The hoax of individual self-determination

The alleged hoax has been running for years “self-determination” individual that would be realized through the form of “Legal representation” which would allow to override the laws of the state.

This hoax with variations in the past was also called “sovereign people“, “single people“, “Individual sovereignty”, even before O.P.P.T., and it was literally sold to unsuspecting citizens who paid good money to have it told in alleged terms “academies” or at seminars by self-styled experts. We are talking about “corsi” costing thousands of euros per volt, and of seminars of one or more days at a cost of hundreds of Euros.

The hoax is based on several false claims which are revealed upon timely verification, exactly, inventions or outright nonsense.

Those who end up believing this hoax do so because they lack the most basic concepts of constitutional and international law, starting from the hierarchy of laws. And in general it is noted among them that they take as true statements that they do not verify, and which instead, once verified, prove to be false. namely , the hoax seems real until, like fools, claims posited as true by the propagandists of the hoax are uncritically believed.

An example is the belief that all’ Registry must be registered in the form NAME SURNAME , while being registered as SURNAME NAME, which would create a legal fiction useful for hidden purposes.

A proof would be Article 6 of the Civil Code which indicates that FIRST NAME SURNAME as constituting the NAME, but the article uses the term “comprehends” which does not indicate an order, DOES NOT prescribe. But still on this issue the gullible hoax they simply didn't check what the registry laws say.

In order not to fall for the hoax, it is sufficient to acquire these elements of law:

• the knowledge of what the hierarchy of sources is, starting from the art. 1 Cost, which limits the sovereignty of the people to the Constitution alone.
• you pick them up, which relegate uses and customs to the bottom of the hierarchy of laws.
• the fact that in the Civil Law system like the Italian one the judge's precedent does not make law and does not bind the other judges, because there is only the “central union” Constitutional Court
• Article 10 of the Cost provides that the Italian system “and comply” to international law, therefore not “adopts” but it adapts to it if and only if it is compatible. What is compatible and how international law is adopted is called “ratifies” and only the Chambers do it, are the only ones that ratify international law on the basis of art. 72 E 80 Cost, therefore a foreign law is not valid if there is no ratification
• UCC and Admiralty have no ratification, likewise Roman law and canon law
• the conceptions and laws of Roman law and of any other legal system have no value in the Italian legal system except as possibly referred to by a law

If after acquiring these items you still believe it, evidently there is a problem of functional illiteracy or lack of logical capacity, and it would be strongly advised to let it go because you are believing an obvious hoax.

Unfortunately, lawyers and writers who believed in it also add to the confusion and credibility of the hoax, but it must be admitted that even in those trades not everyone is good and prepared, specifically they simply did not study nor international law, nor constitutional law .

Another basis of the hoax is that for which “states are corporations”, (i.e. joint stock companies incorporated under US law. From this false assumption, it would follow that all state officials have no public power, and a legal action would be enough to make them lose the delegated power.

Another cornerstone of the hoax is that if you are registered in CAPITAL at birth you are guaranteed as debt slaves of corporate states. The hoax also raves about kill the game which would confirm all this.

Another cornerstone of the hoax is that thanks ALL “READ” U.C.C., it would be possible to bankrupt these states (in reality the first version said that the states had already been declared bankrupt through a simple communication), and in short, to free oneself from these corporate states.

But according to the hoax it would first be necessary to make an individual self-determination, for which it is claimed to use international law known as “International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights” who actually speaks in the part 1) self-determination, but gods peoples and not of individuals.

All seasoned with unfounded interpretations of the law, such as the one for which the natural law would be a valid law, or that it is also the law universal statement of human rights ( as known from the law manuals, the DUDU is not actually a law but the proclamation of goals to be achieved).

In short, the “Individual sovereignty” or recently too “plan B” is a real tome of things that like the saga of Henry Potter is made up of a mixture of half-truths and lies, but easily unmasked. Just click on the links on this page.

But unfortunately, many have been convinced by various hucksters to pay large sums for the illusion that in a few hours of “accademia” we can become expert jurists and also free ourselves from a criminal State which it is, No doubt, the Italian administration.

Yet it is enough to study the very concept of “source hierarchy” not “to lecture” to understand that the US laws of the system of Common Law do not apply to Italy which is a system of civil law , more precisely , starting from the Constitution, those laws that have been, however, also apply “approved”, but not all the others.

The hoax, on the other hand, is based on the idea that through a Trust (an instrument of international law) it can become “legal representatives” of its own legal fiction, that is, to make a self-determination, and instead the Italian law admits the Trust but only insofar as it is compatible with the Italian legal system, while the legal fiction is practically limited to very few cases in the Italian legal system.

If in the end you fail to get to explain things, it is enough to place them in cognitive dissonance by proposing to them

in conclusion, don't pay the holy men of this hoax, Rather, on my behalf they should be reported.