Laryea, Thomas. Principles of Household Debt Restructuring. IMF
                             Staff Papers. June 26, 2009

B. Bankruptcy law is federal statutory law contained in Title 11 of the United States
Code. States are not allowed to legislate their own bankruptcy laws although they do
frequently treat upon debtor creditor relations. Bankruptcy proceedings are supervised by
and litigated in the United States Bankruptcy Courts. These courts are a part of the
District Courts of The United States. The United States Trustees were established by
Congress to handle many of the supervisory and administrative duties of bankruptcy
proceedings. Proceedings in bankruptcy courts are governed by the Bankruptcy Rules
which were promulgated by the Supreme Court under the authority of Congress. There
are two basic types of Bankruptcy proceedings.

1.A filing under Chapter 7 is called liquidation. It is the most common type of bankruptcy
proceeding. Liquidation involves the appointment of a trustee who collects the non-
exempt property of the debtor, sells it and distributes the proceeds to the creditors.
Bankruptcy proceedings under Chapters 11, 12, and 13 involve the rehabilitation of the
debtor to allow him or her to use future earnings to pay off creditors.

2.Under Chapter 7, 12, 13, and some 11 proceedings, a trustee is appointed to supervise
the assets of the debtor. A bankruptcy proceeding can either be entered into voluntarily

                                                                                      279
by a debtor or initiated by creditors. After a bankruptcy proceeding is filed, creditors, for
the most part, may not seek to collect their debts outside of the proceeding. The debtor is
not allowed to transfer property that has been declared part of the estate subject to
proceedings.

C. Passage of the Bankruptcy Prevention and Consumer Protection Act P.L. 109-8 in
April 2005 resulted in major reforms in bankruptcy law, outlining revised guidelines
governing the dismissal or conversion of Chapter 7 liquidations to Chapter 11 or 13
proceedings. The law also expands the responsibilities of the United States Trustees
Program to include supervision of random and targeted audits, certification of entities to
provide credit counseling that individuals must receive before filing for bankruptcy,
certification of entities that provide financial education to individuals before being
discharged from debt, and greater oversight of small business Chapter 11 reorganization
cases. Bankruptcy is a fiscally responsible alternative to wasteful bailout subsidies.
Most corporations the go into bankruptcy insolvent come out renewed.

Art. 3 Questions of International Justice

§43 International Trade Deficit

A. Liberal economic theory dictates that international trade is reliant upon freedom. Just
like military abuse leads to a budget deficit, abuse of the judiciary leads to an
international trade deficit. For a nation‟s international trade to succeed the State must
respect the inherent dignity and equal and inalienable right of all members of the human
family to freedom from fear and want or people do not want to do business. The cost to
international trade caused by arbitrary detention can be estimated at exactly one million
dollars in decreased exports and increased imports per prisoner entitled to release a year.

1. In 2006 the international trade deficit exceeded $800 billion sounding alarms because
the US account deficit, combination of the budget deficit and international trade deficit,
exceeded $1 trillion for a third year in a row, and it could not be reasonably expected that
the government would have a budget deficit less than $200 billion needed to keep the
account deficit less than $1 trillion as is certainly in the best interest of the nation.

B. The judicial problem in international trade manifested with establishment of the Court
of International Trade of the United States (CoITUS) in 1980, around the time the first
mandatory minimum sentencing law began filling the prisons. CoITUS needs to be
renamed to Customs Court. International trade disputes are not the purvey of the Court,
but of the World Trade Organization and U.S. Trade Representative. Genuine legal
disputes in international trade manifest only in the context of Customs Enforcement and
then are usually dispatched by the Executive Branch.

C. The fact that the international trade deficit has increased and the liberal theory that that
the market is reliant upon freedom from fear and want indicate that there must be an
infringement upon the civil liberties obstructing the sale of American made goods. This
theory is vindicated in the timing of the first appearance of a trade deficit in 1971, the

                                                                                           280
same year that Nixon embarked on the “war on drugs” against the criticism of the United
Nations. This theory is further reinforced in the way that the deficit began increasing at
the time that mandatory minimum sentencing was first introduced. It was not however
until the Clinton administration reinforced mandatory minimum sentencing and embraced
neo-liberal investment policies soliciting foreign investment that America gave up hope
in American freedom and the trade deficit really began to be a problem. Whereas
freedom is generally accepted as the basis for economic success it is not difficult to
imagine that the slave trade would harm international trade.

   Fig. 2.6: International Trade in millions $ compared with Detention 1980-2005


  2,500,000

  2,000,000
                                                                          Exports
  1,500,000
                                                                          Imports
  1,000,000                                                               Defict
                                                                          Detention
    500,000

          0
               1980     1985     1990     1995     2000     2005

          Source: Bureau of Economic Analysis and Bureau of Justice Statistics

1. To improve the American economic situation freedom takes on new importance. For
economic success the principles of free trade will clearly need to be applied domestically
to protect the market economy from judicial interference. Congress, the Executive,
States and mostly the people themselves, including bankers and corporate executives,
will need to take responsibility for the resolution of trade disputes and not refer them to
the judiciary that is overburdened with their slave trade. In practice this means that
federal trade regulatory agencies and corporations need to employ more economists and
fewer lawyers because business disputes should not be referred to Court but must be
resolved by the parties, themselves, Better Business Bureaus, Chambers of Commerce,
Congress and Executive Branch.

1. First time fraud and so called white collar offenders should be released in nearly every
case whereas no one shall be imprisoned merely on the ground of inability to fulfill a
contractual obligation under Art. 11 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights of 23 March 1976 as noted in the Free Insider Trader Settlement (FITS) HA-1-4-
04. Business law is civil in hopes of settling compliance and compensation without any
crimes of violence. Disputes with merchants are best regulated by the State rather than
tempting forgery at Court. In worst-case scenarios where prison time is contemplated the
government is competent to revoke the operating license of any merchant not in
compliance with the law.


                                                                                        281
§43a Undocumented Migration

A. The United States of America is a nation of immigrants. The US was populated by
waves of immigrants from Europe and Africa who rapidly outnumbered the natives,
higher pay for equal work has lured millions of Latin Americans in recent years. Legal
immigration increased after World War II to around 300,000 persons per year and
remained around that level until shortly after 1960.

1. With the Immigration Act of 1965 and other related changes, annual legal immigration
increased to about 400,000 and remained fairly stable until 1977. Between 1977 and
1990, legal immigration once again increased, averaging about 580,000 per year.

2. The Immigration Act of 1990, which took effect in fiscal year 1992, restructured the
immigration categories and increased significantly the number of immigrants who may
legally enter the United States. Legal immigration averaged about 837,000 persons per
year during the period 1992 through 2004.

3. The number of legal immigrants in 2004 is estimated to be 946,000 persons. For 2004,
net legal immigration (after considering emigration) is estimated to be about 710,000
persons. The total level of net immigration (legal and other, combined) under the
intermediate projection is assumed to be 1,075,000 persons in 2006, and 900,000 persons
in 2026 and for each year afterward.

4. The Border Protection, Antiterrorism, and Illegal Immigration Control Act of 2005
(Referred to Senate Committee after being Received from House) HR 4437 and the
Border Security Act S. 2394 brought to light that there are an estimated 11 million
undocumented aliens living in the United States but otherwise failed to address the issue
of documenting these illegal aliens.

B. On March 1, 2003, service and benefit functions of the U.S. Immigration and
Naturalization Service (INS) transitioned into the Department of Homeland Security
(DHS) as the U.S Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS).

1. Fifteen thousand (15,000) federal employees and contractors working in approximately
250 Headquarters and field offices around the world comprise the USCIS.

2. USCIS processes more than six million immigration benefits applications annually,
only 51% of which are approved. It is policy that the processing of an immigration
benefit application should be completed not later than 180 days after the initial filing of
the application, except that a petition for a nonimmigrant visa should be processed not
later than 30 days after the filing of the petition.

3. The USCIS is responsible for the administration of immigration and naturalization
adjudication functions of US Embassies and establishing immigration services policies
and priorities to fundamentally transform and improve the delivery of immigration and
citizenship services, while enhancing our nation's security.

                                                                                         282
4. These functions include: (1) Adjudication of immigrant visa petitions; (2)
Adjudication of naturalization petitions; (3) Adjudication of asylum and refugee
applications; (4) Adjudications performed at the service centers, and (5) All other
adjudications formerly performed by the INS.

5. To properly respect the status of the American citizen and immigration statute the
Director of USCIS should enjoy equal rights and equal pay as a Level I Executive in the
Pay Schedule set forth in 5USCIIID(53)II§5312, as argued in Emiliano Gonzalez,
Director of US Citizenship and Immigration Service v. Alberto Gonzalez, Attorney
General HA-11-4-06.

C. The number of illegal entrants into the United States through the Southwest border is
estimated to exceed one million people a year. There an estimated 12 million illegal
aliens residing in the USA. Hundreds of people die crossing our international border
with Mexico every year. Illegal narcotic smuggling along the Southwest border of the
United States is both dangerous and prolific. Globally there are estimated to be between
100 and 200 million people without proper documents, many were not given papers at
birth and others fail to document their international migration.

1. The legal obstacle that is obstructing legal migration into the United States is that
people cannot afford the $2,000 price of an immigration trial that is only 50% likely to
result in a positive determination. Because of the high price many people cross the
border illegally. Even taking into consideration the one in ten chance of being caught,
many people cross the border illegally, it is the most sure way to America.

2. It is unfair to charge people $2,000 for a trial, that takes a year and does not guarantee
an affirmative answer. The best solution seems to be to improve the worker visa system
so that people do not need to pay the filing fee until after they have come the United
States and have started working for the employer who got them their visa and paid the
$100 or $200 first installment when they arrived in the United States that would be paid
off in a year or two if the government did not just decide to collect taxes. Alternatively to
be competitive with Canada the filing fee can be reduced to $500.

3. The government should consider increasing the amount of funding for USCIS so that
the agency could reduce or abolish many of their fees and increase their capacity to
process applications for work and family visas as well as increasing the availability,
accessibility and affordability of English language for foreigner courses.

D. In 2005 DHS apprehended an estimated 1,241,089 foreign nationals. Ninety-two
percent were natives of Mexico.

1. There were 58,727 investigations initiated and 46,656 closed for immigration related
activities including crime, compliance enforcement, work site enforcement, identity and
benefit fraud, alien smuggling, and counter terrorism.



                                                                                         283
2. ICE detained approximately 235,247 foreign nationals for a minimum of 24 hours.

3. There were 202,842 foreign nationals formally removed from the United States. The
leading countries of origin of formal removals were Mexico (73 percent), Guatemala (4.1
percent) and Honduras (4.0 percent). More than 1,035,000 other foreign nationals
accepted an offer of voluntary departure.

E. All aliens subject to detention under 8USC(12)II-IV§1226(c) and §1231(a) whereby,
when an alien is ordered removed, the alien shall be removes from the United States
within a period of 90 days; All inadmissible or deportable aliens subject to proceedings
under §1228 or §1225(b)(2)(A) whereby any alien who at any time after admission is
convicted of two or more crimes involving moral turpitude, not arising out of a single
scheme of criminal misconduct, regardless of whether confined therefore and regardless
of whether the convictions were in a single trial, is deportable. Any alien who is
convicted of an aggravated felony at any time after admission is deportable. An alien
may also voluntarily leave at their own expense.

1. Fernandez-Vargaz v. Gonzalez No. 04-1376 (2006) held that Immigration law has for
some time provided that an order for removing an alien present unlawfully may be
reinstated if he leaves and unlawfully reenters. The Illegal Immigration Reform and
Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (IIRIRA) amended the Immigration and
Nationality Act (INA) to enlarge the class of illegal reentrants whose orders may be
reinstated and limit the possible relief from a removal order available to them.

2. Sanchez-Llamas v. Oregon No. 04-10566 (2006) reports that Article 36(1)(b) of the
Vienna Convention on Consular Relations provides that if a person detained by a foreign
country "so requests, the competent authorities of the receiving State shall, without delay,
inform the consular post of the sending State" of such detention, and "inform the
[detainee] of this right.

§43b Accession to the International Criminal Court

A.As of 1 January 2007, 104 countries are States Parties to the Rome Statute of the
International Criminal Court of 17 July 1998. Out of them 29 are African States, 12 are
Asian States, 16 are from Eastern Europe, 22 are from Latin America and the Caribbean,
and 25 are from Western Europe and other States. The United States of America is not
one of the states parties to the ICC pending the a treaty made under 22USC(81)§7401

1.The lame excuse given at §7421 is that in addition to exposing members of the Armed
Forces of the United States to the risk of international criminal prosecution, the Rome
Statute creates a risk that the President and other senior elected and appointed officials of
the United States Government may be prosecuted by the International Criminal Court.

2. There are several good reasons, that are not elaborated upon, for not acceding to the
ICC. First, the United States is the most penal nation in the world and idolizing
prosecution is not trusted. Second, the office of prosecutor, pronounced Satan in

                                                                                         284
Hebrew, is offensive to a nation that did not kill all their Jews, and respects the statehood
of the Attorney General. Third, the ICC is neither competent nor independent because it
specializes in the prosecution of war crimes committed by heads of state and military
officers and totally lacks any judicial discipline or indeed fulfills any role not performed
by the Security Council. Fourth, the ICC has abetted the International Criminal Tribunal
for the Former Yugoslavia to violently overthrow the International Court of Justice, kill
prisoners Babic (innocent) and Milosevic, assassinate the Director-General of the World
Health Organization, seize the United Nations and wreck the global economy and public
health. Fifth, the ICC must be evicted from the H(Pl)ague, High Commission on Human
Rights, civil society and made inferior to the International Court of Justice not the
Secretary-General. Sixth, the devastation of the international economy was pre-ordained
by the infringement of the trademark International Criminal Court (ICC) on the
International Chamber of Commerce, that was benign until they launched their coup.

3. On the other hand, by not signing the Rome Statute, the United States appears like a
national government intent upon committing international crimes because they are at war
and their own judiciary is too corrupt punish their nation‟s war criminals. In the language
used to explain their failure to accede to the Rome Statute the United States completely
fails to discipline their armed forces, government agents and foreign policy that in this
light appear to be extremely criminal.

B. During its first resumed session held in New York from 3 to 7 February 2003, the
Assembly of States Parties elected the eighteen judges of the Court for a term of office of
three, six, and nine years. The judges constitute a forum of international experts that
represents the world's principal legal systems.

1. The Appeals Division is composed of the President and four other judges, the Trial
Division of the Second Vice President and five other judges, and the Pre-Trial Divisions
of the First Vice President and six other judges.

2. The primary questions for the ICC are, how do international tribunals operating during
war to secure justice affect the work of peacemakers? Do international tribunals help
bring parties to the peace table, or do they hinder the prospects for peace? Does the ICC
engage in subversive activity with local prosecutors and law enforcement? Is there any
liberty to be learned in the judgments of the ICC? Should the United States of America
accede to the Rome Statute?

3. Mr F S Nariman, President of the Bar Association of India, pointed out that: „.the spirit
of the Rome Statute is not so much in the actual establishment of the Court and the filling
of its dockets with cases to be tried before it; its spirit lies rather in the encouragement it
gives to national governments worldwide to put up for trial in their own national courts
persons accused of genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity. The Rome Statute
has established what can be described as a “culture of legality”: its true success will only
come when aversion to impunity gets internalized by the democratic legal systems of
each ratifying nation State.‟



                                                                                           285
C. The International Bar Association notes that the work of the International Criminal
Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) was „frequently politicized and used for
propaganda purposes by its opponents‟, and seen as „remote and disconnected from the
population‟. The advent of the ICC has increased the politicization of the tribunals to the
point of willful killing, the murdering of prisoners without trial and assassination.

1. The first example of prosecutorial indiscretion resulting in the death of human beings,
is that of the Ugandan Government who referred the situation of northern Uganda to the
ICC on 16 December 2003. This referral was announced by the Prosecutor, Luis Moreno
Ocampo, in a joint press conference with President Museveni in London on 29 January
2004 and the Prosecutor began investigations in July 2004. On 8 July 2005, arrest
warrants were issued, under seal, against five LRA leaders: J Kony, V Otti, R Lukwiya,
O Odhiambo and D Ongwen. D Ongwen was reported to have been killed on 2 October
2005, and none of the others have yet been detained. Our biggest fear is that arrest
warrants will be an excuse for military forces to go in all guns blazing and these children
will be killed or injured in a hail of bullets.‟ ICC-02/04-01/05

2. At 18:30 hours on Sunday 5 March 2006 Mr. Milan Babic, a detained witness, was
found dead in his cell at the United Nations Detention Unit in Scheveningen. The
Detention Unit Medical Officer confirmed Milan Babic‟s death shortly after his body was
found, hanged. The Dutch authorities were called immediately who, confirmed that the
cause of death was suicide. Although Mr. Babic initially participated in the Tribunal as a
witness who needed protection he was betrayed and indicted on 17 November 2003. On
26 November 2003 Mr. Milan Babic surrendered to the Tribunal HA-5-3-06.

3. Six days later, on Saturday morning, 11 March 2006, a prison guard found the former
Yugoslav leader, Mr. Slobodan Milosevic, lifeless in bed. The cause of death was
cardiac arrest after years of heart complications exacerbated by the denial of medical care
by Judge Ronbinson. It was an abrupt end to his four-year U.N. war crimes tribunal for
orchestrating a decade of conflict that ended with 250,000 dead and the Yugoslav
federation torn asunder. In April 2001 Mr. Slobodan Milosevic was arrested. He was
extradited to the Hague that June. The trial began in February 2002. Strangely, both his
mother and father are reported to have died of suicide, at different times HA-11-3-06.

4. On Monday May 22, 2006 at 7:43 pm after Mr. Lee Jong-wook, Director-General of
the World Health Organization died in Geneva before the annual World Health Assembly
meeting 22-27 May while undergoing emergency surgery for a blood clot, subdural
hematoma, in his brain. Lee, a native of South Korea, was 61 and received a medical
doctor's degree from SNU and a master's degree in public health from the University of
Hawaii. He worked for 19 years at the agency before becoming elected as the head of the
U.N.'s health agency in May 2003. His term was to last five years HA-31-3-06.

Art. 4 Human Rights

§44 Human Rights Council



                                                                                        286
A. On 15 March 2006, the United Nations 60th General Assembly passed a historic
resolution approving the creation of the new UN Human Rights Council.

1. The Council will serve as the main United Nations forum for dialogue and cooperation
on human rights. Its focus will be to help Member States meet their human rights
obligations through dialogue, capacity building and technical assistance.

2. The Council will also make recommendations to the General Assembly for further
development of international law in the field of human rights.

3. The first election of members of the Human Rights Council by the General Assembly
is expected to take place on 9 May 2006, followed by the first meeting of the Council to
be convened on 19 June 2006.

4. The purpose of this Council is to sustain Human Rights in a permanent forum to hear
petitions all year rather than at special times of the year. UN Chronicle: Human Rights
Council HA-30-3-06.

B. The Human Rights Council, is led by the High Commissioner of Human Rights. The
overarching Council on Human Rights is composed of 53 States, meets each year in
regular session in March/April for six weeks in Geneva. Over 3,000 delegates from
member and observer States and from non-governmental organizations participate. There
are 7 Committees to the Human Rights Council (HRC).

1. The Council can also meet exceptionally between its regular sessions in special
session, provided that a majority of States members of the Commission so agree, mindful
of the need for the Commission on Human Rights to deal with urgent and acute human
rights situations in the most expeditious way.

2. During its regular annual session, the Council adopts about a hundred resolutions,
decisions and Chairperson's statements on matters of relevance to individuals in all
regions and circumstances. It is assisted in this work by the Sub-Commission on the
Promotion and Protection of Human Rights, a number of working groups and a network
of individual experts, representatives and rapporteurs mandated to report to it on specific
issues.

C. The International Bill of Rights is found in ratification of the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights of December 10, 1948, the International Covenant on Economic, Social
and Cultural Rights of 3 January 1976 and the International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights of 23 March 1976.

1. Council on Human Rights procedures and mechanisms are mandated to examine,
monitor and publicly report either on human rights situations in specific countries or
territories (known as country mechanisms or mandates) or on major phenomena of
human rights violations worldwide (known as thematic mechanisms or mandates).


                                                                                         287
2. These procedures and mechanisms are collectively referred to as the Special
Procedures of the Commission on Human Rights and published as the Rules of Procedure
of the Functional Commissions of the Economic and Social Council of 12 August 1947.

D. The US must ratify the following Optional Protocols to extend the protection of
human rights to all US citizens.

1. Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil an Political Rights of 23
March 1976 relating to the Human Rights Committee

2. Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
aiming at the abolition of the death penalty of 15 December 1989

3. Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of all Discrimination against
Women of 22 December 2000

4. Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or
Degrading Treatment or Punishment of 4 February 2003

§44A High Commissioner of Human Rights

A. The High Commissioner for Human Rights has the rank of Under Secretary-General
of the United Nations and heads the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights
(OHCHR).

B. The post of High Commissioner was established in December 1993 by a General
Assembly resolution, in accordance with a recommendation contained in the Vienna
Declaration and Programme of Action 25 June 1993.

1. The resolution specifies that the High Commissioner is the principal United Nations
official responsible for United Nations human rights activities, and that the High
Commissioner performs his/her duties under the direction and authority of the Secretary-
General.

2. The resolution gives the High Commissioner the broad mandate to promote and protect
all human rights: civil, political, economic, social and cultural.

§44B Human Rights Committee

A. The Human Rights Committee (HRC) was established in Part IV of the International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights of 23 March 1976 and its first Optional Protocol
of 23 March 1976 allowing individuals to submit complaints to the Human Rights
Committee The Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights, aiming at the abolition of the death penalty, was adopted on 15
December 1989 and entered into force on 11 July 1991.


                                                                                        288
B. The Human Rights Committee was established to monitor the implementation of the
Covenant and the Protocols to the Covenant in the territory of States parties. It is
composed of 18 independent experts who are persons of high moral character and
recognized competence in the field of human rights. The Committee convenes three times
a year for sessions of three weeks' duration, normally in March at United Nations
headquarters in New York and in July and November at the United Nations Office in
Geneva.

C. Each session of the Committee is preceded by two simultaneous pre-session working
groups established under rules 62 and 89 of its Rules of Procedure of 26 July 1989. The
working group established under rule 89 is entrusted with the task of making
recommendations to the Committee regarding communications received under the
Optional Protocol.

§44C Committee on Migrant Workers

A. The Committee on Migrant Workers and Members of their Families (CMW) was
established in Part VII of the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of
All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families 18 December 1990 by its State
parties. It is the newest treaty body which held its first session in March 2004.

