The highest court in Saskatchewan denies individual liberty has “any application” in granting myself leave to represent the federal political party I founded and continue to lead.

The Canadian Nationalist Party was unconstitutionally excluded from the most recent 43rd Federal Election after requesting and being denied (ubiquitously and without exception) the liberty of hosting a public event and communicating their policies to voters after the issue of the writ (September 11th – October 21st, 2019).

We maintain that this represents a failure of the Government Of Canada to uphold their democratic mandate.

The resulting constitution lawsuit included a judgement from the Court Of Queen’s Bench For Saskatchewan ordering that I am not allowed to represent the federally-sanctioned political party I am the leader, sole director, and chief agent of. The Judge ordered that until someone other than myself is appointed to represent my party, no further action can take place, and that failing to appoint someone else within 90 days may result in the outright dismissal of our claim.

The Court Of Appeal For Saskatchewan has today held that this order does “not dispose of the rights of the parties, in a final and binding way, with respect to any substantive issue in the action”.

It seems that here in Canada we are excluded from not only electoral but judicial proceedings as well.

Because I am the sole director of the corporation, there exists union of office between the corporate entity (Canadian Nationalist Party Inc.) and my individual, natural self, and therefore, denying me the ability to represent my party is effectively depriving me of my right to self-representation. Put simply: I am the Canadian Nationalist Party. Contrary to the Saskatchewan courts claim that there exists “no support” in law for such interchangeability of an individual person and a corporation they are sole director of, the notion of corporation sole boasts a well-established common law precedent:

According to the Federal Department of Justice’s volume Crown Law, the Crown of Canada is “a non-statutory corporation sole.” Essentially, “a corporation sole creates a corporation out of an office. Once the corporation is established, there is no distinction between the office-holder and the office itself.” Although the office and office-holder retain dual capacities, “namely its corporate capacity, and its individual or natural capacity,” they are inseparably fused in law. – Royal Succession and the Canadian Crown as a Corporation Sole: A Critique of Canada’s Succession to the Throne Act, 2013 (Philippe Lagassé, James W.J. Bowden)

The Canadian Nationalist Party has no intention of retaining someone other than myself to represent them at this time and to dismiss or delay a claim of such national importance as this one carries would be an egregious denial of justice. It would also violate the inherent dignity of the human person and damage confidence in social and political institutions which are created to enhance participation in our society.

Being a member of the Law Society Of Saskatchewan is not an absolute requirement to represent a corporation in the court of law.

The Saskatchewan Courts also falsely claim that I filed “no evidence” in support of our application for the Court Of Queen’s Bench to grant leave to allow me to represent the corporation as lawyer during these proceedings, despite an application we submitted on November 2nd and which was additionally included in the opposing party’s materials. This application was also verbally delivered during a court hearing on November 5th, which the Justice seemingly failed to consider.

Although referenced multiple times and spoken of at length during proceedings, both judgements from the courts in Saskatchewan have failed to consider the relevance of Magna Carta (Great Charter) in protecting our religious liberties.

We maintain that, in the current day and age, holding a “license” to practice law within the dominion is not an absolute requirement (OAHSPE, Book Of Judgement, Chapter 35, verse 1-9). This is a religious right and liberty which the courts in Saskatchewan have neglected to consider entirely. They have also neglected to consider in their judgements the fact that the Magna Carta is lawfully-binding on Her Majesty The Queen in right of Canada and continues to embody the Supreme Law of the realm after being successfully invoked on March 23rd, 2001. The Magna Carta was sealed at Runnymede, England over 800 years ago and must be observed in good faith and by heirs in perpetuity. Any Crown Agent who, when called upon, fails to honour this treaty may be held criminally liable for aiding and abetting High Treason.

The maximum sentence for a valid conviction of High Treason within the common law is capital punishment.

In your service,

Mr. Travis Mitchell Patron