Petition in Honour by Confession of Faith Motu Proprio

Dated this 14th day of June, in the year of our Lord, 2026

Dated this 14th day of June, in the year of our Lord, 2026

To:

The private woman Louise Arbour,

acting in the office of Governor General of Canada,

Military Chancellor, and Commander-in-Chief,

Rideau Hall,

1 Sussex Drive,

Ottawa, Ontario,

Canada.

From: minister Edward Jay Robin,

a living man created by God chosen by his son.

standing in conscience and equity under duty to my Creator,

ministering as shepherd, witness, confessor, and watchman.

Preface Petition in Equity and Conscience e

I present this emergency settlement demand to the private woman Louise Arbour acting as Governor General of Canada.My dear sister Louise, I approach in love, in life, and in honesty. I, Edward Jay Robin, a living man created by God, standing in conscience and equity under duty to my Creator, ministering as shepherd, witness, confessor, and watchman, present this Petition to you, Louise Arbour, a private woman acting as providence does, in the office of Governor General of Canada, Military Chancellor, and Commander-in-Chief.

I address you first as the private woman Louise because equity acts upon conscience, and conscience belongs to the living man or woman. I minister to you in the sense that Scripture requires: I bring the word, the warning, the evidence, and the confession to you as one who is required by God to speak as boldly as I should. I do not minister as a title. I minister as an active duty. I confess my secular sin herein in order to put on the full armour of God as Ephesians 6:10–20 in the 1611 King James Version Bible directs.

If I do not bring this matter of trust to you privately, Louise, I lose my soul. I deny the watchman's directive. If I bring it to you for your precious examination, not to dispute it but to exhort it, our choice in that regard is between us and God. But I will have delivered my soul to ensure yours.

This Petition seeks a plenary examination, forensic accounting, expedient accommodation, judicial restoration, reconciliation, and appropriate Levitical remedy.It is presented in honour, in obedience to Christ's command to seek agreement quickly and privately where peace remains possible (Matthew 5:25), and in accordance with the order of confession before remedy (Leviticus 6:2–5).

This Petition does not proceed by dishonourable commercial argument.It presents matters for equitable examination, confession, agreement, or, if necessitated, by specific written denial of a man or woman with the sworn lawful authority, particularity, and supporting competent citation. Where duty to answer exists, silence is treated as failure of duty and may, in emergent circumstances, stand as agreement in honour.He who seeks equity must do equity. He who comes into equity must come with clean hands. These maxims govern every word that follows. I have first cleansed my own hands by confession, and I proceed in the order that equity itself requires.

The established equitable order proceeds as follows: discovery invokes awareness; awareness invokes knowledge; knowledge invokes duty; duty invokes standing; standing invokes examination; examination invokes conscience; conscience invokes confession; confession invokes accommodation; accommodation invokes restoration; restoration invokes remedy; remedy seeks reconciliation.This order governs the entire Petition. It will be referred to hereafter as "the established equitable order" or "the order already set forth." order already set forth."Petition in Honour by Confession of Faith Motu Proprio

Dated this 12th day of June, in the year of our Lord, 2026

To:

The private woman Louise Arbour, acting in the office of Governor General of Canada, Military Chancellor, and Commander-in-Chief, Rideau Hall, 1 Sussex Drive, Ottawa, Ontario, K1A 0A1, Canada.

From:

Edward Jay Robin, a living man created by God, standing in conscience and equity under duty to my Creator, ministering as shepherd, witness, confessor, and watchman.

Preface

Petition in Equity and Conscience

My dear sister Louise, I approach in love, in life, and in honesty. I, Edward Jay Robin, a living man created by God, standing in conscience and equity under duty to my Creator, ministering as shepherd, witness, confessor, and watchman, present this Petition to you, Louise Arbour, a private woman acting as providence does, in the office of Governor General of Canada, Military Chancellor, and Commander-in-Chief.

This Petition seeks a plenary examination, forensic accounting, expedient accommodation, judicial restoration, reconciliation, and appropriate Levitical remedy.