B. All States parties are obliged to submit regular reports to the Committee on how the
rights are being implemented. States must report initially one year after acceding to the
Convention and then every five years. The 14 expert Committee will examine each report
and address its concerns and recommendations to the State party in the form of
“concluding observations”. The Committee meets in Geneva and normally holds one
session per year.

§44D Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights

A. The Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR), unlike the other
committees, was not established by its corresponding instrument - the International
Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights of 3 January 1976. Rather, the
Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) created the Committee, following the less than
ideal performance of two previous bodies entrusted with monitoring the Covenant.

B. The Committee was established in 1985, met for the first time in 1987 and has to date
held 14 sessions. Meeting initially on an annual basis, the Committee currently convenes
twice a year, holding two three-week sessions, generally in May and
November/December. It holds all its meetings at the United Nations Office at Geneva.

C. The Committee is comprised of 18 members who are experts with recognized
competence in the field of human rights. Members of the Committee are independent and
serve in their personal capacity, not as representatives of Governments. At present, the
Committee is made up of 13 men and five women. The Committee itself selects its


                                                                                       289
chairperson, three vice-chairpersons and rapporteur. Members of the Committee are
elected by ECOSOC for four year terms, and are eligible for re-election if re-nominated.

§44E Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women

A. The Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), was
established in Part V of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of
Discrimination against Women 3 September 1981.

B. The Committee's mandate is very specific: it watches over the progress for women
made in those countries that are the States parties. A country becomes a State party by
ratifying or acceding to the Convention and thereby accepting a legal obligation to
counteract discrimination against women. This body supplements the Commission on the
Status of Women (CSW) that was established in 1946 as a functional commission of
ECOSOC.

C. An expert body established in 1982, is composed of 23 experts on women's issues
from around the world.

1. Meetings are held twice annually, when the Committee reviews national reports
submitted by the States parties within one year of ratification or accession, and thereafter
every four years.

2. The Committee monitors the implementation of national measures to fulfill this
obligation.

3. An Optional Protocol Entered into Force 22 December 2000 granting the Committee
the authority to accept petitions from individuals.

§44F Committee on the Rights of the Child

A. The Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC) was established in Part II of the
Convention on the Rights of the Child of 2 September 1990

B. The CRC is composed of 18 independent experts who are persons of high moral
character and recognized competence in the field of human rights.

1. Members are elected for a term of four years by States parties in accordance with
article 43 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child.

2. Members serve in their personal capacity and may be re-elected if nominated.

§44G Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination

A. The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD) was established
in Part II of the International Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial

                                                                                         290
Discrimination of 4 January 1969

B. Since CERD was established many Non-Self-governing Territories, including some
administered by States under United Nations trusteeship agreements, have become
independent. Nevertheless, there are still 18 such Territories.

C. CERD is composed of 9 members as determined at the First Meeting of States Parties
to the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination
held in 1969.

§44H Committee against Torture

A. The Committee against Torture (CaT) was established pursuant to article 17 of the
Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or
Punishment of 26 June 1987 to monitor its implementation.

B. The 10-member Committee began to function on 1 January 1988, six months after the
entry into force of the Convention, adopted on 10 December 1984. An Optional Protocol
was made available for ratification 4 February 2003.

Art. 5 International Courts

§45 International Bar Association

A. Inspired by the vision of the United Nations (UN) and with the aim of supporting the
establishment of law and administration of justice worldwide; representatives of 34
national bar associations gathered in New York on 17 February 1947 to create the
International Bar Association (IBA).

1. In its role as a dual membership organisation, comprising 30,000 individual lawyers
and over 195 Bar Associations and Law Societies, the International Bar Association
(IBA) influences the development of international law reform and shapes the future of the
legal profession. Its Member Organisations cover all continents of the World.

B. IBA membership grew steadily and in 1970 was accelerated by the admission of
individual lawyers to the Association and the formation of the Section on Business Law.

1.In 1974 the Section on Legal Practice was formed and in 1982 a third Section, the
Section on Energy and Natural Resources Law was created.

2. The Standing Committee on Human Rights and the Just Rule of Law were formed in
the 1980s.

3. In 1992 an Action Plan was adopted to establish a Trial Observer Corps and investigate
cases where judges and lawyers or the independence of Bar Associations was threatened.


                                                                                       291
4. In 1995, the formation of the Human Rights Institute expanded this work and gave the
opportunity for member organisations and individual members to actively contribute.

C. Grouped into two Divisions –

1. the Legal Practice Division and

2. the Public and Professional Interest Division – the Association covers all practice areas
and professional interests. It provides members with access to leading experts and up-to-
date information as well as top-level professional development and network-building
opportunities through high quality publications and world-class conferences.

D. The IBA‟s Bar Issues Commission provides its Member Organisations with
substantive and social programmes at and between meetings and the IBA's Human Rights
Institute works across the Association, helping to promote, protect and enforce human
rights under a just rule of law, and to preserve the independence of the judiciary and the
legal profession worldwide.

§45A International Court of Arbitration

1. Since its foundation in 1923 by the International Chamber of Commerce the
International Court of Arbitration has settled over 10,000 cases from more than 170
countries and territories in accordance with the Rules of Arbitration. The purpose of the
International Court of Arbitration is to improve the settlement of international Alternative
Dispute Resolution and provide litigants with business disputes of an international
character an alternative to the higher cost of settling in national courts by appointing one
of 144 experts to arbitrate and settle the dispute while being monitored by the
International Court of Arbitration.

2. The American Arbitration Association (AAA) resolves 14,500 labor-management
disputes annually.

§45B International Court of Justice

A. The International Court of Justice or World Court was established by the UN General
Assembly in Chapter XIV of the 1945 Charter of the United Nations to settle disputes
between states in Peace Palace at the Hague in the Netherlands to take over the
operations of the Permanent Court of Justice.

1. The World Court is the principle judicial organ of the United Nations. The World
Court operates under the Statute of the Court and the Rules of Court.

2. The Court dockets contentious cases between nations regarding the legality of the use
of force, issues presented by the General Assembly, issues Advisory Opinions for
Specialized Agencies Authorized to Request Advisory Opinions and settles international
disputes regarding compensation.

                                                                                        292
3. Post World War II interpretations of international law by the court are founded in the
1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights, the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of
Genocide and the 1949 Geneva Convention.

4. The Court keeps records of their decisions since its creation in 1947 and for the
Permanent Court of Justice that preceded it at Peace Palace (1922-1946).

B. The first published decision of the Court assisted the General Assembly to establish
Condition for Admission of a State to Membership by reviewing Article 4, paragraph 1,
of the Charter enumerating that member nations be (1) a State; (2) peace-loving; (3) must
accept the obligations of the Charter; (4) must be able to carry out these obligations; (5)
must be willing to do so.

1. The most recent published decision of the Court as it relates to the USA is Mexico v.
United States of America where the court ordered the United States to grant clemency to
those Mexican nationals scheduled to die and not to execute the 54 Mexican nationals
sentenced to die in the United States. The argument is that (1) the prisoners have not
been given the protection of the Mexican Consulate required by the Vienna Convention
on Consular Relations and (2) the Mexican government, whose law prohibits the death
penalty, furthermore demands that no Mexican nationals be executed by the USA.

C. The United States of America has had more decisions (convictions) published on the
ICJ web site than other nation,

1. Avena and other Mexican Nationals (Mexico v. United States of America) (2003-
2004)
2. Legality of Use of Force (Yugoslavia v. United States of America) (1999),
3. LaGrand (Germany v. United States of America) (1999-2001)
4. Vienna Convention on Consular Relations (Paraguay v. United States of America)
(1998)
5. Oil Platforms (Islamic Republic of Iran v. United States of America) (1992-2003)
6. Questions of Interpretation and Application of the 1971 Montreal Convention arising
from the Aerial Incident at Lockerbie (Libyan Arab Jamahiriya v. United States of
America) (1992-2003)
7. Aerial Incident of 3 July 1988 (Islamic Republic of Iran v. United States of America)
(1989-1996)
8. Electronica Sicula S.p.A. (ELSI) (United States of America v. Italy) (1987-1989)
9. Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United
States of America) (1984-1991)
10. Delimitation of the Maritime Boundary in the Gulf of Maine Area (Canada/United
States of America) (1981-1984)
11. United States Diplomatic and Consular Staff in Tehran (United States v. Iran) (1979-
1981)
12. Aerial Incident of 7 November 1954 (United States v. USSR) (1959)

                                                                                       293
13. Aerial Incident of 4 September 1954 (United States v. USSR) (1958)
14. Aerial Incident of 27 July 1955 (United States v. Bulgaria) (1957-1960)
15. Interhandel (Switzerland v. United States) (1957-1959)

D. On 12 January 2005 Information Officer Boris Heim wrote, the Court's activity is
limited to rendering judgments in legal disputes between States submitted to it by the
States themselves and giving advisory opinions when it is so requested by UN organs or
specialized agencies of the UN system under Article 34 of the Statute and Rules.

1. For a successful claim treaty obligations may be levied against States under Art. 36 of
the Statute of the Court for service upon the Secretary-General.

§45C International Criminal Court

A. International criminal courts and tribunals are a distinctive development of the 1990s.
At the start of that decade, no international criminal courts existed. Today, three
independent international bodies adjudicate international criminal law: the International
Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY), established in 1993; the
International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR), established in 1994; and the
International Criminal Court (ICC), created by a treaty concluded in 1998. With the
exception of the ICC, these bodies were intended at their creation to have limited life
spans.

1. In Security Council Resolution 1534 (2004) the International Criminal Tribunal for the
former Yugoslavia and International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda recalls that resolution
1503 (2003) cites the Completion Strategy (S/2002/678) called on the International
Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) and the International Criminal
Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) to take all possible measures to complete investigations by
the end of 2004, to complete all trial activities at first instance by the end of 2008, and to
complete all work in 2010. East Timor Special Panels and Serious Crimes Unit closed in
May 2005. It should be a simple matter to transfer responsibility of the detainees to
nations that grant them asylum and their voluminous records to the United Nations
Archives and Records Management Section.

2. As former ICTY prosecutor Louise Arbour, later High Commissioner of Human
Rights, wrote, "If we exploit the full potential of criminal trials for war crimes, we should
do so in part to punish, in part to deter, but, most importantly, to try to understand."

B. The International Criminal Court is the most recent development in the international
justice system and will try crimes against humanity, genocide, war crimes and acts of
aggression in accordance with the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.

1. There are 18 judges from different states, nominated by their state and elected by 2/3
vote of the General Assembly to serve one 9 year, non-renewable term.




                                                                                          294
2. The International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia was founded by UN
Security Council Resolution 827 in 1993 to prosecute the grave breaches in international
humanitarian law that began in 1991 and now has yearly budget of $500 million. The
Tribunal has conceded to close their doors.

3. The International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda was created by UN Security Council
Resolution 955 in 1994 to prosecute those responsible for genocide and breaches in
international law, it has a current yearly budget of $177,739,400.

Art. 6 Regional Courts

§46 European Court of Justice

The European Court of Justice, or European Court of Human Rights as it was formerly
called, is the oldest and busiest continental court in the world. The Court operates in
conjunction with the laws of the Council of Europe.

1. The Court was founded in 1959 in accordance with the ratification of the Convention
for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms Articles 40-56 by
European nations in 1953 to uphold the rights and freedoms enumerated in Articles 2-18
of the Convention.

2. The bench currently accommodates 41 judges, 1 for each member nation, who are
elected to serve 6 year terms by the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe
Admission is reserved to the High Contracting Parties and the Commission on Human
Rights to bring cases before the court in accordance with Article 44.

3. The admission of more nations to the European Union has caused the number of
applications registered annually with the Commission to increase from 404 in 1981 to
2,037 in 1993 to 4,750 in 1997.

4. By 1997 the number of unregistered or provisional files opened each year in the
Commission had risen to over 12,000. The European Court is unique in that the
judgment is executed by the Council of Ministers.

§45 Inter-American Court of Human Rights

A. The Inter-American Court of Human Rights was founded in 1978 as an autonomous
judicial seat located in San Jose, Costa Rica composed of 7 judges elected for 6 year
terms by the General Assembly of the Organization of American States in accordance
with Article 52 of the American Convention on Human Rights, the Statute of the Inter-
American Court of Human Rights and the Rules of Procedure of the Inter-American
Court of Human Rights. All cases are presented by member nations and the guests of the
Inter-American Commission on Human Rights.




                                                                                       295
B. In Treaties Subject to the Consultative Jurisdiction of the Court the Court determined
in 1982 that Art. 64 of the American Convention on Human Rights grants the Court an
unlimited advisory jurisdiction rather than a limited venue for organizations to request
such an opinion from the court as offered by the International Court of Justice. The
model procedure is for the Court to issue a request to parties to submit their advisory
opinions so that the court can come to a well-researched opinion regarding any treaty in
the world.

§46 African Court of Human and Peoples’ Rights

A. Article 18 of the Constitutive Act of the African Union adopted 11 July 2000 calls for
a Court of Justice to build peaceful institutions and try violations of human rights that
occur in African Republics. The Protocol of the Court of Justice of the African Union
was signed on 11 July 2003 however remains to be ratified.

B. To complicate matters the Protocol to the African Charter on Human and People‟s
Rights on the Establishment of an African Court on Human and People‟s Rights was
ratified on 15 January 2004 under the African Charter on Human and Peoples‟ Rights
adopted 27 June 1981 to assist the African Commission on Human and Peoples‟ Rights.

Art. 7 US Courts

§47 Supreme Court of the United States

A. The US Supreme Court is the highest court in the US. The Court is framed by Article
III §1 of the US Constitution, Title 28 US Code (1)1 and the Rules of the Supreme Court.

1. In co-operation with the Judiciary Committee of the US Congress, the US Supreme
Court amends the Federal Rules of Evidence, the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure,
and the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

B. The chief justice and eight associate justices are appointed by the president of the
United States, for a life term, with the consent of 2/3 of the Senate in accordance with
Article II §2 of the U.S. Constitution.

1. When the time comes for a justice, particularly chief justice, to retire, associate justices
are appointed to learn the procedures of the high court before a vacancy must be filled.

2. Decisions of the Court since 1893 are kept on public record.

C. Cases are filed in accordance with the Rules of Practice. Writ of certiorari are granted
by the grace of the Supreme Court when a federal question arises in the court of appeals
[or state supreme court] in accordance with III Rule 10.




                                                                                           296
1. Original actions may be heard in all cases affecting ambassadors, other public
ministers and consuls, and those in which a state shall be party in accordance with IV
Rule 17.

2. Extraordinary writs are also sparingly reviewed in accordance with IV Rule 20.

D. The 2000 year end report shows the total number of cases filed in the Supreme Court
in 1999 to be 7,377. 5,282 were in forma pauperis. 2,092 paid the $300 filing fee, only
83 cases were argued and 79 were disposed of in 74-signed opinions.

1. The total number of cases filed in the Supreme Court increased from 7,496 filings in
the 2004 Term to 8,521 filings in the 2005 Term–an increase of 13.7%.

2. The number of cases filed in the Court„s in forma pauperis docket increased from
5,755 filings in the 2004 Term to 6,846 filings in the 2005 Term–a 19% increase. The
number of cases filed in the Court„s paid docket decreased from 1,741 filings in the 2004
Term to 1,671 filings in the 2005 Term–a 4% decline.

3. During the 2005 Term, 87 cases were argued and 82 were disposed of in 69 signed
opinions, compared to 87 cases argued and 85 disposed of in 74 signed opinions in the
2004 Term.

E. In the Amistad 40 US 518 (1841) the Court recognized that the government of the
United States is based on the principles promulgated in the Declaration of Independence,
by the Congress of 1776; 'that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their
Creator with certain inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of
happiness; and that to secure these rights, governments are instituted.' Recollecting that
there is among nations, as among men, a golden rule; let us do to them, as we wish them
to do to us. Therefore be declared free and dismissed from the custody of the court.

1. The landmark decision of the times is Blakely v. Washington No. 02-1632 of June 24,
2004 that eliminated sentencing guidelines schemes and, 20 years of sentencing reform.
Sentences imposed under such guidelines in cases currently pending on direct appeal, or
in cold habeas petitions, are in jeopardy.

2. In both legislative and litigate practice Criminal sentences must be adjusted downward
rather upward, mandatory minimum schemes eliminated and acquittals the norm for most
crimes where there are significant mitigating factors.

§48 American Bar Association

A. The American Bar Association (ABA) was founded on August 21, 1878; in Saratoga
Springs, New York, by 100 lawyers from 21 states. In 2005 membership to the ABA
reached more than 400,000 including more than 350,000 lawyer members. The ABA has
long served a dual role as advocate for the profession and for the public. With the



                                                                                          297
growing complexity of society and our legal system, the ABA's public role has gained
both emphasis and breadth. The 11 goals of the association are:

1. to promote improvement in the American system of justice
2. to promote meaningful access to legal representation and the American system of
justice for all persons regardless of their economic or social condition
3. to provide ongoing leadership in improving the law to serve the changing needs of
society
4. to increase public understanding of and respect for the law, the legal process and the
role of the legal profession
5. to achieve the highest standards of professionalism, competence and ethical conduct
6. to serve as the national representative of the legal profession
7. to provide benefits, programs and services which promote professional growth and
enhance the quality of life of the members
8. to advance the rule of law in the world
9. to promote full and equal participation in the legal profession by minorities, women,
and persons with disabilities
10. to preserve and enhance the ideals of the legal profession as a common calling and its
dedication to public service
11. to preserve the independence of the legal profession and the judiciary as fundamental
to a free society.

B. In 2004 the Bureau of Labor Statistics estimates that there are 2,362,860 people with a
legal occupation in the United States averaging a mean annual salary of $66,780.
1,504,540 people were law enforcement officers making an average of $54,455 a year.
464,250 of these people are lawyers who make an average of $90,360 per year. 27,250
are Administrative Law Judges, Adjudicators and Hearing Officers who make an average
of $51,580 per year. 6,260 are Arbitrators, Mediators and Conciliators making an
average of $70,310 per year. 23,150 are Judges, Magistrates and prosecutors who make
an average of $67,150 per year. 175,870 are paralegals and legal assistants making an
average of $36,550 per year. 17,460 are Court Reporters making an average of $38,040.
26,060 are law clerks making an average of $29,280 per year. 38,730 are Title
Examiners, Abstractors and Searchers making an average of $30,880.

§49 Federal Judiciary

A. The Federal Judiciary was established by Article 3 of the U.S. Constitution and all
federal judges are appointed by the US President and the Senate Judiciary Committee
upon the recommendation of the US Department of Justice.

1. There are a total of 875 authorized federal judgeships. 9 with the Supreme Court, 179
with the Circuit Courts of Appeals, 678 with the District Courts and 9 with the Court of
International Trade. As of June 30, 2007 there were 51 vacancies. 13 on the Courts of
Appeal and 38 in the District Court.




                                                                                         298
B. By statute, federal district judges receive the same salaries as members of Congress,
$165,200 a year in 2005. Judges on the federal appeals courts received $175,100;
associate justices of the Supreme Court, $203,000; and the chief justice $212,100.

1. Their last substantial pay raise was a 25 percent increase provided by a 1989 law, the
Ethics Reform Act, Pub. L. No. 101-94, 103 Stat. 1716 (1989), under which judges lost
the right to earn most types of outside income in return for the raise and the promise of
regular cost-of-living increases.

2. In 1969, federal district judges earned slightly more than law school deans, $40,000
compared to $33,000, and substantially more than the $28,000 earned by senior law
professors, the situation by 2002 was completely reversed. In that year, the judges were
earning $150,000, compared to $250,000 for the professors and $325,000 for the deans.

3. In 2000 the Federal Judiciary received $2.374 billion, only 0.23% of the $2.025 trillion
federal budget.

4. There were 35 judicial confirmations in fiscal year 2000 and 66 vacancies listed in the
2000 year-end report.

C. In fiscal year 2000 there were 54,697 filings in the 12 regional courts of appeals. In the
district courts there were 259,517 civil cases and 62,745 criminal cases filed, totaling
83,963 criminal defendants. Fiscal Year 2000 numbers are the highest since 1933, when
the Prohibition Amendment was repealed. In 2006 there were an estimated 1.5 million
cases filed with the Federal Judiciary. 8,521 cases were filed by the Supreme Court. The
Circuit Courts of Appeals received 66,618 filing. 326,401 cases were filed with the
District Courts. 1,112,542 cases were filed with Bankruptcy Court.

§49A Circuit Court of Appeal

A. The United States Federal Judiciary is constituted into 12 regional and a Federal
circuit courts of appeals in accordance with Title 28 of the US Code, Chapter 3 §41-49.
The Circuit Court hears appeals of right, by permission and by leave of the Court
regarding the decisions of bankruptcy and district courts in their circuit.

B. In 2002 the Federal Circuit Courts of Appeal filed 57,555 cases- 18,272 from
prisoners, 11,569 criminal cases, 5,789 administrative cases, and 21,925 civil cases –
only 27,758 were terminated, leaving 40,965 cases pending before the Circuit Courts of
Appeals. The average circuit court judge wrote 165 decisions in 2002.

1. The number of appeals filed in the regional courts of appeals in fiscal year 2006
declined by 3% from the record level set in fiscal year 2005. The courts of appeals
received 66,618 filings. All categories of appeals, except original proceedings, declined.
Before 2006, the number of appellate filings had declined only twice since 1959.




                                                                                         299
C. The past year„s decline stemmed from decreases in criminal appeals and federal
prisoner petitions following the filing deadline for cases affected by the Supreme Court„s
decision in United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005), as well as a reduction in
appeals from administrative agency decisions involving the Board of Immigration
Appeals (BIA).

1. Nationwide, the number of criminal appeals dropped by 5% to 15,246 filings, after
rising by 28% in 2005 in response to the Booker decision. Despite that decline, the
number of criminal appeals in 2006 surpassed by more than 25% the number of filings in
the years before the Court„s decision in Blakely v. Washington, 542 U.S. 296 (2004).

2. The number of administrative agency appeals fell by 4% to 13,102 because of a
reduction in the number of cases that the BIA completed in 2005. Since 2002, the number
of BIA appeals has soared by 168%.

3. The number of civil appeals declined by 3% to 31,991 as the statute of limitations
expired for the filing of Booker-related habeas corpus petitions. The number of prisoner
petitions filed by state prisoners rose by 3% to 11,129 filings.

4. The number of original proceedings climbed by 9% to 5,458 filings, as prisoners
continued to file second or successive motions seeking permission to file habeas corpus
petitions. The courts of appeals continue to receive petitions from the backlog of state
prisoners affected by the Blakely decision, who must exhaust their state court remedies
before seeking relief in federal court.

6. Despite the year„s overall decline, the total number of appeals increased by 16%, or
9,063 filings, from 2002 to 2006.

§49B District Court

A. The United States district courts are the trial courts of the federal court system and are
constituted in accordance with chapter 5 § 81-144. Within limits set by Congress and the
Constitution, the district courts have jurisdiction to hear nearly all categories of federal
cases, including both civil and criminal matters.

1. There are 94 federal judicial districts, including at least one district in each state, the
District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, three territories of the United States -- the Virgin
Islands, Guam, and the Northern Mariana Islands.

2. In 2002 there were 344,546 cases filed in the US District Courts, 323,629 cases were
terminated and 312,971 cases pending. The average district judge hears 518 cases every
year- 413 civil, 84 criminal and 21 supervised release hearings.

B. Over the past five years, the number of civil cases filed in the United States district
courts has fallen by 6%, or 15,300 cases. The decline has occurred primarily in cases
involving civil rights, personal injury, and Social Security claims.

                                                                                             300
1. Nevertheless, the number of civil cases filed in 2006 increased by 2% to a total of
259,541 cases. That growth occurred primarily because of a sharp jump in asbestos-
related diversity cases in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.

2. Excluding those filings, civil cases declined by 4% from 2005 to 2006, as federal
question cases involving prisoner petitions and civil rights dropped significantly.

3. The national median time from filing of a civil case to its disposition was 8.3 months,
which reflected a decline from the 9.5-month median period in 2005.

4. Cases in which the United States was a plaintiff or defendant declined by 15% to
44,294 cases, while those in which the United States was a defendant fell by 17%. The
latter number declined because federal prisoner petitions decreased by 33% (down by
5,978 cases) as filings returned to levels consistent with the number of petitions filed
before the Supreme Court„s decision in Booker.

C. The number of criminal cases filed in 2006 decreased by 4% to 66,860 cases and
88,216 defendants. The decline stemmed from shifts in priorities of the United States
Department of Justice, which directed more of its resources toward combating terrorism.
The number of criminal cases filed in 2006 is similar to the number of cases filed in
2002, when criminal case filings jumped by 7% following the terrorist attacks on
September 11, 2001.

1. Although the number of criminal case filings declined in 2006, the median time for
case disposition for defendants climbed from 6.8 months in 2005 to 7.1 months in 2006.
The median time period, which was 27 days longer than in 2004, reflected an increase in
the time that courts needed to process post-Booker cases.

D. The number of drug-related criminal cases decreased by 4% to 17,429 filings. The
number of defendants charged with drug crimes fell by 6% to 30,567 individuals.

1. The number of immigration-related criminal cases, which rose to record levels in 2005,
declined by 5% to 16,353 cases. The number of defendants charged in those cases
decreased by 4% to 17,651 individuals. Most of the decline in immigration-related
criminal cases is attributable to a decline in cases charging offenses involving improper
first-time entry.

2. Sex-related criminal cases climbed by 6% to 1,885 filings, and the number of
defendants charged in those cases increased by 8% to 1,975 individuals.

3. Criminal cases involving firearms and explosives cases declined by 6% to 8,678
filings, and the number of defendants charged in those cases dropped 5% to 9,800
individuals.




                                                                                         301
4. For the second consecutive year, the number of criminal cases declined. The number of
cases had risen in nine of the previous ten years.

§49C Bankruptcy Court

A. Federal courts have exclusive jurisdiction over bankruptcy cases as constituted by
chapter 6 § 151-158. Bankruptcy cases cannot be filed in state court. Each of the 94
federal judicial districts handles bankruptcy matters in accordance with Title 11.

1. The primary purposes of the law of bankruptcy are: (1) to give an honest debtor a
"fresh start" in life by relieving the debtor of specific debts by prohibiting further
collection actions, and (2) to repay creditors in an orderly manner to the extent that the
debtor has property available for payment.

B. In 2002 the number of bankruptcy proceedings was 1.5 million. The number of filings
in the United States bankruptcy courts fell from 1,782,643 cases in 2005 to 1,112,542
cases in 2006. The past year„s number, which reflects the lowest number of bankruptcy
cases filed since 1996, was 38% below the record number in 2005, when filings soared as
debtors rushed to file before the October 17, 2005, implementation date of the
Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005.

1. The 2005 surge in filings accelerated until the implementation date, and more than half
of the total 2006 filings occurred in the first month of the fiscal year. Non-business filings
dropped by 38%, and business petitions fell by 20%.

2. Chapter 7 and chapter 13 filings declined by 38% and 36%, respectively, and chapter
11 filings dropped by 10%. Chapter 12 filings rose by 3%, reflecting 12 more filings than
the previous year.

§49D US Sentencing Commission

A. Under 28 USC§991-998 there is established as an independent commission in the
judicial branch of the United States a United States Sentencing Commission which shall
consist of seven voting members and one nonvoting member. The President, after
consultation with representatives of judges, prosecuting attorneys, defense attorneys, law
enforcement officials, senior citizens, victims of crime, and others interested in the
criminal justice process, shall appoint the voting members of the Commission, by and
with the advice and consent of the Senate.

B. The purposes of the United States Sentencing Commission are to establish sentencing
policies and practices for the Federal criminal justice system that -

1. assure the meeting of the purposes of sentencing as set forth in 18USC§3553(a)(2);

2. provide certainty and fairness in meeting the purposes of sentencing, avoiding
unwarranted sentencing disparities among defendants with similar records who have been

                                                                                          302
found guilty of similar criminal conduct while maintaining sufficient flexibility to permit
individualized sentences when warranted by a rehabilitated treatment not taken into
account in the establishment of general sentencing practices; and

3. reflect, to the extent practicable, advancement of knowledge of human behavior as it
relates to the criminal justice process; and

4. develop means of measuring the degree to which the sentencing, penal, and
correctional practices are effective in meeting the purposes of sentencing as set 18 USC
§3553(a)(2).

C. Blakely v. Washington No. 02-1632. June 24, 2004 compels judges to disregard, as
federal legislation, sentencing guidelines of the US Sentencing Commission. The judge,
in making an authorized sentencing decision regarding probation, prison and fines under
§3553(a)(2) must adjust downward the sentencing estimate introduced by the prosecutor.

1. The calibration of sentences of imprisonment in the US Code allows the judge to
automatically sentence all offenders to probation unless they meet the legislative
threshold of 50 years for a Class A or B felony under federal law under
18USC(227)§3563.

§50 Tax Court

1. The U.S. Tax Court employs 19 presidential appointed judges who hear cases for $60
regarding the decisions of the Commissioner of the Internal Revenues Service that must
be filed within 90 days.

2. The jurisdiction of the Tax Court includes the authority to hear tax disputes concerning
notices of deficiency, notices of transferee liability, certain types of declaratory judgment,
readjustment and adjustment of partnership items, review of the failure to abate interest,
administrative costs, worker classification, relief from joint and several liability on a joint
return, and review of certain collection actions.

§51 Customs Court

A. The U.S. Court of International Trade was constituted by the Customs Court Act of
1980 at 28 U.S.C. Chapter 11 §251-258 to employ 12 presidential appointed judges who
hear claims against the United States under 28 USC Chapter 95 §1581-1585.

1. The 1930 Tariff Act, 1974 Trade Act and the Customs Courts Act of 1980 grant the
Court a residual grant of exclusive subject matter jurisdictional authority to decide any
civil action against the United States, its officers, or its agencies arising out of any law
pertaining to international trade, tariffs and customs.

2. The Court operates in accordance with the Rules of Court and in co-operation with the
Civil Division of the Department of Justice.

                                                                                           303
B. The name CoITUS needs to be renamed to Customs Court (CC) to better represent the
dignity of the United States in international law.

1. Title 22 Foreign Relations and Intercourse (A-FRaI-D) also needs to be cleaned up to
read just Foreign Relations (FR-EE).

2. The USAID Bureau for Asia and the Near East (ANE) has played asylum to all five of
our wars since WWII. It needs to be divided once and for all into two Bureaus for the
Middle East and Central Asia (MECA) and South East Asia (SEA).

§52 Court of Claims

A. The US Court of Federal Claims was recreated pursuant to Article I of the United
States Constitution in October 1982, by the Federal Courts Improvement Act. The U.S.
Court of Federal Claims is constituted under 28 USC Chapter 7 §171-179 and is subject
to the jurisdiction and venue set forth in 28 USC Chapter 91§1491-1509. The Court
consists of sixteen judges nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate for a
term of fifteen years.

1. The Court of Federal Claims is authorized to hear primarily money claims founded
upon the Constitution, federal statutes, executive regulations, or contracts, express or
implied-in-fact, with the United States particularly those involving unjust imprisonment,
declaratory judgment, treaties, accounts of officers, patents and copyrights.

2. Approximately one-quarter of the cases before the Court involve tax refund suits, an
area in which the court exercise concurrent jurisdiction with United States district courts.
The cases tend to involve complex factual and statutory construction issues in tax law.

B. After 1982, the Court retained all the original jurisdiction of the Court of Claims and
continues, uninterrupted, a judicial tradition more than 140 years old.

1. The Court has been given new equitable jurisdiction in the area of bid protests, as well
as jurisdiction in vaccine compensation, civil liberties, product liability, oil spills,
intellectual property, government contracts (10% of docket), civilian and military pay
questions and various other areas of the law over the last sixteen years.

2. The 2,200 plus pending cases involve claims currently estimated in the tens of billions
of dollars, making the average claim well over one million dollars. The Court also
efficiently handles numerous smaller claims. Its expertise, in recent years, has been seen
as its ability to efficiently handle civil litigation in co-operation with the Civil,
Environmental and Tax Divisions of the Department of Justice.

Art. 8 Ministry of Justice

§53 Department of Justice

                                                                                         304
A.The U.S. Department of Justice was founded by the 1870 Act to Establish the
Department of Justice to process the increase in litigation after the civil war by
improving…

1. representation of the federal government in the Courts
2. representation of the federal government to the State Attorney Generals (SAG)
3. representation of state attorney generals to the federal government and
4. counsel to the president by serving as the member of the cabinet who supervises
judicial affairs and litigation with the title Attorney General of the United States.

B. The US Department of Justice is constituted in accordance with Article 3 of the
Constitution of the United States, Title 28, Part 2 United States Code and manages its
judicial administration in accordance with Title 28 Code of Federal Regulations and the
U.S. Attorney‟s Manual.

C. The US Department of Justice is the largest law firm in the world with a $16.78 billion
budget.

1. The Department of Justice consists of the principal organizational units listed in 28
CFR I 0.1 and this Chapter as restructured by the Homeland Security Act of 2002
yielding roughly 17 offices, 7 divisions and 2 boards with four immigration and customs
related agencies seceding to the Department of Homeland Security.

§53a Office of the Attorney General

A. Edmund Randolph 1789-1794 began the first presidential appointment for Office of
the Federal Attorney General (FAG) under the Judiciary Act of 1789 and served as the
first of three attorney generals who were appointed by President Washington.

Under 28 CFR I 0.5 the Attorney General shall

   (a) Supervise and direct the administration and operation of the Department of Justice,
including the offices of U.S. Attorneys and U.S. Marshals, which are within the
Department of Justice.
   (b) Represent the United States in legal matters generally.
   (c) Furnish advice and opinions, formal and informal, on legal matters to the President
and the Cabinet and to the heads of the executive departments and agencies of the
Government, as provided by law.
   (d) Appear in person to represent the Government in the Supreme Court of the United
States, or in any other court, in which he may deem it appropriate.
   (e) Designate, pursuant to Executive Orders 9788 of October 4, 1946, and 10254 of
June 15, 1951, officers and agencies of the Department of Justice to act as disbursing
officers for the Office of Alien Property.
   (f) Perform or supervise the performance of other duties required by statute or
Executive order.

                                                                                        305
§53b Office of the Deputy Attorney General

Under 28 CFR I 0.15 (a) The Deputy Attorney General is authorized to exercise all the
power and authority of the Attorney General, unless any such power or authority is
required by law to be exercised by the Attorney General personally.

(a) The Deputy Attorney General shall advise and assist the Attorney
General in formulating and implementing Department policies and programs
and in providing overall supervision and direction to all organizational
units of the Department. Subject to the general supervision of the Attorney General, the
Deputy Attorney General shall direct the activities of organizational units as assigned. In
addition, the Deputy Attorney General shall:
   (1) Except as assigned to the Associate Attorney General, exercise the power and
authority vested in the Attorney General to take final action in matters pertaining to:
   (i) The employment, separation, and general administration of personnel in the Senior
Executive Service and in General Schedule grades GS-16 through GS-18, or the
equivalent, and of attorneys and law students regardless of grade or pay in the
Department;
   (ii) The appointment of special attorneys and special assistants to the Attorney General
(28 U.S.C. 515(b)) for $12,000 yearly;
   (iii) The appointment of Assistant U.S. Trustees and fixing of their compensation; and
   (iv) The approval of the appointment by U.S. Trustees of standing trustees and the
fixing of their maximum annual compensation and percentage fees
   (v) The appointment, employment, separation, and general administration of Assistant
United States Attorneys and other attorneys to assist United States Attorneys when the
public interest so requires and fixing their salaries.
   (2) Administer the Attorney General's recruitment program for honor law graduates
and judicial law clerks.
   (3) Coordinate Departmental liaison with White House Staff and the Executive Office
of the President.
   (4) Coordinate and control the Department's reaction to civil disturbances and
terrorism.
   (5) Perform such other duties and functions as may be assigned from time to time by
the Attorney General.
   (6) The Deputy Attorney General is authorized to exercise the authority vested in the
Attorney General under section 528(a), Public Law 101-509, to accept from federal
departments and agencies the services of attorneys and non-law enforcement personnel to
assist the Department of Justice in the investigation and prosecution of fraud or other
criminal or unlawful activity in or against any federally insured financial institution or the
Resolution Trust Corporation, and to supervise such personnel in the conduct of such
investigations and prosecutions.

§53c Office of the Associate Attorney General




                                                                                          306
The Associate Attorney General (AAG) shall advise and assist the Attorney General and
the Deputy Attorney General in formulating and implementing Departmental policies and
programs under 28 CFR I 0.19 (a). The Associate Attorney General shall also provide
overall supervision and direction to organizational units as assigned. In addition the
Associate Attorney General shall:
   (a) Exercise the power and the authority vested in the Attorney General to take final
action in matters pertaining to the employment, separation, and general administration of
attorneys and law students in pay grades GS-15 and below in organizational units subject
to his direction.
   (b) Perform such other duties as may be especially assigned from time to time by the
Attorney General.
   (c) Exercise the power and authority vested in the Attorney General to authorize the
Director of the U.S. Marshals Service to deputize persons to perform the functions of a
Deputy U.S. Marshal.

§53d Office of the Solicitor General

The following-described matters are assigned to, and shall be conducted, handled, or
supervised by, the Solicitor General, in consultation with each agency or official
concerned under 28 CFR I 0.20:

   (a) Conducting, or assigning and supervising, all Supreme Court cases, including
appeals, petitions for and in opposition to certiorari, briefs and arguments, and settlement
thereof.
   (b) Determining whether, and to what extent, appeals will be taken by the Government
to all appellate courts (including petitions for rehearing en banc and petitions to such
courts for the issuance of extraordinary writs) and, in accordance with Sec. 0.163,
advising on the approval of settlements of cases in which he had determined that an
appeal would be taken.
   (c) Determining whether a brief amices curiae will be filed by the Government, or
whether the Government will intervene, in any appellate court.
   (d) Assisting the Attorney General, the Deputy Attorney General and the Associate
Attorney General in the development of broad Department program policy.

Under 28 CFR I 0.21 the Solicitor General may in consultation with each agency or
official concerned, authorize intervention by the Government in cases involving the
constitutionality of acts of Congress.

Art. 9 Offices

§54 Office of Legal Counsel

The following-described matters are assigned to, and shall be conducted, handled, or
supervised by, the Assistant Attorney General (AAG), Office of Legal Counsel under 28
CFR I 0.25:



                                                                                        307
   (a) Preparing the formal opinions of the Attorney General; rendering informal opinions
and legal advice to the various agencies of the Government; and assisting the Attorney
General in the performance of his functions as legal adviser to the President and as a
member of, and legal adviser to, the Cabinet.
   (b) Preparing and making necessary revisions of proposed Executive orders and
proclamations, and advising as to their form and legality prior to their transmission to the
President; and performing like functions with respect to regulations and other similar
matters which require the approval of the President or the Attorney General.
   (c) Rendering opinions to the Attorney General and to the heads of the various
organizational units of the Department on questions of law arising in the administration
of the Department.
   (d) Approving proposed orders of the Attorney General, and orders which require the
approval of the Attorney General, as to form and legality and as to consistency and
conformity with existing orders and memoranda.
   (e) Coordinating the work of the Department of Justice with respect to the participation
of the United States in the United Nations and related international organizations and
advising with respect to the legal aspects of treaties and other international agreements.
   (f) When requested, advising the Attorney General in connection with his review of
decisions of the Board of Immigration Appeals and other organizational units of the
Department.
   (g) Designating within the Office of Legal Counsel:
   (1) A liaison officer, and an alternate, as a representative of the Department in all
matters concerning the filing of departmental documents with the Office of the Federal
Register, and
   (2) A certifying officer, and an alternate, to certify copies of documents required to be
filed with the Office of the Federal Register (1 CFR 16.1).
   (h) Approving certain blind trusts, as required by section 202(f)(4)(B) of the Ethics in
Government Act of 1978, 92 Stat. 1843.
   (i) Consulting with the Director of the Office of Government Ethics regarding the
development of policies, rules, regulations, procedures and forms relating to ethics and
conflicts of interest, as required by section 402 of the Ethics in Government Act of 1978,
92 Stat. 1862.
   (j) Performing such special duties as may be assigned by the Attorney General, the
Deputy Attorney General, or the Associate Attorney General from time to time.

§54a Office of Legislative Affairs

The following-described matters are assigned to, and shall be conducted, handled, or
supervised by, the Assistant Attorney General, Office of Legislative and
Intergovernmental Affairs (OLA) under 28 CFR I 0.27:

  (a) Maintaining liaison between the Department and the Congress.
  (b) Reviewing, coordinating and submitting departmental legislative reports.
  (c) Coordinating the preparation and submission of proposed departmental legislation.
  (d) Maintaining liaison between the Department and State and local governments and
their representative organizations.

                                                                                        308
   (e) Consulting with State and local officials and their representative organizations to
inform them of Department policy and law enforcement initiatives that may affect State
and local governments.
   (f) Performing such other duties respecting legislative matters as may be assigned by
the Attorney General, the Deputy Attorney General, or the Associate Attorney General.

§54b Office of Professional Responsibility

The Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) shall be headed by a Counsel, appointed
by the Attorney General under 28 CFR I 0.39. The Counsel shall be subject to the general
supervision and direction of the Attorney General or, whenever appropriate, of the
Deputy Attorney General or the Associate Attorney General or the Solicitor General.

(a)The Office of Professional Responsibility, which reports directly to the Attorney
General, is responsible for investigating allegations of misconduct involving Department
attorneys that relate to the exercise of their authority to investigate, litigate or provide
legal advice, as well as allegations of misconduct by law enforcement personnel when
they are related to allegations of attorney misconduct within the jurisdiction of OPR.
(b)The objective of OPR is to ensure that Department of Justice attorneys continue to
perform their duties in accordance with the high professional standards expected of the
Nation's principal law enforcement agency.
(c) The OPR submits an annual report to the Attorney General discussing the work of the
OPR and providing summaries of all the cases heard during the year.

§54c Office of Legal Policy

The Office of Legal Policy (OLP) shall be headed by an Assistant Attorney General. The
principal responsibilities of the Office shall be to plan, develop, and coordinate the
implementation of major policy initiatives of high priority to the Department and to the
Administration under 28 CFR I 0.23. In addition, the Assistant Attorney General, Office
of Legal Policy, shall:

   (a) Examine and study legislation and other policy proposals and coordinate
Departmental efforts to secure enactment of those of special interest to the Department
and the Administration.
   (b) Assist the Attorney General and the Deputy Attorney General in fulfilling
responsibilities of the Federal Legal Council to promote coordination and communication
among Federal legal offices with the goal of achieving effective, consistent, and efficient
management of legal resources throughout the Federal Government.
   (c) Advise and assist the Attorney General and the Deputy Attorney General regarding
the selection and appointment of Federal judges.
   (e) Administer the Federal Justice Research Program.
   (f) Represent the Department on the Administrative Conference of the United States
and, as appropriate, on regulatory reform matters.
   (g) Participate, as appropriate, in internal budget hearings of the Department with
regard to policy implications of resource allocations and resource implications of major

                                                                                        309
policy initiatives; and advise the Assistant Attorney General for Administration with
regard to information requirements for Departmental policy formulation.
    (h) Advise appropriate Departmental officials, from time to time, on investigation,
litigation, negotiation, penal, or correctional policies to insure the compatibility of those
policies with overall Departmental and National goals.
    (i) Perform such other duties and functions as may be specially assigned by the
Attorney General and the Deputy Attorney General.

(2) In carrying out his responsibilities under this section, the Assistant Attorney General,
Office of Legal Policy, shall have the right to call upon the relevant Departmental units
for personnel and other assistance.

§54d Office of Public Affairs

The Office of Public Affairs is headed by a Director of Public Affairs (OPA) under 28
CFR I 0.28 who shall:

  (a) Handle matters pertaining to relations with the public generally.
  (b) Disseminate information to the press, the radio and television services, the public,
members of Congress, officials of Government, schools, colleges, and civic
organizations.
  (c) Coordinate the relations of the Department of Justice with the news media.
  (d) Serve as a central agency for information relating to the work and activities of all
agencies of the Department.
  (e) Prepare public statements and news releases.
  (f) Coordinate Department publications.
  (g) Assist the Attorney General and other officials of the Department in preparing for
news conferences, interviews and other contacts with the news media.

§54e Office of the Pardon Attorney

The Office of the Pardon Attorney (OPA) has the authority under 28 CFR I 0.35 to:

  (a) Exercise of the powers and performance of the functions vested in the Attorney
General.
  (b) Performance of such other duties as may be assigned by the Attorney General or
the Associate Attorney General.

(2) Under 28 CFR I 0.36 The Pardon Attorney shall submit all recommendations in
clemency cases through the Associate Attorney General and the Associate Attorney
General shall exercise such discretion and authority as is appropriate and necessary for
the handling and transmittal of such recommendations to the President.

§54f Office of Intelligence Policy and Review




                                                                                           310
A. The Office of Intelligence Policy and Review (OIPR), under the direction of the
Counsel for Intelligence Policy, is responsible for advising the Attorney General on all
matters relating to the national security activities of the United States.