It is presented in honour, in obedience to Christ's command to seek agreement quickly and privately where peace remains possible (Matthew 5:25), Matthew 15:18-20 and in accordance with the order of confession before remedy (Leviticus 6:2–5). This Petition does not proceed by dishonourable commercial argument.

It presents matters for equitable examination, confession, agreement, or, if necessitated, by specific written denial of a man or woman with the sworn lawful authority, particularity, and supporting competent citation. Where duty to answer exists, silence is treated as failure of duty and may, in emergent circumstances, where silence acquiesces to emergent facts, it can stand as agreement in honour.

He who seeks equity must do equity. He who comes into equity must come with clean hands. These maxims govern every word that follows. I have first cleansed my own hands by confession, and I proceed in the order that equity itself requires.

The established equitable order proceeds again as follows: discovery invokes awareness; awareness invokes knowledge; knowledge invokes duty; duty invokes standing; standing invokes examination; examination invokes conscience; conscience invokes confession; confession invokes accommodation; accommodation invokes restoration; restoration invokes remedy; remedy seeks reconciliation.

This order governs the entire Petition. It will be referred to hereafter as "the established equitable order" or "the order already set forth."

The Petition proceeds in the following order:

(a) My Confession.

(b) My Duty of the Watchman.

(d) Part I: Forty Propositions of Fact.

(e) Part II: Terms of Agreement.

(f) Part III: Jurisdiction of the Military Chancellor.

(g) Part IV: The Foundational Breach of Trust in Constructive Fraud.

(h) Part V: Coronation Oath Deficiency and the Oath Chain.

(i) Part VI: The Mechanism of Concealment and the Foreign Actors.

(j) Part VII: The Restitution That Follows the Confession.

(k) Part VIII: Emergency and Necessity.

(l) Part IX: Prayer for Relief.

(m) Part X: Schedule of Authorities: Does It Not Also Say in Your Own Law?

No part should be read apart from the whole.

The Confession

"And not many days after the younger son gathered all together, and took his journey into a far country, and there wasted his substance with riotous living. And when he had spent all, there arose a mighty famine in that land; and he began to be in want. And he went and joined himself to a citizen of that country; and he sent him into his fields to feed swine. And he would fain have filled his belly with the husks that the swine did eat: and no man gave unto him. And when he came to himself, he said, How many hired servants of my father's have bread enough and to spare, and I perish with hunger! I will arise and go to my father, and will say unto him, Father, I have sinned against heaven, and before thee, And am no more worthy to be called thy son: make me as one of thy hired servants. And he arose, and came to his father. But when he was yet a great way off, his father saw him, and had compassion, and ran, and fell on his neck, and kissed him. And the son said unto him, Father, I have sinned against heaven, and in thy sight, and am no more worthy to be called thy son." (Luke 15:13-21, KJV)

I am the younger son Louise tho I be 73 years of age, arriving September 29^th 1952. I am the one who squandered his inheritance and lusted after the King’s daintee’s in the far country of the commercial jurisdiction: the system of personage, fictitious identity, and administration through which I was treated as a record, a debtor, and an instrument of surety. I submitted myself to personation Louise here are the scriptural proof of my sin!

My inheritance as recorded is the actuarial life value assigned at my birth, my estate, my beneficial interest held in trust. The wasting of my substance is the spending down of that value through the tiered book-entry system, through intermediaries who dealt with it without my knowledge, consent, or compensation.

The famine is the exhaustion of remedy within the commercial system. There is no way forward but by confession of my error, of my failure to stand upon the word of God, my respect of and immoral commercial intercourse with persons. James 2:9 King James Version 1611

"When he came to himself" is what happened to me. I awakened. I saw where I was. I saw what was taken. I saw what I permitted. And now I kneel. "Father, I have sinned against heaven, and before thee" is the confession I make before you, Louise, and I do not make it lightly. The weight of those words presses upon my chest. To confess is to stand naked before the throne with nothing in your hands but the truth of what you did and what you failed to do. I did not want to come here. I did not want to be the man on his knees before the chancellor with these words in his mouth. But the watchman who will not speak forfeits his own soul, and so I speak, trembling, because I must.