1. The Office prepares and files all applications for electronic surveillance and physical
search under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978, assists Government
agencies by providing legal advice on matters of national security law and policy, and
represents the Department of Justice on variety of interagency committees such as the
National Counterintelligence Policy Board.

2. The Office also comments on and coordinates other agencies' views regarding
proposed legislation affecting intelligence matters.

3. The Office serves as adviser to the Attorney General and various client agencies,
including the Central Intelligence Agency, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and the
Defense and State Departments, concerning questions of law, regulation, and guidelines
as well as the legality of domestic and overseas intelligence operations.

Art. 10 Executives

§55 Executive Office for Immigration Review

A. The Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) was created on January 9,
1983, through an internal Department of Justice (DOJ) reorganization which combined
the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) with the Immigration Judge function previously
performed by the former Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) (now part of the
Department of Homeland Security). Besides establishing EOIR as a separate agency
within DOJ, this reorganization made the Immigration Courts independent of INS, the
agency charged with enforcement of Federal immigration laws.

1. The Office of the Chief Administrative Hearing Officer (OCAHO) was added in 1987.
EOIR is also separate from the Office of Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Unfair
Employment Practices in the DOJ Civil Rights Division and the Office of Immigration
Litigation in the DOJ Civil Division.

B. The creation of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) in 2001 was the most
significant transformation of the U.S. government since 1947, when various branches of
the U.S. Armed Forces merged into the Department of Defense to better coordinate the
nation's defense against military threats and improve the dissemination of immigration
and customs information by consolidating.

1. DHS represents a similar consolidation whereby, 22 previously disparate domestic
agencies were consolidated into one department called the Department of Homeland
Security.




                                                                                        311
C. USCIS and other bureaus are charged with fundamentally transforming and improving
the delivery of immigration and citizenship services, while enhancing our nation's
security.

1. All authorities and functions of the Department of Homeland Security to administer
and enforce the immigration laws are vested in the Secretary of Homeland Security.
Delegation may be made by regulation, directive, memorandum, or other means deemed
appropriate by Congress.

D. There shall be in the Department of Justice a Board of Immigration Appeals, subject
to the general supervision of the Director, Executive Office for Immigration Review
(EOIR). The Board members shall be attorneys appointed by the Attorney General to act
in the cases that come before them. Membership on the Board shall be reduced to eleven
members. A vacancy, or the absence or unavailability of a Board member, shall not
impair the right of the remaining members to exercise all the powers under 8CFR§1003.1

§55a Community Relations Service

A. The following-described matters are assigned to, and shall be conducted, handled, or
supervised by, the Director of the Community Relations Service (CRS) under 28 CFR I
0.30:

  (a) Exercise of the powers and performance of the functions vested in the Attorney
General by sections 204(d), 205, 1002, and 1003(a) of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (78
Stat. 267) and section 2 of Reorganization Plan No. 1 of 1966.
  (b) Preparation and submission of the annual report to the Congress required by section
1004 of that Act.

B. In case of a vacancy in the Office of the Director of the Community Relations Service,
the Deputy Director of the Service shall perform the functions and duties of the Director
under 28 CFR I 0.31.

  (a) The Director is authorized, in case of absence from his office or in case of his
inability or disqualification to act, to designate the Deputy Director to act in his stead. In
unusual circumstances, or in the absence of the Deputy Director, a person other than the
Deputy Director may be so designated by the Director.

C. Under 28 CFR I 0.32 Departmental regulations which are generally applicable to units
or personnel of the Department of Justice shall be applicable with respect to the
Community Relations Service and to the Director and personnel thereof, except to the
extent, if any, that such regulations may be inconsistent with the intent and purposes of
section 1003(b) of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

§55b Executive Office for United States Attorneys




                                                                                           312
The Executive Office for United States Attorneys (EOUSA) shall be under the direction
of a Director under 28 CFR I 0.22 who shall:

   (a) Provide general executive assistance and supervision to the offices of the U.S.
Attorneys, including:
   (1) Evaluating the performance of the offices of the U.S. Attorneys, making
appropriate reports and inspections and taking corrective action were indicated.
   (2) Coordinating and directing the relationship of the offices of the U.S. Attorneys with
other organizational units of the Department of Justice.
   (b) Publish and maintain a U.S. Attorneys' Manual and a United States Attorneys'
Bulletin for the internal guidance of the U.S. Attorneys' offices and those other
organizational units of the Department concerned with litigation.
   (c) Supervise the operation of the Office of Legal Education, the Attorney General's
Advocacy Institute and the Legal Education Institute, which shall develop, conduct and
authorize the training of all Federal legal personnel.
   (d) Provide the Attorney General's Advisory Committee of United States Attorneys
with such staff assistance and funds as are reasonably necessary to carry out the
Committee's responsibilities (28 CFR 0.10(d)).
   (e) Establish policy and procedures for the satisfaction, collection, or recovery of
criminal fines, special assessments, penalties, interest, bail bond forfeitures, restitution,
and court costs in criminal cases consistent with 28CFR I 0.171.

§55c Executive Office for United States Trustees

A. The Executive Office for United States Trustees (UST) shall be headed by a Director
appointed by the Attorney General under 28 CFR I 0.37.

1. Under 28 CFR I 0.38 the Director shall have responsibility for assisting the Attorney
General and the Deputy Attorney General in supervising and providing general
coordination and assistance to United States Trustees.
2. The Director shall perform such duties relating to such functions under the Bankruptcy
Reform Act of 1978 and the litigation of US Bankruptcy Courts.

§55d INTERPOL--United States National Central Bureau

The following functions are assigned to the Chief of the United States National Central
Bureau, International Criminal Police Organization (INTERPOL--U.S. National Central
Bureau), under 28 CFR I 0.34, as authorized by statute and within guidelines prescribed
by the Department of Justice, in conjunction with the Department of Treasury:

   (a) Pay a pro rata share to the International Prison Commission under 22 U.S.C. 263a.
   (b) Represent the U.S. National Central Bureau at criminal law enforcement and
international law enforcement conferences and symposia.
   (c) Serve as a member of the Executive Committee of INTERPOL-United States
National Central Bureau (INTERPOL-USNCB).



                                                                                         313
   (d) Transmit information of a criminal justice, humanitarian, or other law enforcement
related nature between National Central Bureaus of INTERPOL member countries, and
law enforcement agencies within the United States and abroad; and respond to requests
by law enforcement agencies, and other legitimate requests by appropriate organizations,
institutions and individuals, when in agreement with the INTERPOL constitution.
   (e) Coordinate and integrate information for investigations of an international nature
and identify those involving patterns and trends of criminal activities.
   (f) Conduct analyses of patterns of international criminal activities, when specific
patterns are observed.
   (g) Establish and collect user fees to process name checks and background records for
licensing, humanitarian and other non-law enforcement purposes.

§55e Community Oriented Policing Services

A. The Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) shall be headed by a
Director appointed by the Attorney General under 28 CFR I 0.119 . The Director shall
report to the Attorney General through the Associate Attorney General.

B. The Director, Office of Community Oriented Policing Services under 28 CFR I 0.120
shall:

    (a) Exercise the powers and perform the functions vested in the Attorney General by
title I and subtitle H of title III of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of
1994 (Pub. L. 103-322); and
    (b) Perform such other duties and functions relating to policing and law enforcement as
may be specially assigned by the Attorney General or the Associate Attorney General.

C. Grant programs administered through the Office of Justice Programs, shall apply with
equal force and effect to grant programs administered by the Office of Community
Oriented Policing Services under 28 CFR I 0.121.

§55f Foreign Claims Settlement Commission

A. The Foreign Claims Settlement Commission (FCSC)of the United States is a separate
agency within the Department of Justice that investigates claims of US citizens against
foreign countries.

1. It is composed of a full-time Chairman, and two part-time Commissioners.

2. All functions, powers, and duties of the Commission not directly related to
adjudicating claims are vested in the Chairman of the Commission, including the
functions set forth in section 3 of Reorganization Plan No. 1 of 1954 and the authority to
issue rules and regulations.

3. The Attorney General provides necessary administrative support and services to the
Commission.

                                                                                        314
§55g U.S. Parole Commission

(1)The U.S. Parole Commission (USPC) is composed of nine Commissioners of whom
one is designated Chairman under 28 CFR I 0.124. The Commission:

   (a) Has authority, to grant, modify, or revoke paroles of eligible U.S. prisoners serving
sentences of more than 1 year, and is responsible for the supervision of parolees and
prisoners mandatorily released prior to the expiration of their sentences, and for the
determination of supervisory conditions and terms;
   (b) Has responsibility in cases in which the committing court specifies that the Parole
Commission shall determine the date of parole eligibility of the prisoner;
   (c) Has responsibility for determining, in accordance with the Labor-Management
Reporting and Disclosure Act of 1959 (29 U.S.C.§504), whether the service as officials
in the field of organized labor or in labor oriented management positions of persons
convicted of certain crimes is contrary to the purposes of that act; and
   (d) Has responsibility under the Employee Retirement Income Security
Act of 1974 (29 U.S.C.§1111), for determining whether persons convicted of certain
crimes may provide services to, or be employed by, employment benefit plans.

(2) The Chairman of the United States Parole Commission shall make any temporary
assignment of a Commissioner to act as Vice Chairman, National Appeals Board
member, or Regional Commissioner in the case of an absence or vacancy in the position,
without the concurrence of the Attorney General under 28 CFR I 0.125.

(3) The U.S. Parole Commission is authorized to exercise the authority to make a finding
that a parolee is unable to pay a fine in whole or in part and to direct release of such
parolee based on such finding under 28 CFR I 0.127.

Art. 11 Programs

§56 Office of Justice Programs

A. Since the 1984 Justice System Improvement Act 42 US Code Chapter 46 Subchapters
1-15 the Office of Justice Programs (OJP) has supervised,

1. the Bureau of Justice Statistics,
2. the National Institute of Justice and
3. the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.

B. The Office of Justice Programs is headed by an Assistant Attorney General appointed
by the President. Under the general authority of the Attorney General, the Assistant
Attorney General maintains liaison with and provides information to Federal, State, local,
and private agencies and organizations on criminal justice matters, and provides staff
support to and coordinates the activities of the National Institute of Justice under 28 CFR
I 0.90.

                                                                                         315
§56a National Institute of Justice

The National Institute of Justice (NIJ) is headed by a Director appointed by the President.
Under the general authority of the Attorney General and reporting through the Assistant
Attorney General, Office of Justice Programs, the Director performs functions and
administers programs, including provision of financial assistance, under 42 U.S.C. 3721-
3723 to support basic and applied research into justice issues.

§56b Bureau of Justice Statistics

A. The Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS), is headed by a Director appointed by the
President under 28 CFR I 0.93. Under the general authority of the Attorney General and
reporting through the Assistant Attorney General, Office of Justice Programs, the
Director performs functions and administers programs, including provision of financial
assistance, under 42 U.S.C. 3731-3734, to provide a variety of statistical services for the
criminal justice community.

B. The Bureau of Justice Statistics reported a total of 2,131,180 prisoners in the Census
of 30 June 2004. 726 prisoners per 100,000 people. At midyear 2004 there were 4,919
black male prison and jail inmates per 100,000 black males in the United States,
compared to 1,717 Hispanic male inmates per 100,000 Hispanic males and 717 white
male inmates per 100,000 white males.

§56c Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention

The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) is headed by an
Administrator appointed by the President under 28 CFR I 0.94. Under the general
authority of the Attorney General and reporting through the Assistant Attorney General,
Office of Justice Programs, the Administrator performs functions and administers
programs, including provision of financial assistance, under 42 U.S.C. 5601 et seq.,
relating to juvenile delinquency, the improvement of juvenile justice systems and missing
children. Their most impressive achievement is the National Juvenile Court Data
Archive that compiles statistics for juvenile courts.

§56d Bureau of Justice Assistance

(1) The Bureau of Justice Assistance is headed by a Director appointed by the Attorney
General under 28 CFR 0.94-1. Under the general authority of the Attorney General and
reporting through the Assistant Attorney General, Office of Justice Programs, the
Director performs functions and administers programs, including provision of financial
assistance, under 42 U.S.C. §3741-3742, §3750-3766b; §3769, relating to the
administration of State and local criminal justice systems. The Director also administers
the Public Safety Officers' Death Benefits Program under 42 U.S.C. §3796.




                                                                                        316
(a) Subject to the authority and direction of the Attorney General, the Director of the
Bureau of Justice Assistance is authorized to exercise the power and authority vested in
the Attorney General by Executive Order No. 11755 of December 29, 1973, 39 FR 779,
with respect to work-release laws and regulations.

Art. 12 Divisions

§57 Justice Divisions

There are 7 Divisions to the US Department of Justice that have Assistant Attorney
Generals appointed to them (1) Anti-Trust Division, (2) Civil Division, (3) Civil Rights
Division, (4) Criminal Division, (5) Environment and Natural Resources Division, (6)
Tax Division, and (7) Justice Management Division.

§57a Antitrust Division

A.The following functions are assigned to and shall be conducted, handled, or supervised
by, the Assistant Attorney General, Antitrust Division (ATR) under 28 CFR I 0.40:

   (a) General enforcement, by criminal and civil proceedings, of the Federal antitrust
laws and other laws relating to the protection of competition and the prohibition of
restraints of trade and monopolization, including conduct of surveys of possible
violations of antitrust laws, conduct of grand jury proceedings, issuance and
enforcement of civil investigative demands, civil actions to obtain orders and injunctions,
civil actions to recover forfeitures or damages for injuries sustained by the United States
as a result of antitrust law violations, proceedings to enforce compliance with final
judgments in antitrust suits and negotiation of consent judgments in civil actions,
civil actions to recover penalties, criminal actions to acquit including actions against the
prosecution and judiciary for the imposition of penalties for conspiring to defraud the
Federal Government by violation of the antitrust laws, participation as amices curiae in
private antitrust litigation; and prosecution or defense of appeals in antitrust proceedings.
   (b) Intervention or participation before administrative agencies functioning wholly or
partly under regulatory statutes in administrative proceedings which require consideration
of the antitrust laws or competitive policies, including such agencies as the Civil
Aeronautics Board, Interstate Commerce Commission, Federal Communications
Commission, Federal Maritime Commission, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,
Federal Reserve Board, Federal Trade Commission, Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
and Securities and Exchange Commission, except proceedings referred to any agency by
a federal court as an incident to litigation being conducted under the supervision of
another Division in this Department.
   (c) Preparing the approval or disapproval of the Attorney General whenever such
action is required by statute from the standpoint of the antitrust laws as a prerequisite to
the development of Defense Production Act voluntary programs or agreements and small
business production or raw material pools, the national defense program and atomic
energy matters.



                                                                                         317
   (d) Assembling information and preparing reports required or requested by the
Congress or the Attorney General as to the effect upon the maintenance and preservation
of competition under the free enterprise system.
   (e) Preparing for transmittal to the President, Congress, or other departments or
agencies views or advice as to the propriety or effect of any action, program or practice
upon the maintenance and preservation or competition under the free enterprise system.
   (f) Representing the Attorney General on interdepartmental or interagency committees
concerned with the maintenance and preservation of competition generally and in various
sections of the economy and the operation of the free enterprise system and when
authorized participating in conferences and committees with foreign governments and
treaty organizations concerned with competition and restrictive business practices in
international trade.
   (g) Collecting fines, penalties, judgments, and forfeitures arising in antitrust cases.
   (h) The Attorney General is authorized to grant export trade certificates in accordance
       with 15 U.S.C. Chapter 66 §4011-4021.

(2) Under 28 CFR I 0.41 the following functions are assigned to, and shall be conducted,
handled, or supervised by, the Assistant Attorney General, Antitrust Division:
   (a) Institution of proceedings to impose penalties for unjustly or unreasonably
discriminating among persons, classes of persons, or localities.
   (b) Representing the United States before three-judge district courts under title 28 U.S.
Code chapter 157 §2321-2325 to enforce, suspend, enjoin, annul, or set aside, in whole or
in part, any order of the Interstate Commerce Commission.
   (c) Representing the United States in proceedings before courts of appeals under 28
U.S.C. chapter 158 §2341-2350.
   (d) Defending the Secretary of the Treasury
   (e) Guaranteeing Standby Energy Authority under 42 U.S.C. Chapter 77 §6272-6285.

§57b Civil Division

(1)The following-described matters are assigned to the Assistant Attorney General of the
Civil Division (CD) under 28 CFR I 0.45:

  (a) Admiralty and shipping cases--civil and admiralty litigation in any court by or
against the United States, its officers and agents, which involves ships, shipping,
workmen's compensation, litigation and waiver of claims and tariffs under reciprocal-aid
maritime agreements with foreign governments.
  (b) Court of Federal Claims cases--litigation by and against the United States
  (c) Civil litigation at the Court of International Trade, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1581(i)
  (d) Fraud cases--civil claims arising from fraud and (gross) negligence 19 U.S.C. 1592
  (e) Gifts and bequests to the United States.
  (f) Patent, copyright, and trademark litigation before the U.S. courts and the Patent
Office and the Court of Federal Claims (28 U.S.C. 1498)
  (g) suits for compensation under the Patent Secrecy Act where the invention was
ordered to be kept secret by he government (35 U.S.C. 183),



                                                                                        318
    (h) suits for compensation for unauthorized practice of a patented invention in the
furnishing of assistance under the Foreign Assistance Act (22 U.S.C. 2356),
     (i) suits for compensation for the unauthorized communication of restricted data by
the Atomic Energy Commission to other nations (42 U.S.C. 2223),
     (j) Tort cases--defense of tort suits against the United States, Government contractors
and Federal employees whose official conduct is involved.
    (k) Consumer litigation--All civil and criminal litigation and grand jury proceedings
arising under the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 301-397), the Fair
Packaging and Labeling Act (15 U.S.C. 1451 et seq.), the Automobile Information
Disclosure Act (15 U.S.C. 1231 et seq.).
    (l) All civil litigation arising under the passport, visa and immigration and nationality
laws and related investigations and other appropriate inquiries pursuant to all the power
and authority of the Attorney General to enforce the Immigration and Nationality Act and
all other laws relating to the immigration and naturalization of aliens except all civil
litigation, investigations, and advice with respect to forfeitures, return of property actions,

(2) Under 28 CFR I 0.46 The Assistant Attorney General in charge of the Civil Division
shall direct all other civil litigation including claims by or against the United States, its
agencies or officers, in domestic or foreign courts, special proceedings, and similar civil
matters not otherwise assigned, and shall employ foreign counsel to represent before
foreign criminal courts, commissions or administrative agencies officials of the
Department of Justice and all other law enforcement officers of the United States who are
charged with violations of foreign law as a result of acts which they performed in the
course and scope of their Government service.

(3) Under 28 CFR I 0.48 the Attorney-in-Charge, International Trade Field Office, at 26
Federal Plaza, New York, New York 10007, in the Office of the Assistant Attorney
General, Civil Division, is designated to transmit letters of request to foreign tribunals in
connection with the United States Customs Court.

§57c Civil Rights Division

(1)The following functions are assigned to, and shall be conducted, handled, or
supervised by, the Assistant Attorney General, Civil Rights Division (CRT) under 28
CFR I 0.50:

   (a) Enforcement of all Federal statutes affecting civil rights as it applies to equal
employment, including those rights pertaining to religion, elections and voting, public
accommodations, public facilities, school desegregation, employment (42 U.S.C. 2000e)
  (b) Protecting housing, credit, and constitutional and civil rights of Indians arising
under 25 U.S.C. 1301 et seq., and of institutionalized persons.
   (c) Title 18 U.S. Code §591-611, relating to criminal elections and political activities;
   (d) Title 18 U.S. C. Chapter 13 §241-248 pertaining to criminal aspects of Civil Rights.
   (e) Requesting and reviewing investigations arising from reports or complaints of
public officials or private citizens with respect to matters affecting civil rights.



                                                                                           319
   (f) Conferring with individuals and groups who call upon the Department in
connection with civil rights matters, advising such individuals and groups thereon, and
initiating action appropriate thereto.
   (g) Coordination within the Department of Justice of all matters affecting civil rights.
   (h) Consultation with and assistance to other Federal departments and agencies and
State and local agencies on matters affecting civil rights.
   (i) Research on civil rights matters, and the making of recommendations to the
Attorney General as to proposed policies and legislation relating thereto.
   (j) Representation of civil rights to Federal officials in private litigation arising from
discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin under 42 U.S.C. 2000d.
   (k) Administration of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, as amended (42 U.S.C. 1973c).
   (l) Administration of the Civil Liberties Act of 1988 (50 U.S.C. App. 1989b).
   (m) Upon request, Federal Protection certification under 18 U.S.C. §245.
   (n) The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 42 U.S.C. §12101-12213
 (2) Under 28 CFR I 0.51
   (a) The Assistant Attorney General in charge of the Civil Rights Division shall
exercise the authority vested in and perform the functions assigned to the Attorney
General by Executive Order 12250 (`Leadership and Coordination of Nondiscrimination
Laws'').
   (b) Under paragraph (a) of this section, the Assistant Attorney General in charge of the
Civil Rights Division shall be responsible for coordinating the implementation and
enforcement by Executive agencies of the nondiscrimination provisions of the following
laws:
   (i) Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. §2000d).
   (ii) Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 (20 U.S.C. §1681).
   (iii) Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended (29 U.S.C. §794).
   (c) Any other provision of Federal statutory law which provides, in whole or in part,
that no person in the United States shall, on the ground of race, color, national origin,
handicap, religion, or sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or
be subject to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial
assistance.

§57d Criminal Division

(1)The following functions are assigned to and shall be conducted, handled, or supervised
by, the Assistant Attorney General, Criminal Division (CD) under 28 CFR I 0.55:

   (a) Prosecutions for Federal crimes not otherwise specifically assigned.
   (b) Civil petitions for remission or mitigation of forfeitures and civil penalties, in
compromise, and related proceedings for prison-made goods (18 U.S.C. §1761-1762).
   (c) Immigration and Nationality authority under 8 U.S.C. §1182-1183
   (d) Coordination of enforcement activities directed against organized crime and
racketeering.
   (e) All civil proceedings seeking exclusively equitable relief against Criminal Division
activities including criminal investigations, prosecutions and other criminal justice
activities (including without limitation, applications for writs of habeas corpus,

                                                                                         320
deportation or detention under the immigration laws and coram nobis) not supervised by
another division
    (f) International extradition proceedings.
    (g) Relation of military to civil authority with respect to criminal matters affecting
both.
    (h) §241, 242, , 1201 and 594 of title 18, and §1973i and 1973j of title 42, U.S. Code,
insofar as they relate to voting and election matters not involving discrimination or
intimidation on grounds of race or color, and §245(b)(1) of title 18 U.S. Code, insofar as
it relates to matters not involving discrimination or intimidation on
grounds of race, color, religion, or national origin;
    (i) §245(b)(3) of title 18, U.S. Code, pertaining to forcible interference with persons
engaged in business during a riot or civil disorder; and
    (j) Administrative Subpoenas under 39 U.S.C. §3016 (Postal Reorganization Act).
    (k) Resolving questions that arise as to Federal prisoners held in custody by Federal
officers or in Federal prisons, commitments of mentally defective defendants and juvenile
delinquents, validity and construction of sentences, probation, and parole.
    (l) Supervision of matters of Prisoners arising under the Escape and Rescue Act (18
U.S.C. §751, 752), the Fugitive Felon Act (18 U.S.C. §1072, 1073), and the Influencing
or Injuring Jurors (18 U.S.C. §1503).
    (m) Supervision of prisoner release matters arising under the Bail Reform Act of 1966
arrest and release 28 U.S.C.§3041-3063, release and detention pending judicial
proceedings 28 U.S.C.§3141-3156.

(2) The Assistant Attorney General in charge of the Criminal Division is authorized to
determine administratively whether the Federal Government has exclusive or concurrent
jurisdiction over offenses committed upon lands acquired by the United States, and to
consider problems arising there from under 28 CFR I 0.56.

(3) The FBI estimates 1,417,745 violent crimes occurred nationwide in 2006. There were
an estimated 473.5 violent crimes per 100,000 inhabitants. When data for 2006 to 2005
were compared, the estimated volume of violent crime increased 1.9 percent. The 5-year
trend (2006 compared with 2002) indicated that violent crime decreased 0.4 percent. For
the 10-year trend (2006 compared with 1997) violent crime fell 13.3 percent. Aggravated
assault accounted for the majority of violent crimes, 60.7 percent. Robbery accounted for
31.6 percent and forcible rape accounted for 6.5 percent. Murder, the least committed
violent offense, made up 1.2 percent of violent crimes in 2006. In 2006, firearms were
used in 67.9 percent of the Nations murders, in 42.2 percent of the robbery offenses, and
in 21.9 percent of the aggravated assaults.

§57f Environment and Natural Resources Division

(1)The following functions are assigned to the Assistant Attorney General in charge of
the Land, Environment, and Natural Resources Division (ENRD) under 28 CFR I 0.65:

   (a) Civil suits and matters in Federal and State courts (and administrative tribunals), by
or against the United States, its agencies, officers, or contractors, or in which the United

                                                                                         321
States has an interest, whether for specific or monetary relief, and also non-litigation
matters, relating to:
   (i) The public domain lands and the outer continental shelf of the United States.
   (ii) Other lands and interests in real property owned, leased, or otherwise claimed or
controlled, or allegedly impaired or taken, by the United States, its agencies, officers, or
contractors, including the acquisition of such lands by condemnation proceedings or
otherwise,
   (iii) The water and air resources controlled or used by the United States, its agencies,
officers, or contractors,
   (iv) The other natural resources in or related to such lands, water, and air,
   (b) Rendering opinions as to the validity of title to all lands acquired by the United
States, except as otherwise specified by statute.
   (c) Civil and criminal suits and matters involving air, water, noise, and other types of
pollution, the regulation of solid wastes, toxic substances, pesticides under the Federal
Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act, and the control of the environmental impacts
of surface coal mining.
   (d) Civil and criminal suits and matters involving obstructions to navigation, and
dredging or filling (33 U.S.C. § 403).
   (e) Civil and criminal suits and matters arising under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954
(42 U.S.C. § 2011) insofar as it relates to the prosecution of violations committed by a
company in matters involving the licensing and operations of nuclear power plants.
   (f) Civil and criminal suits and matters relating to the natural and biological resources
of the coastal and marine environments, the outer continental shelf, the fishery
conservation zone and, where permitted by law, the high seas.
   (g) Performance of the Secretary of the Interior under the authority of the Surface
Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977, section 201(f), 91 Stat. 450, and contained
in 30 CFR part 706.
   (h) Conducting the studies of processing sites required by section 115(b) of the
Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act of 1978, publishing the results of the
studies and furnishing the results thereof to the Congress.
   (i) Criminal suits and civil penalty and forfeiture actions relating to wildlife law
enforcement under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C.§1531-1544); the
Lacey Act and related provisions (18 U.S.C. §41-48); the Airborne Hunting Act (16
U.S.C. §742j-1); the Migratory Bird Act (16 U.S.C. §701); the Wild Horses and Wild
Burros Act (16 U.S.C. §1331-1340); the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16
U.S.C.§668-668d); and the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (16 U.S.C.§661-667d).

(2) The Assistant Attorney General in charge of the Land, Environment]and Natural
Resources Division or such members of his staff as he may specifically designate in
writing, are authorized to sign the name of the Attorney General to opinions on the
validity of titles to property acquired by or on behalf of the United States, except those
which, in the opinion of the Assistant Attorney General involve questions of policy or for
any other reason require the personal attention of the Attorney General under 28 CFR I
0.66 (a).
   (a) the Assistant Attorney General in charge of the Land and Natural Resources
Division is authorized:

                                                                                        322
  (i) To exercise the Attorney General's power of delegating to other departments and
agencies his (the Attorney General's) responsibility for approving the title to lands
acquired by them,
  (ii) With respect to delegations so made to other departments and agencies, to exercise
the Attorney General's function of general supervision regarding the carrying out by such
departments and agencies of the responsibility so entrusted to them, and
  (iii) To promulgate regulations and any appropriate amendments thereto governing the
approval of land titles by such departments and agencies.

(3) The Assistant Attorney General in charge of the Land, Environment and Natural
Resources Division, and such members of his staff as he may specifically designate in
writing, are authorized to execute the power and authority of the Attorney General under
the provisions of section 3 of the act of August 7, 1947, 61 Stat. 914, 30 U.S.C.§ 352,
respecting the leasing of minerals on lands under the jurisdiction of the Department of
Justice under 28 CFR I 0.68.

§57g Tax Division

(1) The following functions are assigned to the Assistant Attorney General, Tax Division
(TD) under 28 CFR I 0.70:

   (a)      Prosecution and defense in all courts, other than the Tax Court, of civil suits,
         and the handling of other matters, arising under the internal revenue laws, and
         litigation resulting from the taxing provisions of other Federal statutes
   (b)      Criminal proceedings arising under the internal revenue laws,
   (c)      Enforcement of tax liens, and mandamus, injunctions, and other special actions
         or general matters arising in connection with internal revenue matters.
   (d)      Defense of actions arising under of title 28 U.S.C.§2410 whenever the United
         States is named as a party to an action as the result of the existence of a Federal
         tax lien.
   (e)      Petitions to review decisions of the Tax Court of the United States.

(2) Under 28 CFR I 0.71 the Assistant Attorney General in charge of the Tax Division is
Authorized to handle matters involving the immunity of the Federal Government from
State or local taxation and State or local taxation involving contractors performing
contracts for or on behalf of the United States.

§57h Justice Management Division

(1) The Assistant Attorney General for Administration shall head the Justice
Management Division (JMD) and shall provide advice relating to basic Department
policy for budget and financial management, program evaluation, auditing, personnel
management and training, procurement, information processing and telecommunications,
security and for all matters pertaining to organization, management, and administration
under 28 CFR I 0.75.



                                                                                         323
The following matters are assigned to, and shall be conducted, handled, or supervised by,
the Assistant Attorney General for Administration:
   (a) Conduct, direct, review, and evaluate management studies and surveys of the
Department's organizational structure, functions, and programs, operating procedures and
supporting systems, and management practices throughout the Department; and make
recommendations to reduce costs and increase productivity.
   (b) Supervise, direct, and review the preparation, justification and execution of the
Department of Justice budget, including the coordination and control of the programming
and reprogramming of funds.
   (c) Review, analyze, and coordinate the Department's programs and activities to ensure
that the Department's use of resources and estimates of future requirements are consistent
with the policies, plans, and mission priorities of the Attorney General.
   (d) Plan, direct, and coordinate Department-wide personnel management programs,
and develop and issue Department-wide policy in all personnel program areas, including
training, position classification and pay administration, staffing, employee performance
evaluation, employee development, employee relations and services, employee
recognition and incentives, equal employment opportunity programs, including the equal
opportunity recruitment program (5 U.S.C. §7201), personnel program evaluation, labor
management relations, adverse action hearings and appeals, employee grievances, and
employee health programs.
   (e) Develop and direct Department-wide financial management policies, programs,
procedures, and systems including financial accounting, planning, analysis, and reporting.
   (f) Supervise and direct the operation of the Department's central payroll system,
automated information services, publication services, library services and any other
Department-wide central services which are established by or assigned to the Justice
Management Division.
   (g) Formulate and administer the General Administration Appropriation of the
Department's budget.
   (h) Formulate Department-wide audit policies, standards and procedures; develop,
direct and supervise independent and comprehensive internal audits, including
examinations authorized by 28 U.S.C.§526, of all organizations, programs, and functions
of the Department, and audits of expenditures made under the Department's contracts and
grants to ensure compliance with laws, regulations and generally accepted accounting
principles; economy and efficiency in operation; and that desired results are being
achieved.
   (i) Develop and direct a Department-wide directives management program and
administer the directives management system.
   (j) Plan, direct, administer, and monitor compliance with Department-wide policies,
procedures, and regulations concerning records, reports, procurement, printing, graphics,
audiovisual activities (including the approval or disapproval of production and equipment
requests), forms management, supply management, motor vehicles, real and personal
property, space assignment and utilization, and all other administrative services
functions.
   (k) Formulate Department policies, standards, and procedures for information systems
and the management and use of automatic data processing equipment; review the use and
performance of information systems with respect to Department objectives, plans,

                                                                                      324
policies, and procedures; provide technical leadership and support to new Department-
wide information systems; review and approve all contracts for information processing
let by the Department, and provide the final review and approval of systems and
procedures and standards for use of data elements and codes.
   (l) Formulate policies, standards, and procedures for Department telecommunications
systems and equipment and review their implementation.
   (m) Provide computer and digital telecommunications services on an equitable
resource-sharing basis to all organizational units within the Department.
   (n) Formulate Department policies for the use of consultants and non-personal service
contracts, review, and approve all non-personal service contracts, and review the
implementation of Department policies.
   (o) Serve as liaison with state and local governments on management affairs, and
coordinate the Department's participation in Federal regional interagency bodies.
   (p) Direct all Department security programs including personnel, physical, document,
information processing and telecommunications, special intelligence, and employee
health and safety programs and formulate and implement Department defense
mobilization and contingency planning.
   (q) Review legislation for potential impact on the Department's resources.
   (r) Develop and implement a legal information coordination system for the use of the
Department of Justice and, as appropriate, the Federal Government as a whole.

Art. 13 Armed Forces

§58 Federal Bureau of Investigation

(1)The Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)under 28 CFR I 0.85 shall:

   (a) Investigate violations of the laws, of the United States and collect evidence in cases
       in which the United States is or may be a party in interest.
   (b) Conduct the acquisition, collection, exchange, classification and preservation of
fingerprints and identification records from criminal justice and other governmental
agencies, including fingerprints voluntarily submitted by individuals for personal
identification purposes; provide expert testimony in Federal, State and local courts as
to fingerprint examinations; and provide fingerprint training and provide identification
assistance in disasters and for other humanitarian purposes.
   (c) Conduct personnel investigations requisite to the work of the Department of Justice
and whenever required by statute or otherwise.
   (d) Carry out the Presidential directive of September 6, 1939, as reaffirmed by
Presidential directives of January 8, 1943, July 24, 1950, and December 15, 1953,
designating the Federal Bureau of Investigation to take charge of investigative work in
matters relating to espionage, sabotage, subversive activities, and related matters.
   (e) Establish and conduct law enforcement training programs to provide training for
State and local law enforcement personnel; operate the Federal Bureau of Investigation
National Academy; develop new approaches, techniques, systems, equipment, and
devices to improve and strengthen law enforcement and assist in conducting State and



                                                                                         325
local training programs, pursuant to section 404 of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe
Streets Act of 1968, 82 Stat. 204.
   (f) Operate a central clearinghouse for police statistics under the Uniform Crime
Reporting Program, and a computerized nationwide index of law enforcement
information under the National Crime Information Center.
   (g) Operate the Federal Bureau of Investigation Laboratory to serve not only the
Federal Bureau of Investigation, but also to provide, without cost, technical and scientific
assistance, including expert testimony in Federal or local courts, for all duly constituted
law enforcement agencies, other organizational units of the Department of Justice, and
other Federal agencies, which may desire to avail themselves of the service. As provided
for in procedures agreed upon between the Secretary of State and the Attorney General,
the services of the Federal Bureau of Investigation Laboratory may also be made
available to foreign law enforcement agencies and courts.
   (h) Make recommendations to the Office of Personnel Management in connection with
applications for retirement under 5 U.S.C.§8336(c).
   (i) Investigate alleged fraudulent conduct in connection with operations of the
Department of Housing and Urban Development and other alleged violations of the
criminal provisions of the National Housing Act, including 18 U.S.C.§1010.
   (j) Exercise the power and authority vested in the Attorney General
to approve and conduct the exchanges of identification records enumerated at Sec.
50.12(a) of this chapter.
    (l) Exercise Lead Agency responsibility in investigating all crimes for which it has
primary or concurrent jurisdiction and which involve terrorist activities or acts in
preparation of terrorist activities within the statutory jurisdiction of the United States.
Within the United States, this would include the collection, coordination, analysis,
management and dissemination of intelligence and criminal information as appropriate. If
another Federal agency identifies an individual who is engaged in terrorist activities or in
acts in preparation of terrorist activities, that agency is requested to promptly notify the
FBI. Terrorism includes the unlawful use of force and violence against persons or
property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment
thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.
   (o) The acronym of the Bureau, FBI, and their arrest record indicate that a name
change is needed to eliminate the, “fib” from acceptable prosecutions.

§58a Bureau of Prisons

(1) The Director of the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) shall direct all activities of the Bureau of
Prisons under 28 CFR I 0.95 including:

   (a) Management and regulation of all Federal penal and correctional institutions and
prison commissaries (including military prisons).
   (b) Provision of suitable quarters for, and safekeeping, care, and subsistence of, all
persons charged with or convicted of offenses against the United States or held as
witnesses or otherwise.
   (c) Provision for the protection, instruction, and discipline of all persons charged with
or convicted of offenses against the United States.

                                                                                         326
   (d) Classification, commitment, control, or treatment of persons committed to the
custody of the Attorney General.
   (e) Payment of rewards with respect to escaped Federal prisoners (18 U.S.C.§3059).
   (f) Certification with respect to the insanity or mental incompetence of a prisoner
whose sentence is about to expire pursuant to title 18U.S.C.§4247.
   (g) Entering into contracts with State officials for the custody, care, subsistence,
education, treatment, and training of State prisoners, upon certification with respect to the
availability of proper and adequate treatment facilities and personnel, pursuant to section
18U.S.C.§5003.
   (h) Conduct and prepare, or cause to be conducted and prepared, studies and submit
reports to the court and the attorneys with respect to disposition of cases in which
juveniles have been committed, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §5037, and to contract with public
or private agencies or individuals or community-based facilities for the observation and
study and the custody and care of juveniles, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §5040.
   (i) Conduct of examinations to determine whether an offender is an addict, mentally ill
or a sexual offender who is likely to be rehabilitated through treatment, as well as the
preparation and submission of reports to committing courts.
   (j) Transfer of prisoner to appropriate hospital pursuant to 18U.S.C.§4245.
   (k) Providing technical assistance to State and local governments in the improvement
of their correctional systems (18 U.S.C. §4042).

(2) Under 28 CFR I 0.96 the Director of the Bureau of Prisons is authorized to exercise or
perform any of the authority, functions, or duties conferred or imposed upon the Attorney
General by any law relating to the commitment, control, or treatment of persons
(including insane prisoners and juvenile delinquents) charged with or convicted of
offenses against the United States, including the taking of final action in the following-
described matters:
   (a) Requesting the detail of Public Health Service officers for the purpose of
   furnishing services to Federal penal and correctional institutions (18 U.S.C. §4005).
   (b) Payment of claims less than $1,000 by officers losing property (31 U.S.C. §3722)
   (c) Designating places of imprisonment or rehabilitation where the sentences of
   prisoners shall be served and ordering transfers from one institution to another,
   whether maintained by the Federal Government or otherwise, 18 U.S.C.§4082b
   (d) Designation of agents for the transportation of prisoners (18 U.S.C. §4008).
   (e) Performing the functions of the Attorney General under the provisions of Offenders
with Mental Disease or Defect (18 U.S.C. §4241-4247).
   (f) Settlement of claims arising under the Federal Tort Claims Act as provided in 28
CFR 0.172.
   (g) Entering into reciprocal agreements with fire organizations for mutual aid and
rendering emergency assistance in connection with extinguishing fires within the vicinity
of a Federal correctional facility, as authorized by sections 2 and 3 of the Act of May 27,
1955 (42 U.S.C. §1856a, 1856b).
   (h) Prescribing rules and regulations applicable to the carrying of firearms by Bureau
of Prisons officers and employees (18 U.S.C. §3050).
   (i) Promulgating rules governing the control and management of Federal penal and
correctional institutions and providing for the classification, government, discipline,

                                                                                         327
treatment, care, rehabilitation, and reformation of inmates confined therein (18 U.S.C.
§4001, §4041, and §4042).
   (j) Granting permits to states or public agencies for rights-of-way upon lands
administered by the Director in accordance with the provisions of 43 U.S.C.§931c, §961;
18 U.S.C. §4001, §4041, §4042.
   (k) Authority under the provisions of 18 U.S.C. §4082(b) to provide law enforcement
representatives with information on Federal prisoners who have been convicted of felony
offenses and who are confined at a residential community treatment center located in the
geographical area in which the requesting agency has jurisdiction.
   (l) Approving inmate disciplinary and good time regulations (18 U.S.C. §3624).
   (m) Contracting, for a period not exceeding three years, with the proper authorities of
any State, Territory, or political subdivision thereof, for the imprisonment, subsistence,
care, and proper employment of persons convicted of offenses against the United States
(18 U.S.C. §4002).

(3) Under 28 CFR I 0.99 the Board of Directors of Federal Prison Industries, or such
officer of the corporation as the Board may designate, may exercise the authority vested
in the Attorney General by 18U.S.C.§4126, as amended, to prescribe rules and
regulations governing the payment of compensation to inmates of Federal penal and
correctional institutions employed in any industry, or performing outstanding services in
institutional operations, and to inmates or their dependents for injuries suffered in any
activity connected with the maintenance of operation of the institution where confined.

(4) The Federal Penitentiary is particularly weak in conviction being comprised of 60%
drug offenders and an estimated 25% white collar offenders.

§58b United States Marshals Service

(1) The Director of the United States Marshals Service (USMS) shall direct and supervise
all activities of the U.S. Marshals Service under 28 CR I 0.111 including:

   (a) Execution of Federal arrest warrants pursuant to rule 4 of the Federal Rules of
Criminal Procedure,
   (b) The service of all civil and criminal process emanating from the Federal judicial
       system
   (c) Re-employment at the same pay grade if laid off in good behavior pursuant to
       28U.S.C.§569(b)
   (d) Provisions for the health, safety, and welfare of Government witnesses and their
families, including the psychological well-being and social adjustment of such persons,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §3521.
   (e) Administration and implementation of courtroom security requirements for the
Federal judiciary.
   (f) Protection of Federal jurists, court officers, witnesses, defendants and other
threatened persons in the interests of justice whereas criminal intimidation impedes the
functioning of the Federal judicial process.
   (g) Provision of assistance in the protection of Federal property and buildings.

                                                                                       328
   (h) Direction and supervision of a training school for United States Marshals Service
personnel.
   (i) Disbursement of appropriated funds to satisfy Government obligations incurred in
the administration of justice.
   (j) Maintenance of custody, management control, and disposal of property and money
seized or forfeited pursuant to any law enforced or administered by the Department of
Justice, when the property is seized by the U.S. Marshals Service or delivered to the U.S.
Marshals Service in accordance with regulations; and administer the Department of
Justice Asset Forfeiture Fund.
   (k) Receipt, processing and transportation of prisoners held in the custody of a marshal
or transported by the U.S. Marshals Service under cooperative or intergovernmental
agreements.
   (l) Sustention of custody of Federal prisoners from the time of their arrest by a marshal
or their remand to a marshal by the court, until the prisoner is committed by order of the
court to the custody of the Attorney General for the service of sentence, otherwise
released from custody by the court, or returned to the custody of the U.S. Parole
Commission or the Bureau of Prisons.
   (m) Coordination and direction of the relationship of the offices of U.S. Marshals with
the other organizational units of the Department of Justice.
   (n) Approval of staffing requirements of the offices of U.S. Marshals.
   (o) Investigation of alleged improper conduct on the part of U.S. Marshals Service
personnel.
   (p) Acquisition of adequate and suitable detention space, health care and other services
and materials required to support prisoners under the custody of the U.S. Marshal who
are not housed in Federal facilities.
   (q) Approval of ``other necessary expenditures in the line of duty'' of U.S. Marshals
and Deputy U.S. Marshals under 28 U.S.C. §567(3)
   (r) Exercising the delegate authority vested in the Attorney General under 28 U.S.C.
§510 to conduct and investigate fugitive matters, domestic and foreign, involving escaped
federal prisoners, probation, parole, mandatory release, and bond default violators.

Art. 14 State Courts

§59 State Supreme Courts

(1)The Supreme Courts of the 50 states are the highest courts in their respective state and
act in accordance with their state constitution & code that are drafted within the
constraints of Federal Law. State Supreme Court Justices appoint many of the state
administrators, review habeas corpus, prohibitions, mandamus, precedendo and have
original jurisdiction in cases regarding the behavior of state officials. The Supreme
Courts publish all rules and regulations governing attorneys and judges licensed by their
state.

(2) State Supreme Courts are led by the Conference of Chief Justices. As of 2005
Justices are paid an average of $150,000 per year who in turn pay Appeals Court Judges
$125,000 per year, County Judges $100,000 per year and Municipal Judges $50,000.

                                                                                        329
Judges and Justices are democratically elected for 3-15 year terms. Most states have a
state court of claims to settle tort claims against the state.

(3)The appeals process in the state courts follows a hierarchical structure similar to the
Federal Judiciary whereby municipal courts, county circuit courts or county common
pleas courts appeal to circuit or district courts that in turn may petition the State Supreme
Court from whence the US Supreme Court may be petitioned for a writ of certiorari.