"The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit: a broken and a contrite heart, O God, thou wilt not despise." (Psalm 51:17, KJV)

He who seeks equity must do equity. He who comes into equity must come with clean hands. The broken and contrite heart is the clean hands doctrine before it was ever written in a law book.

"If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness." (1 John 1:9, KJV)

Confession, then absolution, then remedy. The sequence cannot be reversed.

I confess five errors.

Error the First: I confess that I submitted to the registration with and the commandments of men without examining them against Scripture. I accepted statutory courts, law societies, and commercial instruments as binding upon conscience without asking whether they stood beneath God's law. The sorrow of this error is the sorrow of a man who walked willingly into a house he never inspected and called it home. I repent of this error.

Error the Second: I confess that I permitted my vital event registration to be administered within a commercial system and failed to object when my identity, estate, and life value were treated as instruments of surety, debt, and obligation. To know now what was done in silence, while I slept in trust of those who held the pen, is a grief I carry to this threshold. I repent of this error.

Error the Third: I confess that I acquiesced to personage by answering, appearing, and being treated through a legal fiction rather than standing as a living man created by God. Each time I answered to the fiction, each time I accepted the King’s dainties's I diminished the man. I repent of this error. "Ye shall do no unrighteousness in judgment: thou shalt not respect the person of the poor, nor honour the person of the mighty: but in righteousness shalt thou judge thy neighbour." (Leviticus 19:15, KJV)

"Ye shall not respect persons in judgment; but ye shall hear the small as well as the great; ye shall not be afraid of the face of man; for the judgment is God's: and the cause that is too hard for you, bring it unto me, and I will hear it." (Deuteronomy 1:17, KJV)

"For the LORD your God is God of gods, and Lord of lords, a great God, a mighty, and a terrible, which regardeth not persons, nor taketh reward:" (Deuteronomy 10:17, KJV)

"Thou shalt not wrest judgment; thou shalt not respect persons, neither take a gift: for a gift doth blind the eyes of the wise, and pervert the words of the righteous." (Deuteronomy 16:19, KJV)

"Wherefore now let the fear of the LORD be upon you; take heed and do it: for there is no iniquity with the LORD our God, nor respect of persons, nor taking of gifts." (2 Chronicles 19:7, KJV)

"These things also belong to the wise. It is not good to have respect of persons in judgment." (Proverbs 24:23, KJV)

"To have respect of persons is not good: for for a piece of bread that man will transgress." (Proverbs 28:21, KJV)

"Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons:" (Acts 10:34, KJV)

"For there is no respect of persons with God." (Romans 2:11, KJV)

"And, ye masters, do the same things unto them, forbearing threatening: knowing that your Master also is in heaven; neither is there respect of persons with him." (Ephesians 6:9, KJV)

"But he that doeth wrong shall receive for the wrong which he hath done: and there is no respect of persons." (Colossians 3:25, KJV)

"And if ye call on the Father, who without respect of persons judgeth according to every man's work, pass the time of your sojourning here in fear:" (1 Peter 1:17, KJV)

"My brethren, have not the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory, with respect of persons. For if there come unto your assembly a man with a gold ring, in goodly apparel, and there come in also a poor man in vile raiment; And ye have respect to him that weareth the gay clothing, and say unto him, Sit thou here in a good place; and say to the poor, Stand thou there, or sit here under my footstool: Are ye not then partial in yourselves, and are become judges of evil thoughts? Hearken, my beloved brethren, Hath not God chosen the poor of this world rich in faith, and heirs of the kingdom which he hath promised to them that love him? But ye have despised the poor. Do not rich men oppress you, and draw you before the judgment seats? Do not they blaspheme that worthy name by the which ye are called? If ye fulfil the royal law according to the scripture, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself, ye do well: But if ye have respect to persons, ye commit sin, and are convinced of the law as transgressors." (James 2:1-9, KJV) Accept my repentance in error of his directions I repent!

Error the Fourth: I confess that I, lost in belligerent rebellion, consumed by the anger and bait of the world lusts, delayed in blowing the trumpet after discovery and awareness had invoked knowledge and duty. The watchman cannot unknow what has been discovered, and every day of silence after this knowledge was acquired is a day the blood remains at his hand. The weight of that delay sits upon me still. I repent of this error.