(4) The National Center for State Courts represents the state courts nationally.

§59a County Courts

The majority of the 93 million judicial cases filed in 2001 were processed by 15,555 state
trial courts operating under the supervision of the county; 13,515 were of limited
jurisdiction and 2,040 of general jurisdiction, operated by 29,266 judges. 6 states have
developed what they call a unified jurisdiction rather than a general jurisdiction that
permits these courts to hear 88% civil cases rather than 60% civil cases while
dramatically reducing mental health cases. The County Courts are the trial courts where
defendants may contest their charges and the prosecution can make their case. The
principal subdivisions of the County Court are the Criminal Division, Civil Division and
Traffic Division. Most trials are heard in courts of general jurisdiction.

§59b Criminal Division

A. The Criminal Division detains, indicts, posts bond, holds jury trials, sentences,
dismisses charges, confines, posts bail, and supervises state and county jails and releases
prisoners in accordance with state criminal and correction statutes that are drafted under
federal criminal law as set forth in Title 18U.S.C.

1. In 2001 14.1 million criminal cases were filed. In the two tier court system
misdemeanor cases are tried in the lower court while felonies are indicted in the lower
court and tried in the higher court. In the unified jurisdiction cases are heard by one
court.

2. The number of criminal filings are directly correlated to the population of the state, the
median number of filings per 100,000 is roughly 1,441. Only 3% of criminal cases are
resolved in trial, guilty pleas dispose of 65% of cases and 25% of cases are dismissed or
the prosecutor refuses to prosecute nolle prosequi.

3. Felonies are the more serious crimes and usually come with more than 1 year of jail
time, between 1987-2001 felony filings rose 49% to a yearly total of 2.5 million.

§59c Civil Division

A.The Civil Division hears claims of a civil nature. Typically Small Claims Court hears
cases involving sums of money less than $1,000, the county court hears cases involving

                                                                                          330
sums less than $10,000, the state district or circuit court hears cases involving sums
typically less than $25,000 and federal district court sums in private civil claims up to
$50,000.

1. In 2001 15.8 million cases were filed with the civil division. The majority of civil
filings deal with tenant/landlord relations and small claims. Tort filings that are
conducted roughly in accordance with 28U.S.C.§2671-2680 regarding medical
malpractice, defamation, insurance premiums and claims against the state have hovered
around 250,000 yearly. 57% of automobile insurance premium cases resulted in a +/-
$18,000 settlement whereas on 27% of medical malpractice cases resulted in +/-287,000
compensation. There are roughly 250,000 contract cases in any given year that deal with
breach of contract, such as debt collection.

2. In 2001 the highest settlement was a $28 billion tobacco product liability tort.

B. Although Courts of general jurisdiction cannot be completely deprived of their civil
trials under this chapter the vast majority of civil trials should be judged by licensed
social workers elected to judgeships.

§59d Traffic Division

A. Traffic Courts hears cases under the supervision of the National Highway Traffic
Safety Commission regarding the traffic tickets, driving under the influence 23USC§408
makes decisions regarding points on a persons license 23 CFRPart1327, fines, the
roadworthiness of vehicles and compliance with the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control
Devices 23CFR655.601.

1.In 2001 there were 55.7 million traffic cases filed, roughly half of them were heard in
traffic courts because the defendant wished to contest the case or had difficulty paying.
Traffic court is the most frequently filed of all courts.

§59e Municipal Court

Municipal Courts are found in all but the smallest of towns. The Municipal Court
enforces misdemeanor criminal and traffic offences against city code and passes
judgment in civil cases valued less than $1,000. The municipal court indicts felons with
the grand jury for prosecution in a county court of general or unified jurisdiction.

§59f Juvenile Court

A. Juvenile Courts are led nationally by the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
Prevention. They operate primarily in accordance with 42USC Chapter 72 The
jurisdiction of the Juvenile Court can be subdivided into three major subdivisions…

1. juvenile delinquency proceedings to try juveniles for their crimes as set forth in
18U.S.C. Part IV Correction of Juvenile Offenders

                                                                                            331
2. interstate family support to provide for the support of single parents by billing the
absentee parent in accordance with 42USC§666 unless the father (or absent mother) is
too poor, living below the poverty line, to afford child support thereby requiring the court
to request Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) from the state under
42USC§601 if the caregiver is in need of assistance to pay for their basis subsistence as
the result of time involved in child care.
3. custodial determinations between competing parents and between parents and the state
as the result of neglect and abuse in accordance with the wishes and best interest of the
child. The Court must contact the extended family to find a relative who can take care of
the child who the child would like to live with. Institutionalization is fundamentally
negligent and abusive and is to be used only as a last resort and with a full spectrum of
appeals available for care giving relatives, foster families and the child to appeal their
homelessness to be placed in a safe home with a relative or friendly foster parent.

B. In 2001 2 million criminal cases were filed in Juvenile Courts a decrease of 100,000
from 1998 primarily due to stricter pre-adjudication screening. 61% of these cases
involve criminal charges that are treated as juvenile delinquency proceedings, 20% are
child victim cases where the state prosecutes the parents and removed the child into the
custody of the state, 16% were status offenses such as runaways and truants who are
typically sent to foster care, counseling or placed on probation.

1. Of the 1,673,042 delinquency offenders 23.1% were regarding personal offenses,
42.2% property, 11.4% drugs and 23.2% for public order offences. An alternative
Juvenile Court is called Children Court.

§59g Appellate Court

A. Appellate Courts hear cases disposed of by the trial courts to guarantee fairness,
constitutional trials and justice by providing for the judicial review of the decisions of the
trial court. There are two types of appellate courts (1) intermediate courts of appeal and
(2) courts of last resort.

1. For the initial term 47% of judges are appointed and 53% are elected, only 43% are
retained for a second term. Appellate Courts provide an important opportunity to remedy
errors of the trial court. Only 11 small jurisdictions function without an appellate court.

2. In 2001 276,408 cases were filed with the Appellate Courts. 68% of these cases were
mandatory appeals by leave of the court and 32% were discretionary appeals of right.

Art. 15 Social Division

§60 Probate Court

A. Probate Court was typically the first court to be established in colonial and frontier
communities and is still the official compiler of vital records in many states where the job
is not done by the County Clerk. The National College of Probate Judges was founded in

                                                                                          332
1968 to exchange information regarding Probate Courts to Probate Judges in the United
States. Probate Courts have a diverse jurisdiction that intersects with many aspects of
life, they,

(i) issue marriage certificates in accordance with state marriage statute
(ii) administer and appoint executors for wills, 24U.S.C.§420
(iii) provide duplicate legal forms for the national census such as name changes, births
and paternity.

B. On the condition that they abolish the slavery of the alleged mentally ill (ami) and
elect a social worker to judge wills, trusts and estates etc. the “Probate Court” has the
option to change their name to “Justice of the Peace” for graduation from the National
College of Probate Judges as directed in Chapter 7 National Cemeteries.

§60a Family Court

A. The principal function of Domestic Relations and Family Courts is to conduct divorce
proceedings in accordance with the divorce laws of the state. As divorce involves the
separation two people who have become financially and psychologically dependent upon
each other the Family Court is also responsible for…

1. child custody determinations make arrangements for visitation, housing and care of the
child as defined by 28USC§1738A and in accordance with the wishes and best interest of
the child.
2. interstate family support cases to provide for the support of single parents by billing
the absentee parent in accordance with 42USC§666 unless the father (or absent mother)
is too poor to afford child support requiring the court to request Temporary Assistance for
Needy Families (TANF) from the state under 42USC§601 if the caregiver is in need of
assistance to pay for their basis subsistence as the result of time involved in child care.
3. alimony is a consideration in divorce proceedings where on spouse faces a decrease in
their standard of living and their former spouse can afford to make some payments.
4. adoption of children is conducted under 42USC Chapter 67 Subchapter II

B. To accommodate the high divorce rates in the United States where more than 50% of
marriages end in divorce the Domestic Relations and Family Courts processed 5.3
million cases in 2001.

   1. Despite the prevalence of divorce, as of 2001 the parental makeup of families is
      7% single father, 23% single mother and 70% married couples. 935,000 filings
      in 2001 were regarding the custody of children, 88,928 of cases filed were
      regarding Interstate Family Support, 800,000 regarding divorce, 250,000 paternity
      and 73,000 regarding Adoption. Between 1996 and 2001 filings of domestic
      violence rose 16% from 521,000 to 602,000 in reporting states.

C. To redress the high rates of divorce and unsatisfactory divorce settlements, that often
leave the mother without the independence of her maiden name, licensed social workers

                                                                                            333
shall take full responsibility for and be elected to Divorce, Domestic Relation and Family
Court Judgeships.

§60b Mental Health Court

Mental Health Courts under the Justice System Improvement Act Sub-Chapter XII-J
should be adjudicated by the Community Board of Mental Health social workers. State
mental institution and private psychiatric hospitals have been thoroughly condemned,
most recently by the World Health Organization Report on Mental Health in 2001.
Propaganda is to “close state mental institution and private psychiatric hospitals in favor
of community mental health. The State Mental Institution Library Education (SMILE)
buildings are given the right choice to be the community mental health headquarters or
the option to become a high security penal institution for criminal defendants Chapter 4.

§60c Drug Court

A. There are currently 1,200 specialized Drug Courts in operation or planned in the
United States eligible for drug court grants under the 1994 Omnibus Crime and Safe
Street Act 42U.S.C.§3789d upholding Drug Abuse Prevention, Treatment and
Rehabilitation 21U.S.C.Chapter 16.

1. Since the inception of drug courts in 1989 drug court programs have treated 300,000
drug addicts and 71% of them have either quit or continue to participate in programs.
Drug courts have been proven to reduce recidivism to 4-21% rather 49% for drug
offenders who are not professionally treated.

2. Drug offenders continue to account for 21% of state sentencing and 57% of sentenced
federal inmates. Severe drug addiction and crime are distinctly related and the average
severe addict commits 63 crimes a year, 16% of prison inmates report to have committed
crimes to support their drug addiction.

3. The drug court provides a much less expensive and more effective method of treating
people for their drug addiction both reducing the cost of correctional care, usually +/-
25,000 a year to +/-$4,000 a year and greatly decreasing recidivism.

B. Under this Chapter licensed professional social workers trained in drug treatment shall
Judge the adjudication of substance abuse offenders.

Art. 16 Employees

§61 Clerk

A. The Clerk or Registrar of the Court monitors all the activities of judiciary by indexing
the decisions and judgments of the court, information provided by deputies and the
transportation to and from correctional facilities. The County Clerk is an elected office
that publishes all of the decisions of the Common Pleas and Appeals Judges and manages

                                                                                        334
many of the licensing accounts of the county including, in many states, the election of
county officials. Although the judges do the decision-making, the Clerk supervises all
the judges and deputies in their jurisdiction and is the Clerk is holder of county funds
allotted to the judiciary that are dispensed in accordance with the approval of the judges
and the budgets of county organizations.

B. Under 28USCIII(57)Sec. 951 each clerk of court and his deputies shall take the
following oath or affirmation before entering upon their duties: ''I, _ _ _ _ _ _, having
been appointed _ _ _, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will truly and faithfully enter
and record all orders, decrees, judgments and proceedings of such court, and will
faithfully and impartially discharge all other duties of my office according to the best of
my abilities and understanding. So help me God.''

§62 Police

A. The International Association of Chiefs of Police standardizes police practices around
the world in accordance with the 1979 Law Enforcement Code of Conduct that ensures
that police protect the populace from illegal acts and refrain from the excessive use of
force themselves. Interpol conducts international policing operations in co-operation
with National Departments of Justice whose statistics are data-based by the United
Nations Crime and Justice Information Network. The primary purpose of law
enforcement is to keep the peace by apprehending criminals and patrolling the streets
under the supervision of courts who ensure that people apprehended enjoy their
constitutional right to a fair trial and rehabilitation.

B. Policing is one of the integral responsibilities of the government. Most police officers
attend a police academy for 6 months before being employed however many officers are
merely hired and trained on the job as long as they have no felony convictions on their
record. Funding for the police in the USA has risen 244% since 1982 from $20 billion to
$65 billion in 1999. The major trend in police funding has been to demilitarize the police
force by advocating for collaboration with other public safety officials to provide
Community Oriented Policing Services.

C. Police Officers are supervised by a geographic law enforcement agency that defines
the jurisdiction of the police officers. The Bureau of Justices Statistics reported that in
2000 the federal government employed 88,496 full-time law enforcement officers
authorized to make arrests and carry fire arms. 17,784 state and local law enforcement
agencies employed 708,022 full time officers. 12,666 local police agencies employed
440,920 full time officers. 3,070 county sheriffs employed 164,711 deputies. 49 primary
state agencies employed 56,348 officers. 1,376 special jurisdictions employed 43,413
officers. 623 Texas constable offices employed 2,630 law enforcement officers.

§63 Pre-Trial

A. Pre-Trial supervises the administration of bonds and bails to guarantee that felony
defendants go to court, have an opportunity for pretrial release and can post bail. In 1998

                                                                                         335
Bureau of Justice Statistics estimated that 64% of defendants were released by the court
prior to the disposition of their case.

1. Thirty-six percent were detained until case disposition, including 7% who were denied
bail. Released defendants were most likely to be released on commercial surety bond
(34%) or their own recognizance (30%).

2. Murder defendants (13%) were the least likely to be released prior to case disposition,
followed by defendants whose most serious arrest charge was robbery (38%), rape (47%),
burglary (50%), or motor vehicle theft (50%).

3. Less than half of defendants with an active criminal justice status, such as parole
(18%) or probation (43%), at the time of arrest were released, compared to 71% of these
with no active status.

4. About a third of released defendants were either rearrested for a new offense, failed to
appear in court as scheduled, or committed some other violation that resulted in the
revocation of their pretrial release.

5. Of the 24% of released defendants who had a bench warrant issued for their arrest
because they did not appear in court as scheduled, about a fifth, representing 5% of all
released defendants, were still fugitives after 1 year.

B. The number of federal defendants activated in pretrial services, including pretrial
diversion cases, dropped by nearly 3% from 99,365 cases in 2005 to 96,479 cases in
2006. As a result, the number of pretrial services reports prepared by Pretrial Services
officers declined by more than 2%.

1. The number of cases opened in 2006, including pretrial diversion cases, was nearly 6%
greater than the 91,314 cases opened in 2002. During that same period, the number of
persons interviewed grew by 1% from 63,528 to 64,018 individuals.

§64 District Attorney

A. The District Attorney oversees the prosecution of felony defendants in a specific
prosecutorial district such as a court, county or group of several counties.

1. In 2000 there were 2,341 state court prosecutors most of whom are democratically
elected in county elections and employ 79,000 attorneys, investigators and support staff
who prosecuted a total of 928,000 adults and 36,000 juveniles in 1998, 68% of whom
were sentenced to incarceration.

2. The prosecution was funded approximately $4 billion in 2000. As a rule the
prosecutor‟s offices are highly over funded and overstaffed.




                                                                                           336
B. In 2000 the offices of the 93 US Attorneys, the federal prosecutors, opened
investigations against 123,559 people for violations of federal law.

1. Forty percent were investigated for public-order offenses such as regulatory (5%),
immigration (13%) and weapons (7%) offenses; a third (32%) were investigated for drug
offenses; 23% for property offenses; and 5% for violent offenses such as murder, rape,
assault, and robbery.

2. Of the 117,450 suspects in matters concluded during 2000, 74% were referred for
prosecution either before a U.S. district court judge (62%) or a U.S. magistrate (12%).

3. Nearly all (97%) of those investigated for immigration offenses were referred for
prosecution. 46% of defendants were released following their initial court appearance.

4. Of the 68,156 defendants convicted and sentenced during 2000, 74% were sentenced to
a term of imprisonment (either alone or in conjunction with probation), 18% were
sentenced to probation (either alone or with incarceration), and 4% were sentenced to pay
a fine alone.

5. The average prison sentence imposed during 2000 was 57 months. Defendants
convicted of weapons felonies (92 months), violent felonies (87 months), and drug
felonies (76 months) received the longest prison terms, on average.

C. The Guidelines on the Role of Prosecutors of 27 August-7 September 1990 explain.

1. The office of prosecutors shall be strictly separated from judicial functions.

2. Prosecutors carry out their functions impartially and avoid all political, social,
religious, racial, cultural, sexual or any other kind of discrimination.

3. When prosecutors come into possession of evidence against suspects that they know or
believe on reasonable grounds was obtained through recourse to unlawful methods,
which constitute a grave violation of the suspect's human rights, especially involving
torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, or other abuses of human
rights, they shall refuse to use such evidence against anyone other than those who used
such methods, or inform the Court accordingly, and shall take all necessary steps to
ensure that those responsible for using such methods are brought to justice.

§65 Public Defender

A. The purpose of lawyers is to establish conditions under which justice can be
maintained. International treaties obligate lawyers exclusively in the role of defending
the criminally accused.

1. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights enshrines the principles of equality before
the law, the presumption of innocence, the right to a fair and public hearing by an

                                                                                          337
independent and impartial tribunal, and all the guarantees necessary for the defense of
everyone charged with a penal offence.

2. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights proclaims, in addition, the
right to be tried without undue delay and the right to a fair and public hearing by a
competent, independent and impartial tribunal established by law.

3. The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights recalls the
obligation of States under the Charter to promote universal respect for, and observance
of, human rights and freedoms.

4. The Body of Principles for the Protection of All Persons under Any Form of Detention
or Imprisonment provides that a detained person shall be entitled to have the assistance
of, and to communicate and consult with, legal counsel.

5. The Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners recommend, in
particular, that legal assistance and confidential communication with counsel should be
ensured. Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers 27 August to 7 September 1990

B. The Public Defender‟s Office represents criminally accused people who are too poor
to afford legal counsel to uphold the 6th Amendment right to counsel. Assigned counsel
program and open contracts to local defense attorneys.

1. Among the Nation's 100 most populous counties in 1999, public defender programs
were operating in 90 counties, assigned counsel programs in 89 counties, and contract
programs in 42 counties.

C. In 1999 an estimated $1.2 billion was spent to provide indigent criminal defense in the
Nation's 100 most populous counties. About 73% of the total was spent by public
defender programs, 21% by assigned counsel programs, and 6% on awarded contracts.

1. This $1.2 billion represents an estimated 3% of all local criminal justice expenditures
used for police, judicial services, and corrections in these counties. County governments
provided 60% of all funds for indigent criminal defense services in the largest 100
counties followed by State governments providing 25%.

2. Public defender offices in the largest 100 counties employed over 12,700 individuals
during 1999, including over 6,300 assistant public defenders, 1,200 investigators, 300
social workers, 2,700 support staff, and nearly 400 paralegals.

3. Over 30,700 private attorneys were appointed through assigned counsel programs to
represent indigent defendants in the largest 100 counties during 1999. Over 1,000
contracts for indigent defense services were administered by contract attorney programs.

D. Conviction rates for indigent defendants and those with their own lawyers were about
the same in Federal and States courts.

                                                                                          338
1. About 90% of the Federal defendants and 75% of the defendants in the most populous
counties were found guilty regardless of the type of their attorneys.

2. Of those found guilty, however, those represented by publicly financed attorneys were
incarcerated at a higher rate than those defendants who paid for their own legal
representation 88% compared to 77% in Federal courts and 71% compared to 54% in the
most populous counties.

3. On average, sentence lengths for defendants sent to jail or prison were shorter for those
with publicly-financed attorneys than those who hired counsel.

a. In Federal district court those with publicly financed attorneys were given just under 5
years on average and those with private attorneys just over 5 years.

b. In State courts those with publicly financed attorneys were sentenced to an average of
2½ years and those with private attorneys to 3 years.

§66 Prisoners

A. Jails and Prisons are expected to meet the safety and civility of the Standard Minimum
Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners. Federal Bureau of Prisons statutes are set forth in
Title 18 US Code Part 3 Chapters 301-319 and Title 28 CFR Chapters 3&5 . State
departments of corrections manage prisons and local jails in accordance with applicable
state and federal laws.

B. The US Correctional population has increased 357.9% between 1980 and 2002 at an
average annual growth rate of 3.6%. At year end 2002 6.7 million people were in jail or
on probation or parole, 3.2% of the adult population. A total of 2,178,577 people were
detained - 1,440,665 were in prison, 1,277,127 in state prisons and 163,528 in federal
prison, another 737,912 were held in local jails awaiting trial or serving a misdemeanor
sentence of less than a year. By year end 2002 4.7 million people were on probation and
753,100 were on parole.

1. The Bureau of Justice Statistics has published the new total of 2,131,180 from the
Census of 30 June 2004. 726 prisoners per 100,000 people. At midyear 2004 there were
4,919 black male prison and jail inmates per 100,000 black males in the United States,
compared to 1,717 Hispanic male inmates per 100,000 Hispanic males and 717 white
male inmates per 100,000 white males. The correctional census needs to be done every
year, preferably in January, Jail month, while promoting the goal of a dramatic reduction
to only 1 million detention beds.

2. 50% of the increase in prison population is attributed to a 340% increase in violent
offences from 173,300 in 1980 to 589,100 in 2000. The incarceration of drug offenders
increased 1,322% from 19,000 in 1980 to 251,100 in 2000 and is attributed with more
than half of the federal inmates and 27% of state inmates.



                                                                                        339
3. The number of prisoners on death row has dramatically increased since the death
penalty was reinstated in 1978 from 134 to 3,593 in 2001 when 71 people were executed.

4. The United States has the largest prison population in the world as the result of
mandatory minimum sentencing legislation.

C. Prisoners are entitled to fair trial and treatment under the Fifth, Sixth, Seventh and
Eighth Amendment to the US Constitution, Excessive bail shall not be required, nor
excessive fines imposed, nor cruel punishments inflicted. Under the Thirteenth
amendment they may not be incarcerated except for a crime for which they have been
duly convicted. In 1970 the US Supreme Court remanded Hurtado v. United States 410
US 578 (1973) to the United States Congress requiring and raising the fee awarded to
pre-trial detainees from $20 to $21 a day. Inflation has caused the current witness fee for
prisoners to rise to $40 per day of pre-trial detention, the same as witnesses, but a lower
hourly rate under 28USC§1821(d)(4).

1. People should not be jailed for misdemeanor offences that should ticketed and tried, if
misdemeanor offenders are incarcerated, they should be released by the jail within 24
hours.
2. The Court shall appoint counsel for the defense if the prisoner cannot afford it on his
own.
3. Jailers shall help to overturn the convictions of people who they believe to have been
arrested on false charges or falsely imprisoned or abducted in some miscarriage of justice
3. Once sentenced, the prisoner has the right to appeal the decision at the Court of
Appeals and therefrom to the Supreme Court.

§67 Judges

A. In the United States there are an estimated 27,250 Administrative Law Judges,
Adjudicators and Hearing Officers who make an average of $51,580 per year. 6,260 are
Arbitrators, Mediators and Conciliators making an average of $70,310 per year. 23,150
are Judges, Magistrates and prosecutors who make an average of $67,150 per year.
175,870 are paralegals and legal assistants making an average of $36,550 per year.
17,460 are Court Reporters making an average of $38,040. 26,060 are law clerks making
an average of $29,280 per year.

1. On average State courts pay their justices $150,000, appeals judges $120,000 and give
county judges of general jurisdiction $100,000, magistrates $50,000 and municipal
judges of the Grand Jury $50,000 and adjudicators of the Traffic Division $25,000-
$35,000.

2. Judges are responsible for the adjudication of criminals, the settlement of civil disputes
and claims against the state that suit the authorization of their office.

   (a) Municipal Judges are typically authorized to disburse funds up to $1,000, ie. For
       the grand jury.

                                                                                         340
   (b) County Judges are authorized to settle funds up to $10,000 for a felony trial.
   (c) State Appeals Judges are authorized to settle up to $25,000 for the state.
   (d) Federal Judges are authorized to settle $50,000 private matters and may authorize
       all cases, great and small.
   (e) The Supreme Courts and Court of International Trade have no limit.

3. The duties of judges and justices are simple…

   (a) employ a staff competent to respond to all petitioners in a civilized and human
       manner.
   (b) Obey the law.
   (c) Issue summons, and pay, attorneys, witnesses, educators and jurists.
   (d) Hold trials to hear arguments regarding the merits of the laws.
   (e) Remain certified to practice law by the Supreme Court of their state and nation.
   (f) Publish decisions at the Clerk‟s Office.

4. Judges are typically served by several assistants, a representative to the Clerk‟s Office,
a bailiff and as many deputies as is required to hear the defendants. These assistants
typically are not licensed attorneys and make between $25,000 and $50,000.

5. Magistrate Judges are licensed attorneys who are appointed by the local Jury of Judges
to serve the court in the capacity of Magistrate Judge.

B. The premise of the Basic Principles on the Independence of the Judiciary of 1985 is
that the judiciary shall decide matters before them impartially, on the basis of facts and in
accordance with the law, without any restrictions, improper influences, inducements,
pressures, threats or interferences, direct or indirect, from any quarter or for any reason.
The Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct as revised at the Round Table Meeting of
Chief Justice at Peace Palace, the Hague, 25-16 November 2002 explains, a judge shall
exercise the judicial function independently on the basis of the judge's assessment of the
facts and in accordance with a conscientious understanding of the law, free of any
extraneous influences, inducements, pressures, threats or interference, direct or indirect,
from any quarter or for any reason. A judge shall not only be free from inappropriate
connections with, and influence by, the executive and legislative branches of government,
but must also appear to a reasonable observer to be free there from.

§68 Probation and Parole Officers

A. Probation officers and correctional treatment specialists who counsel criminal
offenders as they reenter society held about 84,000 jobs in 2002 according to the
American Probation and Parole Association. Many people who are convicted of crimes
are placed on probation, instead of being sent to prison. During probation, offenders must
stay out of trouble and meet various other requirements. Probation officers, who are
called community supervision officers in some States, supervise people who have been
placed on probation. Correctional treatment specialists, who may also be known as case
managers, counsel prison inmates and help them plan for their release from incarceration.

                                                                                         341
1. Probation officers supervise offenders on probation or parole through personal contact
with the offenders and their families. Instead of requiring offenders to meet officers in
their offices, many officers meet offenders in their homes and at their places of
employment or therapy.

2. Probation and parole agencies also seek the assistance of community organizations,
such as religious institutions, neighborhood groups, and local residents, to monitor the
behavior of many offenders.

3. Some offenders are required to wear an electronic device so that probation officers can
monitor their location and movements.

4. Officers may arrange for offenders to get substance abuse rehabilitation or job training.

B. The number of persons under federal post-conviction supervision in 2006 increased by
less than 1% to 114,002 individuals. As of September 30, 2006, the number of persons
serving terms of supervised release after their release from a correctional institution
totaled 85,729 individuals. That number constituted 75% of all persons under post-
conviction supervision, compared to 73% in the previous year.

1. Persons on parole declined by nearly 10% from 3,183 individuals in 2005 to 2,876
individuals in 2006. The parole cases accounted for less than 3% of post-conviction
cases. Because of a continuing decline in the imposition of sentences of probation by
both district court judges and magistrate judges, the number of persons on probation
decreased by 5% to 25,178 individuals. That figure represented 22% of all persons under
post-conviction supervision.

2. Proportionately, the number of individuals under post-conviction supervision for a
drug-related offense remained unchanged from a year ago at 44%. From 2002 to 2006,
the number of persons under post-conviction supervision grew by 5%, an increase of
5,210 individuals. The number of persons released from correctional institutions who
served terms of supervised release increased by 17% over the same time period.

§69 Witnesses

A. Witnesses and Writers should be summoned in felony trials, and other trials their
evidence impacts, to assist in the cross-examination of the evidence and witnesses, with
the police and attorneys to determine the truth. The Court may not hire exclusively
witnesses for the prosecution to eliminate the counsel for the defense, due to the damage
that does to the truth.

1. Witnesses and Writers should be recognized for any work they do for the court -
investigating a crime scene, litigating the jail, writing for the county, state or federal
government. Witnesses and writers should not be harassed, intimidated or threatened
with unjustified incarceration, prosecution or espionage for fear that the truth might be
known.

                                                                                           342
B. Witnesses are entitled to the payment of $40 per diem when they attend trial under
28USC§1821(b). Deference should be given to the defense attorney to authorize the
payment of witness fees for the family and friends who have come to counsel the defense.

1. Writers are entitled to payment. Due to the time it takes to render briefs of sufficient
depth and scope, greater than 5 pages, for a felony, it is obligatory that judges and clerks
authorize the payment of an estimated $50 per 5 pages of relevant information submitted
to the court, particularly those in which the lawyers go naked.

2. Police officers often earn time-and-a-half while attending court proceedings however
this policy must be terminated to eliminate bribery. The police should be paid the same
rate as they are on the street so as not to cloud their minds when they witness atrocious
crimes, distortions of the truth and injustices at trial.

§70 Jury

A. Commissioners of jurors are appointed by a judge and shall be officers of the courts of
record in such county and shall attend upon each term of such courts for which a jury is
drawn. Compensation is made at regular or special term of the court. Issues of facts and
law are triable by jury who are sworn under the voir dire, “to tell the truth”. Claims for
actual damages may be assessed by the jury in each case, as instructed by the court.
When the jury cannot agree or the parties to the proceeding do, the jury may be
discharged. R. v. Spencer, SCC 11 2007: March 8.

B. The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) is dedicated to the primacy, coherence
and implementation of international law and principles that promote human rights
through the rule of law. The ICJ provides legal expertise at both the international and
national levels to ensure that developments in international law adhere to human rights
principles and that international standards are implemented at the national level. The
Commission was founded in Berlin in 1952 and its membership is composed of sixty
eminent jurists who are representatives of the different legal systems of the world.

1. Based in Geneva, the International Secretariat is responsible for the realisation of the
aims and objectives of the Commission.

2. In carrying out its work, the International Secretariat benefits from a network of
autonomous national sections and affiliated organisations located in all continents.

C. Jurists are randomly selected from the people who respond to the solicitation and are
selected by the attorneys on the basis of the potential jurists desire to serve on the jury.

1. Jurists may serve longer, if they choose to remain in the jury pool, to serve judges on
the Grand Jury and in civil trials regarding multiple claims for money and/or jail time
exceeding the $20 limit set forth in the Seventh Amendment to the US Constitution.

                                                                                          343
2. A typical jury consists of 12 people who earn $20 a day, $240 a day.

3. Every quarter the Court shall appoint a Grand Jury to Conduct a census of the jails and
inspect human rights conditions in the local correctional community.

D. The Fully Informed Jury Association (FIJA) is a public policy nonprofit, tax-exempt
educational foundation under Section 501 (c) 3 of the Internal Revenue Code. The FIGA
mission is to educate Americans regarding the power of jury nullification. Jury
nullification allows jurors the ability to rely on personal conscience, to judge the merit of
the law and its application, and to nullify bad law, when necessary for justice, by finding
for the defendant. Jurors are often not informed of these rights because court officers
have such a vested interest in a conviction that attorneys are often threatened if they
attempt to educate the jury of the power of jury nullification.

1. Juries protect society from dangerous individuals and also protect individuals from
dangerous government. Juries must take into account the facts of the case, mitigating
circumstances, the merits of the law, and the fairness of its application in each case.

2. The recognition of the authority and right of jurors to weigh the merits of the law and
to render a verdict based on conscience, dates from before the writing of our Constitution,
in cases such as those of William Penn and Peter Zenger. Should this right ever be
suppressed, the people will retain the right to resist, having an unalienable right to veto or
nullify bad and oppressive laws, and in fact then would be morally compelled to do so.

3. An accused or aggrieved party‟s right to trial by jury, in all instances where the
government or any of its agencies is an opposing party, includes the right to inform the
jurors of their power to judge the law as well as the evidence, and to vote on the verdict
according to conscience.

4. This right shall not be infringed by any statute, juror oath, court order, or procedure or
practice of the court, including the use of any method of jury selection which could
preclude or limit the empanelment of jurors willing to exercise this power.

5. Nor shall this right be infringed by preventing any party to the trial, once the jurors
have been informed of their powers, from presenting arguments to the jury which may
pertain to issues of law and conscience, including (1) the merit, intent, constitutionality or
applicability of the law in the instant case; (2) the motives, moral perspective, or
circumstances of the accused or aggrieved party; (3) the degree and direction of guilt or
actual harm done, or (4) the sanctions which may be applied to the losing party.

6. Failure to allow the accused or aggrieved party or counsel for that party to so inform
the jury shall be grounds for mistrial and another trial by jury.”

E. Jury nullification of law is a traditional right that was rigorously defended by
America's Founding Fathers. Those great men, Patriots all, intended the jury to serve as a

                                                                                          344
final safeguard – a test that laws must pass before gaining sufficient popular authority for
enforcement. Thus the Constitution provides five separate tribunals with veto power –
representatives, senate, executive, judges – and finally juries. Each enactment of law
must pass all these hurdles before it gains the authority to punish those who may choose
to violate it.

1. First US Supreme Court Chief Justice John Jay, writing in Georgia v. Brailsford, 1794,
concluded:

"The jury has the right to judge both the law as well as the fact in controversy."

2. Thomas Jefferson said,

"I consider trial by jury as the only anchor yet imagined by man, by which a government
can be held to the principles of its constitution."

3. The power of the jury to judge the justice of the law and to hold laws invalid by a
finding of "not guilty" for any law a juror felt was unjust or oppressive, dates back to the
Magna Carta, in 1215. Chief Justice Vaughan issued an historically-important ruling:
that jurors could not be punished for their verdicts. Bushell's Case (1670) was one of the
most important developments in the common-law history of the jury.

4. John Hancock, the wealthy Massachusetts patriot and smuggler who as President of the
Continental Congress affixed his familiar bold signature to the Declaration of
Independence was prosecuted via this admiralty jurisdiction in 1768 and fined £9,000 –
triple the value of the goods aboard his sloop "Liberty" which had been previously
forfeited.

5. John Adams eloquently argued the case, chastising Parliament for depriving
Americans of their right to trial by jury. Adams later said of the juror, "it is not only his
right, but his duty – to find the verdict according to his own best understanding,
judgment, and conscience, though in direct opposition to the direction of the court."

6. Until the middle of the 1800s, federal and state judges often instructed the juries they
had the right to disregard the court's view of the law. Northern jurors began to refuse to
convict abolitionists who had violated the 1850 Fugitive Slave Law. Modern treatments
of abolitionism praise these jury-nullification verdicts for the role they played in helping
the anti-slavery cause.

7. In Sparf and Hansen v. U.S 1895, the Supreme Court, under pressure from large
corporations, rendered in a bitter split decision that courts no longer had to inform juries
they had the power to veto an unjust law. Courts began concealing jurors' rights from
American citizens and falsely instructing them that they may consider only the facts as
admitted by the court.




                                                                                           345
8. Researchers in 1966 found that jury nullification occurred only 8.8 percent of the time
between 1954 and 1958, and suggested that "one reason why the jury exercises its very
real power [to nullify] so sparingly is because it is officially told it has none." Today, no
officer of the court is allowed to tell the jury of their veto power.

9. The jury's veto power protects minorities from "the body of the people, operating by
the majority against the minority." Twelve people taken randomly from the population
will represent both friends and opponents of the party in power. With fully-informed
juries, the government cannot exercise its powers over the people without the consent of
the people. Trial by jury is trial by the people.

10. For more than six hundred years, since Magna Carta, in 1215, there has been no
clearer principle of English or American constitutional law, than that, in criminal cases, it
is not only the right and duty of juries to judge what are the facts, what is the law, and
what was the moral intent of the accused; but that it is also their right, and their primary
and paramount duty, to judge of the justice of the law, and to hold all laws invalid, that
are, in their opinion, unjust or oppressive, and all persons guiltless in violating, or
resisting the execution of such laws.

11. Congress must enact laws to educate citizens of their power as jurists to judge the
merit of both the facts and the laws and render a not guilty verdict on conscience, before
they are sent to a courtroom and can no longer be influenced by pamphlets. Jury
nullification occurs when a jury returns a verdict of “Not Guilty” despite its belief that
the defendant is guilty of the violation charged. The jury nullifies a law that it finds
immoral or wrongly applied to the defendant.

Bibliography

1. Act to Establish the Department of Justice 1870
2. Act of May 27, 1955 42 U.S.C. 1856a, 1856b
3. Adjustable Rate Mortgage (ARM) Ban HA-10-5-07
4. Administration of the Civil Liberties Act of 1988 50 U.S.C. App. 1989b
5. Administration of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 42 U.S.C. 1973c
6. Admission of Non-Immigrants 8USC§1184
7. Adoption of children 42USC Chapter 67 Subchapter II
8. Advisory Opinion regarding the Legal Consequences of Constructing a Wall in the 9.
Occupied Palestinian Territory No. 131 on 9 July 2004 was reviewed in the third and
final draft, the Will of the Palestinian People HA-11-11-04
10. Aerial Incident of 7 November 1954 (United States v. USSR) (1959)
11. Aerial Incident of 4 September 1954 (United States v. USSR) (1958)
12. Aerial Incident of 27 July 1955 (United States v. Bulgaria) (1957-1960)
13. Aerial Incident of 3 July 1988 (Islamic Republic of Iran v. United States of America)
(1989-1996)
14. Afghanistan & Iraq v. USA HA-2-11-05
15. African Charter on Human and Peoples‟ Rights adopted 27 June 1981
16. African Commission on Human and Peoples‟ Rights

                                                                                          346
17. African Court of Human and Peoples‟ Rights
18. Ahmed Omar Abu Ali v. US Department of Justice Office of Civil Rights HA-22-6-06
19. Airborne Hunting Act 16 U.S.C. 742j-1
20. American Arbitration Association (AAA)
21. American Bar Association
22. ABA. Model Code of Judicial Conduct. 2004 Edition
23. ABA Model Rules of Professional Responsibility
24. ABA Justice Kennedy Commission Recommendations 2004
25. American Civil Liberties Union. ACLU v. NSA
26. American Convention on Human Rights
27. American Probation and Parole Association
28. Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 42 U.S.C. §12101-12213
29. Amistad 40 US 518 (1841)
30. Amnesty International. Fair Trials Manual
31. Amnesty International, International standards on the death penalty, AI Index: ACT
50/06/97, 1997
32. Antidiscrimination policy; minority recruitment program 5 U.S.C. 7201
33. Anti-Trust Division 28 CFR I 0.40
34. Apple, James G.; Deyling, Robert P. A Primer on the Civil-Law System. Federal
Judicial Center. 1994-1995
35. Applications for retirement 5 U.S.C.8336
36. Appointment of special attorneys and special assistants to the Attorney General 28
U.S.C. 515
37. Approval of “necessary expenditures in the line of duty'' of U.S. Marshals and Deputy
U.S. Marshals 28 U.S.C. 567
38. Approving inmate disciplinary and good time regulations 18 U.S.C. 3624
39. Arrest warrants were issued, under seal, against five LRA leaders: J Kony, V Otti, R
Lukwiya, O Odhiambo and D Ongwen. D Ongwen ICC-02/04-01/05 8 July 2005
40. Ashcroft v. American Civil Liberties Union, 535 U. S. 564 (2002)
41. Ashcroft v. American Civil Liberties Union No. 03-218 (2004)
42. Assistant Attorney General of the Civil Division 28 CFR I 0.46
43. Assistant Attorney General in charge of the Criminal Division 28 CFR I 0.56
44. Assistant Attorney General in charge of the Environment and Natural Resources
Division 28 CFR I 0.66
45. Assistant Attorney General in charge of the Tax Division 28 CFR I 0.71
46. Astrue, M.J. Annual Report of the Supplemental Security Income Program. Social
Security Administration. 2011
47. Atomic Energy Act of 1954 42 U.S.C. 2011
48. Attorney-in-Charge, International Trade Field Office 28 CFR I 0.48
49. Attorney General's Advisory Committee of United States Attorneys 28 CFR 0.10
Recovery 28CFR I 0.171
50. Authority of Attorney General to investigate United States attorneys, marshals,
trustees, clerks of court, and others 28 U.S.C.526
51. Authority to provide law enforcement representatives with information on Federal
prisoners 18 U.S.C. 4082



                                                                                     347
52. Authorization for the interception of wire, oral or electronic communications limited
18USC(119)§2516
53. Automobile Information Disclosure Act 15 U.S.C. 1231
54. Avena and other Mexican Nationals (Mexico v. United States of America) (2003-
2004)
55. Baier v. Alberta 2007 SCC 31 June 29
56. Bail Reform Act of 1966 arrest and release 28 U.S.C.3041-3063
57. Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act 16 U.S.C.668-668d
58. Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct as revised at the Round Table Meeting of
Chief Justice at Peace Palace, the Hague, 25-16 November 2002
59. Bankruptcy Reform Act of 1978 28US Code Chapter 6 § 151-158
60. Basic Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Remedy and Reparation for Victims
of Gross Violations of International Human Rights Law and Serious Violations of
International Humanitarian Law of 16 December 2005
61. Basic Principles of the Independence of the Judiciary of 6 September 1985
62. Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers 27 August to 7 September 1990
63. Bell, Derrick. Race, Racism and American Law. Little Brown and Company. Law
School Case Book Series. Third Edition. Boston. 1992
64. Bergel, Jean Louis. Principal Features and Methods of Codification, 48 La. L. Rev.
1073, 1078–79 (1988)
65. Berger v. New York, 388 U.S. 41 (1967)
66. Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works of September 9,
1886
67. Blairon, Laurence, Mrs. ICJ Information Officer. 3 September 2004
68. Blakely v. Washington No. 02-1632 of June 24, 2004
69. Bloom v. Social Security Administration (10th Cir.) No. 02-3362 (2003)
70. Board of Directors of Federal Prison Industries 28 CFR I 0.99
71. Border Protection, Antiterrorism, and Illegal Immigration Control Act of 2005
(Referred to Senate Committee after being Received from House) HR 4437
72. Border Security Act S. 2394
73. British Columbia (Attorney General) v. Christie 2007 SCC 21 25 May
74. Boumedine v. Bush No. 06-1195 (2008)
75. Buergenthal, Thomas; Shelton, Dinah. Protecting Human Rights in the Americas,
Cases and Materials, N.P. Engel, Publisher, Kehl, Strasbourg, Arlington, 1995
76. Bureau of Justice Assistance 28 CFR 0.94-1
77. Bureau of Justice Statistics 28 CFR I 0.93, 42 U.S.C. 3731-3734
78. Bureau of Prisons 28 CFR I 0.95
79. Bush v. Gore on 12 December 2000
80. Bush v. Palm Beach County Canvassing Board writ of certiorari to the Florida
Supreme Court December 4, 2000
81. Camara v. Municipal Court, 387 U.S. 523 (1967)
82. Canada Attorney General v. Hislop 2007 SCC 10 March 1
83. Canadian Western Bank v. Alberta 2007 SCC 22 May 21
84. Care of juveniles 18 U.S.C. 5040
85. Central Committee of the Hamilton County Republican Party v. Dalton C-060269
Ohio 1st Circuit May 30, 2007

                                                                                     348
86. Chairman of the United States Parole Commission 28 CFR I 0.125
87. Chapter XIV of the 1945 Charter of the United Nations
88. Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) of 1997
89. Chief Justice John G. Roberts. 2006 Year-End-Report of the Federal Judiciary.
January 1, 2007 Chief Justice Rehnquist. Year-End Report. 2000
90. Child custody determinations 28USC§1738A
91. Child Support Enforcement 42USC§666
92. Circuit Courts of Appeals 28US Code Chapter 3 §41-49
93. Civil Division 28 CFR I 0.45
94. Civil litigation at the Court of International Trade Against the United States and
Agencies and Officers Thereof 28 U.S.C. 1581
95. Civil Rights Act of 1875 passed March 1, 1875 Chapter 13 of Title 18
96. Civil Rights Act of 1957
97. Civil Rights Act of 2 July 1964 PL 88-352, 42 USC Chapter 21 §1981 - §2000h
98. Civil Rights Act of 21 November 1991 (Pub. L. 102-166)
99. Civil Rights Cases 109 U.S. 3 (1883)
100. Civil Rights Division 28 CFR I 0.50
101. Comision Interamericana de Derechos Humanos - Diez años de actividad 1971,
Secretaría General de la Organización ede los Estados Americanos, Washington D.C.,
1982
102. Community Relations Service 28 CFR I 0.30
103. Conditions of Probation 18USC(227)§3563
104. Constitution of Hospitals & Asylums Non Governmental Economics (CHANGE)
105. Constitutive Act of the African Union. 11 July 2000
106. Contracting, for the imprisonment, subsistence, care, and proper employment of
persons convicted of offenses against the United States 18 U.S.C. 4002
107. Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or
Punishment of 26 June 1987
108. Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms 1953
109. Convention on Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations of February 13,
1946
110. Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women 3
September 1981
111. Convention on the Prohibition of Development, Production and Stockpiling of
Bacteriologic (Biologic) and Toxin Weapons and Their Destruction (BTWC) of 1972 that
entered into force on 26 March 1975
112. Convention on the Rights of the Child of 2 September 1990
113. Coordination and Assistance of United States Trustees 28 CFR I 0.38
114. Crime Victims‟ Rights 18USC§3771
115. Criminal Aspects of Civil Rights 18 U.S. C. Chapter 13 §241-248
116. Criminal Division 28 CFR I 0.55
117. Criminal Elections and political activities 18 U.S. Code §591-611
118. Declaration of Basic Principles of Justice for Victims of Crime and Abuse of Power
of 29 November 1985
119. Defense of actions 28 U.S.C.2410



                                                                                   349
120. Delimitation of the Maritime Boundary in the Gulf of Maine Area (Canada/United
States of America) (1981-1984)
121. Deputy Director 28 CFR I 0.31
122. Designating places of imprisonment or rehabilitation where the sentences of
prisoners shall be served and ordering transfers from one institution to another, whether
maintained by the Federal Government or otherwise 18 U.S.C.4082b
123. Designation of agents for the transportation of prisoners 18 U.S.C. 4008
124. Director of COPS 28 CFR I 0.120
125. Director of the Bureau of Prisons 28 CFR I 0.96
126. Dismissal on motion of action against individual entitled to immunity
22USC(6)§254d
127. Disposition of cases in which juveniles have been committed 18 U.S.C. 5037
128. Disposition of the Effects of the Deceased 24U.S.C.420
129. D.J. Harris, M. O'Boyle, C. Warbrick, Law of the European Convention on Human
Rights, Butterworths, 1995.
130. Drug Abuse Prevention, Treatment and Rehabilitation 21U.S.C.Chapter 16
131. Education Amendments of 1972 20 U.S.C. §1681
132. Eggen, Dan and Goldstein, Amy. Number of Fired Prosecutors Grows: Dismissals
Began Earlier than Justice Department Says. Washington Post. May 10, 2007
133. Electronica Sicula S.p.A. (ELSI) (United States of America v. Italy) (1987-1989)
134. Eligibility for SSI Benefits Sec. 1611 of Title XVI of the Social Security Act
42USC(7)XVI§1382
135. Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 29 U.S.C.1111
136. Endangered Species Act of 1973 16 U.S.C.1531-1544
137. Enforcement of Civil Rights 42 U.S.C. 2000e
138. Entering into contracts with State officials for the custody prisoners 18U.S.C.5003
139. Environment and Natural Resources Division 28 CFR I 0.65
140. Equal Force 28 CFR I 0.121
141. Escape and Rescue Act 18 U.S.C. 751, 752
142. Eskridge, William N. Jr.; Frickey, Philip P. Cases and Materials on Legislation:
Statutes and the Creation of Public Policy. American Casebook Series. 2nd Edition. West
Publishing Company. St. Paul, Minn. 1995
143. Ethics in Government Act of 1978, 92 Stat. 1843
144. Ethics Reform Act, Pub. L. No. 101-94, 103 Stat. 1716 (1989)
145. Executive Office for Immigration Review 8CFR§1003.1
146. Executive Office for United States Attorneys 28 CFR I 0.22
147. Executive Office for United States Trustees 28 CFR I 0.37
148. Export Trade Certificates 15 U.S.C. Chapter 66 4011-4021
149. Fair Packaging and Labeling Act 15 U.S.C. 1451
150. Federal Bureau of Investigation 28 CFR I 0.85
151. Federal Bureau of Investigation. Crime in the United States-2005. 2006
152. Federal Custody; Remedies on Motion Attacking Sentence 28USC(153)§2255
153. Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act 21 U.S.C. 301-397
154. Federal Protection 18 U.S.C.§245
155. Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure
156. Federal Rules of Civil Procedure

                                                                                      350
157. Federal Rules of Evidence
158. Federal Tort Claims Act 28 CFR 0.172
159. Findings on Juvenile Justice 42 U.S.C. 5601
160. First Amendment Privacy Protection 42USC(21A) IA §2000aa
161. Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act 16 U.S.C.661-667d
162. Foreign Assistance Act 22 U.S.C. 2356
163. Foreign Claims Settlement Commission 28 CFR I 0.128
164. Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 50USC(36)I§1801
165. Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act 50USC(36)I§1809
166. Free Insider Trader Settlement (FITS) HA-1-4-04
167. Fugitive Felon Act 18 U.S.C. 1072, 1073
168. Functions of the Assistant Attorney General, Antitrust Division 28 CFR I 0.41
169. Garner, Bryan A. Black‟s Law Dictionary. West Group. St. Paul, Minn. 7th Edition.
2000
170. Geneva Protocol (to the Hague Conventions) for the Prohibition of the Use in War
of Asphyxiating, Poisonous or other Gases, and of Bacteriological Methods of Warfare
17 June 1925
171. George W. Bush et al v. Her Majesty the Queen: House Judiciary Committee HA-3-
3-06
172. Georgia v. Brailsford, 1794
173. Granting permits to states or public agencies for rights-of-way upon lands
administered by the Director 43 U.S.C.931c, 961; 18 U.S.C. 4001, 4041, 4042.
174. Greenhouse, Linda. Chief Justice Advocates Higher Pay for Judiciary. New York
Times. January 1, 2007
175. Guaranteeing Standby Energy Authority under 42 U.S.C. Chapter 77 §6272-6285
176. Guidelines on the Role of Prosecutors of 27 August-7 September 1990
177. Habeas Corpus Act 1679, Habeas Corpus Restoration Act of 2007 S.185,
H.R.267, H.R.1189, H.R. 2543 and H.R.1416
178. Habeas Corpus Suspension Act, suspended 1794-1801
179. Hamdi v. Rumsfield No. 03-6696 (2004)
180. Himmelstein, David U.; Thorne, Deborah; Warren, Elizabeth; Woolhanderler,
Steffie. Medical Bankruptcy in the United States, 2007: Results of a National Study.
American Journal of Medicine. Elsevier Inc. April 2009
181. Hossain & Aref v. FBI (Comey) HA-6-8-04
182. Human Rights Campaign (HRC), Citizens Commission on Human Rights (CCHR),
et al, plaintiffs v. US Presidential Candidates Barack Obama and John McCain whose
foreign policies fail Asia and the Near East (ANE), US Congress in defense of Title 22
Foreign Relations and Intercourse (a-FRaI-d) and the Court of International Trade
(CoITUS), defendants HA-28-7-08
183. Hurtado v. United States 410 US 578 (1973)
184. Immigration and Nationality 8 U.S.C. 1182-1183
185. Immunity of Witnesses Generally 18USCV(601)§6002
186. Influencing or Injuring Jurors 18 U.S.C. 1503
187. Insanity or mental incompetence of a prisoner 18U.S.C.4247
187. Inter-American Court of Human Rights 1978
188. Interhandel (Switzerland v. United States) (1957-1959)

                                                                                   351
189. International Bar Association ICC Monitoring and Outreach Program HA-27-6-06
190. International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and
Members of Their Families 18 December 1990
191. International Court of Arbitration , Rules of Arbitration.
192. International Court of Justice
193. ICJ. Condition for Admission of a State to Membership
194. International Court of Justice. History of the Court
195. International Court of Justice. Statute of the Court
196. International Criminal Court
197. International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda
198. International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia in the H(P)lague HA-25-
12-04
199. International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights of 23 March 1976
200. International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights of 3 January 1976
201. International Prison Commission 22 U.S.C. 263a
202. International Society for Individual Liberty (ISIL). History of Jury Nullification.
June 2001
203. INTERPOL--United States National Central Bureau
204. Investigate Fugitive Matters 28 U.S.C. 510
205. Jefferson, Thomas. Declaration of Independence ratified by the Congress of the 15
states with 56 signatories on 4 July 1776. Drafted between 11 June and 28 June 1776
206. Jenks, Chris. Square Peg in a Round Hole: Government Contractor Battlefield Torts
Liability and the Political Question Doctrine. Berkeley Journal of International Law. Vol.
28 Is. 1. (2010)
207. Judicial Conference of the United States. Statement of Judge Paul G. Cassell United
States District Court District of Utah to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism and
Homeland Security Committee on the Judiciary of the United States House of
Representatives on “Mandatory Minimum Sentencing Laws – The Issues”. June 26, 2007
208. Judiciary Act of 1789
209. Judgment on the Prosecutor's Application for Extraordinary Review of Pre-Trial
Chamber I's 31 March 2006 Decision Denying Leave to Appeal ICC-01/04-168 of 13
July 2006
210. Jurisdiction and venue of the Court of Claims 28 USC Chapter 91§1491-1509
211. Jurisdiction and Venue of the Court of International Trade 28USCode Chapter 95
§1581-1585
212. Justice Management Division 28 CFR I 0.75
213. Justice System Improvement Act of 1984 42 US Code Chapter 46 Subchapters 1-15
214. Juvenile Delinquency Proceedings 18U.S.C. Part IV
215. Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention 42USC Chapter 72
216. Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347 (1967)
217. King Blackwell (Ohio) HA-17-1-05
218. Kirby v United States 174 US 47, 55 (1899)
219. Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act of 1959 29 U.S.C.504
220. Lacey Act and related provisions 18 U.S.C. 41-48
221. Laeven, Luc; Laryea, Thomas. Principles of Household Debt Restructuring. IMF
Staff Papers. June 26, 2009

                                                                                      352
222. LaGrand (Germany v. United States of America) (1999-2001)
223. Law Enforcement Code of Conduct 1979
224. Lawyers Committee for Human Rights, What is a Fair Trial? A Basic Guide to
Legal Standards and Practice, 1995
225. Legal Consequences of Off-Season Flu Delivery HA-14-5-09
226. Leasing of minerals on lands under the jurisdiction of the Department of Justice.
August 7, 1947, 61 Stat. 914, 30 U.S.C.352
227. Legality of Use of Force (Yugoslavia v. United States of America) (1999)
228. London (City) v. RSJ Holdings Inc. 2007 SCC 29 June 21
229. Magna Carta June 15, 1215
230. Mandatory Restitution 18USC(77)§1593
231. Manfred Nowak, U.N. Covenant on Civil and Political Rights: CCPR Commentary,
NP Engel, 1993
232. Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices 23CFR655.601
233. Martinez et al v. Astrue No. Cal. No 08-CV-48735-CW August 11, 2009
234. Matters involving obstructions to navigation, and dredging or filling 33 U.S.C. 403
235. McDonald v. United States, 335 U.S. 451 (1948)
236. Migratory Bird Act 16 U.S.C. 701
237. Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United
States of America) (1984-1991)
238. Military Commissions Act S. 3930. October 17, 2006
239. National Association of Attorney General (NAAG)
240. National Housing Act 18 U.S.C.1010
241. National Highway Traffic Safety Commission 23USC§408
242. National Institute of Justice 42 U.S.C. 3721-3723
243. National Juvenile Court Data Archive
244. Nigel S. Rodley, The Treatment of Prisoners Under International Law, Clarendon
Press, Oxford, 1987, (new edition forthcoming).
245. Norwegian Institute of Human Rights, Manual for Trial Observation, March 1996.
246 No Social Security Benefits for Prisoners Act of 2009, Public Law 111-115
247. Oath of Deputy 28USCIII(57) 951
248. Obituary of Milan Babic HA-5-3-06.
249. Obituary of Slobodan Milosevic HA-11-3-06
250. O'Donnell, Daniel. Protectión internacional de los derechos humanos, Comisión
Andina de Juristas, Lima 1988
251. Offenders with Mental Disease or Defect 18 U.S.C. 4241-4247
252. Office of the Attorney General 28 CFR I 0.5
253. Office of the Associate Attorney General 28 CFR I 0.19
254. Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) 28 CFR I 0.119
255. Office of the Deputy Attorney General 28 CFR I 0.15
256. Office of Intelligence Policy and Review
257. Office of Justice Programs 28 CFR I 0.90
258. Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention
259. Office of Legal Counsel 28 CFR I 0.25
260. Office of Legal Policy 28 CFR I 0.23
261. Office of Legislative Affairs 28 CFR I 0.27

                                                                                     353
262. Office of Professional Responsibility 28 CFR I 0.39
263. Office of Public Affairs 28 CFR I 0.28
264. Office of the Federal Register 1 CFR 16.1
265. Office of the Pardon Attorney 28 CFR I 0.35
266. Office of the Solicitor General 28 CFR I 0.20
267. Office of the Solicitor General may in consultation with each agency or official
concerned, authorize intervention by the Government in cases involving the
constitutionality of acts of Congress 28 CFR I 0.21
268. Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR)
269. Ohio Elections: Status Report of the House Judiciary Committee Staff HA-5-1-05
270. Oil Platforms (Islamic Republic of Iran v. United States of America) (1992-2003)
271. Old-age and survivors insurance benefit payments. Sec. 202 of Title II of the Social
Security Act 42USC(7)II§402
272. Omnibus Crime and Safe Street Act 42U.S.C.§3789d
273. Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968, 82 Stat. 204
274. Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of all Discrimination against
Women of 22 December 2000
275. Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or
Degrading Treatment or Punishment of 4 February 2003
276. Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil an Political Rights of 23
March 1976
277. Recommendation for Justice of the Supreme Court HA-11-6-05
278. Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe
279. Patent and Copyright Cases 28 U.S.C. 1498
280. Patent Secrecy Act 35 U.S.C. 183
281. Payment of Benefits Sec. 1631 of Title XVI of the Social Security Act
42USC(7)XVI§1383
282. Payment of claims less than $1,000 by officers losing property 31 U.S.C. 3722
283. Payment of rewards with respect to escaped Federal prisoners 18 U.S.C.3059
284. Penalties for Fraud and (gross) negligence 19 U.S.C. 1592
285. Penalties for Fraud Sec. 208 of Title II of the Social Security Act 42USC(7)II§408
286. Penalties for Fraud Sec. 1632 of Title XVI of the Social Security Act
42USC(7)XVI§1383a
287. Pennsylvania v. Balenger, 704 A2d 1385, 1389-90 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1997)
288. Peterson, Trudy Huskamp. US Institute of Peace. Special Report: Temporary Courts,
289. Permanent Record. August 2006
290. Pointer v Texas 380 US 400, 405 (1965)
291. Points on a persons license 23 CFRPart1327
292. Postal Reorganization Act 39 U.S.C. 3016
293. Power to Grant Writ 28USC(153)§2241
294. Prescribing rules and regulations applicable to the carrying of firearms by Bureau of
295. Prison-made goods 18 U.S.C. 1761-1762
296. Prisons officers and employees 18 U.S.C. 3050
297. Procedure for the Payment of Benefits 42USC(7)XVI(B)§1393
298. Procedures of the Commission on Human Rights and published as the Rules of



                                                                                      354
299. Procedure of the Functional Commissions of the Economic and Social Council of 12
August 1947
300. Promulgating rules governing the control and management of Federal penal and
correctional institutions and providing for the classification, government, discipline,
treatment, care, rehabilitation, and reformation of inmates confined therein 18 U.S.C.
4001, 4041, and 4042
301. Protection of Human Test Subjects. National Research Act. July 12, 1974. Title II,
Public Law 93-348 45 CFR 46 .
302. Protocol (III) Additional to the Geneva Conventions relating the Adoption of a
New Distinctive Emblem of 8 December 2005
303. Protocol of the Court of Justice of the African Union 11 July 2003
304. Protocol to the African Charter on Human and People‟s Rights on the Establishment
of an African Court on Human and People‟s Rights. 15 January 2004
305. Provisions for the health, safety, and welfare of Government witnesses and their
families, including psychological well-being and social adjustment 18 U.S.C. 3521
306. Preparation of the code and supplement for the United States and the District of
Columbia 1USC(3)§213 and §202(c)
307. Privileges and immunities of mission of nonparty to Vienna Convention
22USC(6)§254b
308. Providing technical assistance to State and local governments 18 U.S.C. 4042
309. Public Health Service officers serving correctional institutions 18 U.S.C. 4005
310. Purposes of Sentencing 18USC§3553
311. Questions of Interpretation and Application of the 1971 Montreal Convention
arising from the Aerial Incident at Lockerbie (Libyan Arab Jamahiriya v. United States of
America) (1992-2003)
312. Rakas v. Illinois 439U.S.128 (1978)
313. Rasul v. Bush No. 03-334 (2004)
314. Recommendation in Clemency Cases 28 CFR I 0.36
315. Recounts Fla. Stat. §102.141(4) (2000)
316. Recovery of Civil Damages 18USC(119)§2520
317. Re-employment at the same pay grade if laid off in good behavior 28U.S.C.569
318. Regulation of Department of Justice Applicable 28 CFR I 0.32
319. Rehabilitation Act of 1973 29 U.S.C. §794
320. Release and detention pending judicial proceedings 28 U.S.C.3141-3156
321. Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union, 521 U. S. 844 (1997)
322. Reorganization Plan No. 1 of 1966
323. Representation to Federal Officials for Private Litigation 42 U.S.C. 2000d
324. Representing the United States in proceedings before courts of appeals 28 U.S.C.
chapter 158 §2341-2350
325. Restoring the Constitution Act of 2007 S. 576 and HR 1415
326. Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court of 17 July 1998
327. Rules and regulations governing the payment of compensation to Inmates
18U.S.C.4126
328. Rules of Court of International Trade
329. Rules of Procedure and Evidence of the International Criminal Court. 3-10
September 2002

                                                                                     355
330. Rules of Procedure of the Human Rights Committee 26 July 1989
331. Rules of Procedure of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights
332. Rules of the Supreme Court
333. R. v. Couture 2007 SCC 28 June 15
334. R. v. Davis [2008] UKHL 36 June 18
335. R. v. Spencer, SCC 11 2007: March 8
336. Sanders, Tony J. Defense of Social Security Caucus. Hospitals & Asylums HA-1-7-
11
337. Sanford Levinson, Assessing the Supreme Court’s Current Caseload: A Question of
Law or Politics?, 119 Yale L.J. 99 (2010)
338. Second Optional Protocol aiming at the abolition of the death penalty of 15
December 1989
339. Slobodan Milosevic v. Int’l Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia HA-25-12-04
340. Smith v Illinois 390 US 129, 131 (1968)
341. Sparf and Hansen v. U.S 1895
342. Spooner, Lysander. An Essay on The Trial By Jury. 1852
343. Statute of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights
344. Strasbourg Agreement Concerning International Patent Classification of March 24,
1971
345. Strother v. 3464920 Canada Inc. 2007 SCC 24 June 1
346. Suits for compensation for the unauthorized communication of restricted data by the
Atomic Energy Commission to other nations 42 U.S.C. 2223
347. Supreme Court of the United States Title 28 US Code (1)1
348. Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 30 CFR part 706
349. Tariff Act 1930
350. Tax Division 28 CFR I 0.70
351. Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) 42USC§601
352. Title 22 Foreign Relations and Intercourse (A-FRaI-D)
353. Trade Act 1974
354. Tennessee v. Culbreath, 30 S.W.3d 309, 314 (Tenn. 2000); KBA E-275 (July 1983)
355. The Special Court for Sierra Leone will use ICC Facilities for Trial of Charles
Taylor. The Hague, 21 June 2006
356. Three Judge District Court Panel 28 U.S. Code chapter 157 §2321-2325
357. Tort filings 28U.S.C.2671-2680
358. Transfer of prisoner to appropriate hospital 18U.S.C.4245
359. Treaties Subject to the Consultative Jurisdiction of the Court 1982
360. Treatment referrals for individuals with alcoholism or drug addiction condition
42USC(7)(XVI)(B)§1383e
361. Tullock, Gordon. Trials on Trial: The Pure Theory of Legal Procedure. Columbia
University Press. New, York. 1980
362. Unauthorized intrusion and violation of rules and regulations 24USC(3)V§154
363. Uniform Commercial Code. The American Law Institute and the National
Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws. 1978, 1987, 1988, 1990, 1991,
1992, 1994, 1995, 1998, 2001
364. United Kingdom Parliament Joint Committee on Human Rights Fourth Report on
the Mental Health Bill 4 February 2007

                                                                                    356
365. UN Centre for Human Rights, Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice Branch,
Human Rights and Pre-Trial Detention, 1994. (UN Sales No. E.94.XIV.6)
366. UN Chronicle: Human Rights Council HA-30-3-06
367. United Nations Crime and Justice Information Network
368. United Nations Law Commission. Draft Articles on the Responsibility of States for
Internationally Wrongful Acts of 2001 with Comments
369. U.S. Attorney‟s Manual
370. U.S Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS)
371. U.S. Court of Federal Claims 28 USC Chapter 7 §171-179
372. U.S. Court of International Trade 28 U.S.C. Chapter 11 §251-258
373. United States Diplomatic and Consular Staff in Tehran (United States v. Iran)
(1979-1981)
374. United States District Court. 28US Code Chapter 5 § 81-144
375. United States Marshals Service 28 CR I 0.111
376. U.S. Parole Commission 28 CFR I 0.124-0.127
377. US Sentencing Commission 28USC§991-998
378. United States v. Booker No. 04-104 (2005)
379. U.S. v One 1976 Mercedes Benz 280S 618 F2d 453 [1980]
380. United States v. Truong, 629 F.2d 908, 913 (4th Cir. 1980).
381. United States v. U.S. Dist. Ct., 407 U.S. 297 (1972)
382. Universal Declaration of Human Rights of December 10, 1948
383. Vienna Convention on Consular Relations. 1963.
384. Vienna Convention on Consular Relations (Paraguay v. United States of America)
(1998)
385. Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action 25 June 1993
386. Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 (Pub. L. 103-322)
387. Voting Rights Act, adopted initially in 1965 and extended in 1970, 1975, and 1982
and 2005
388. Weissbrodt, David. "International Trial Observers", Stanford Journal of
International Law, Volume 18, Issue 1, Spring 1982.
389. Weissbrodt, David and Wolfrum, Rüdiger. The Right to a Fair Trial, Beiträge zum
Ausländischen Recht öffentichen und Völkerrecht, Vol. 129, Springer, Berlin 1998.
390. WHO Working Paper on Patent Issues Relating to the influenza Virus and their
Genes. And Annex November 17, 2007
391. Whisner, Mary. The United States Code: Prima Facie Evidence and Positive Law.
Law Library Journal. Vol. 101:4 [2009-30]
392. Wild Horses and Wild Burros Act 16 U.S.C. 1338
393. William A. Schabas, The Abolition of the Death Penalty in International Law,
second edition, Cambridge, UK, Cambridge University Press, 1997
394. Will of Mr. Lee Jong-wook HA-31-3-06
395. Witness fees 28USC§1821
396. Witness Relocation and Protection Program 18USC§3521
397. Wong Sun v. United States, 371 U.S. 471 (1963)
398. World Prison Population HA-16-12-04
399. Young v. United States, 481 U.S. 787 (1987)



                                                                                    357

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:5
posted:10/15/2011
language:English
pages:139
ktixcqlmc ktixcqlmc
About