Error the Fifth: I confess that I failed to compare the Exodus 20: covenant, his word, conscience, equity, and trust against the regulations and administrative acts of mammon’s commercial system. I exampled sin by walking in commercial commandments of men with no ears to Christ’s warning of Matthew 15:9. I held two books and read only one. I mixed God and mammon. I as the humbled man am in deep remorse and repent of these grevious errors.

The five errors are confessed. I come into equity having first cleansed my own hands. The broken and contrite heart offers the clean hands doctrine of equity and clear conscience . It is because my hands are now washed in confession that I may ask equity to examine the hands of those who administered the trust. I ask that equity receive this Confession as the first act of this necessitated emergent Petition. I now proceed according to the order already set forth.

Parable Element	What I Bring to You
The Father	God, YHWH the source of my estate and inheritance
The younger son	The old man, before this confession
The inheritance	My actuarial life value, my accrued beneficial interest, my estate plundered
The far country	The commercial jurisdiction, the system of personage mammon.
Wasting my substance	The spending down of my actuarial life value through the tiered system of bills and charges
The famine	The exhaustion of remedy within the commercial system by want of competence
When the Son came to himself	My awareness: I awakened
The confession	Father, I have sinned: this is my confession
The elder brother	Those who will object to my return deny my inheritance
The Father's servants	The officers and ministers who must carry out the restoration, in trust in equity in rescission
The robe	My steward status restored
The ring	My authority as heir confirmed
The shoes	My new standing: I walk free redeemed from the fiction to sin no more grounded in his word.
The fatted calf	Restitution: the full accounting and settlement in honor

Louise, you sit in the office of chancellor. You are the servant the Father is addressing. The question is not whether the order in trust was given. The question is whether you answer the call and will carry it out.

The Duty of the Watchman and the Nature of His Warning

"And the word of the Lord came unto me, saying, Son of man, speak to the children of thy people, and say unto them, When I bring the sword upon a land, if the people of the land take a man of their coasts, and set him for their watchman: If when he seeth the sword come upon the land, he blow the trumpet, and warn the people; Then whosoever heareth the sound of the trumpet, and taketh not warning; if the sword come, and take him away, his blood shall be upon his own head. He heard the sound of the trumpet, and took not warning; his blood shall be upon him. But he that taketh warning shall deliver his soul. But if the watchman see the sword come, and blow not the trumpet, and the people be not warned; if the sword come, and take any person from among them, he is taken away in his iniquity; but his blood will I require at the watchman's hand. So thou, O son of man, I have set thee a watchman unto the house of Israel; therefore thou shalt hear the word at my mouth, and warn them from me. When I say unto the wicked, O wicked man, thou shalt surely die; if thou dost not speak to warn the wicked from his way, that wicked man shall die in his iniquity; but his blood will I require at thine hand. Nevertheless, if thou warn the wicked of his way to turn from it; if he do not turn from his way, he shall die in his iniquity; but thou hast delivered thy soul." (Ezekiel 33:1-9, KJV)

My confession in the preceding section was the first act. This is the second: the declaration of my duty, the nature of this warning, and the standing upon which every word that follows is spoken. I do not come as a litigant, a claimant within the commercial system, or a user of statute, code, or regulation. I come as a watchman. I stand on the wall. I do not argue. I warn. I present for examination what I have seen from the wall. Does it not also say in your law?

I did not build it, own it, or govern it. I see what is coming, and I am required to blow the trumpet. If I blow the trumpet and the people do not take warning, their blood is upon their own heads. If I do not blow the trumpet, their blood is required at my hand. My duty is not optional. It is the condition of my soul.

The commercial codes, statutory instruments, and administrative procedures that operate upon the fiction rather than the living man are dead letters applied to a living soul. "For the letter killeth, but the Spirit giveth life" (2 Corinthians 3:6, KJV). Dead code cannot bind the living man who has confessed, appeared, and sounded the trumpet. I warn that continuing to apply dead code to the living man, after the confession has been made and the trumpet sounded, places the burden upon the one who heard and did not act. The watchman's warning is not accusation. It is mercy offered before consequence.

"Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?" (John 10:34, KJV) The Lord did not adopt the law of the Pharisees as His own. He held up what was written in their law and asked them to answer for it. The citation was not submission. It was examination.

"Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances, (Touch not; taste not; handle not; Which all are to perish with the using;) after the commandments and doctrines of men?" (Colossians 2:20-22, KJV)

Louise, I am dead to the rudiments of the world. Every statute, regulation, code, and institutional reference I cite in the Parts that follow is presented in the same manner the Lord presented the Pharisees' own scripture back to them: does it not also say in your law? I do not adopt these instruments. I do not submit to their jurisdiction by naming them.

I hold them up from the wall and say: I see the sword. Your own regulations forged it. Your own institutions wield it. Your own reports confirm it. I am required in my passion for duty to tell you. I have told you. My soul is now delivered. You are now in possession of my heart in love, with your choice holding the ears and keys of equity

To the people: I warn the living men and women in subjugation by personation that their value has been used as surety assigned, securitized processed, and traded without their knowledge. The trumpet is now blown. Though many be called, few shall be chosen.

To you, Louise, and to every officer, minister, and administrator who receives this Petition: I bring your attention to the evidence to warn you that the infrastructure exists, the regulations confirm it, the OECD has documented it, and the Magnitsky Act applies to those who facilitate it. I give this warning in honour, not in accusation. I do not presume one's guilt. I presume that you, too, may not have been told or aware.

If, having been warned, you examine and find my claims without substance, you may say so in the manner and form required by this Petition. If you refuse to examine, the blood is no longer at my hand. If you examine and find the claims true, the duty that falls upon you is the same duty that fell upon Nehemiah's nobles: restore, and require nothing of them.

I present a further fact for examination. Where a person without valid appointment takes on the administration or control of trust property as if he were a trustee, equity treats him as a trustee de son tort. The doctrine is ancient. It was applied in Hope v. Liddell (1856) and has been recognized in every common law jurisdiction since. A trustee de son tort assumes core fiduciary obligations: to act in good faith for the beneficiaries, to keep and render an account, not to profit, and to restore misapplied trust assets. He is liable for breach of trust and subject to equitable remedies, even though he was never formally appointed. If Sean Fraser and the back-bench justice lawyers swore fake oaths, they hold no valid appointment to the offices from which they acted. They are not lawful trustees of the Crown's administration. Yet they intermeddled with the trust property of the living men and women of Canada: the faith, the conscience, the self-determination, the beneficial interest that the Coronation Oath was meant to preserve. They administered that trust property to the detriment of the beneficiaries by enacting Bill C-9 to criminalize the faith. Equity treats them as trustees de son tort. They assumed fiduciary obligations they cannot disclaim. They must account. They must restore. They cannot profit from the legislation they forged under colour of authority they have not shown to be sound. The British Columbia Humanist Association, which lobbied for the removal of the good faith religious expression defence, knowingly participated in the breach. A third party who knowingly participates in a breach of trust is equally liable to the beneficiaries. The humanist association intermeddled in the administration of a trust it had no part in creating and acted to strip the beneficiaries of their ancient protection. Does it not also say in your law?

The House of God, His Courts, and the Money Changers

The House of God, His Courts, and the Money Changers

"Whatsoever is commanded by the God of heaven, let it be diligently done for the house of the God of heaven: for why should there be wrath against the realm of the king, and his sons? Also we certify you, that touching any of the priests and Levites, singers, porters, Nethinims, or ministers of this house of God, it shall not be lawful to impose toll, tribute, or custom, upon them. And thou, Ezra, after the wisdom of thy God, that is in thine hand, set magistrates and judges, which may judge all the people that are beyond the river, all such as know the laws of thy God; and teach ye them that know them not. And whosoever will not do the law of thy God, and the law of the king, let judgment be executed speedily upon him, whether it be unto death, or to banishment, or to confiscation of goods, or to imprisonment." (Ezra 7:23-26, KJV)

Four commands. Four questions I bring to you for examination.

Verse 23 commands that what God requires for His house be done diligently, lest wrath come upon the realm. I ask you: has the Crown administered the house diligently, or has it permitted the house to become an instrument of commerce?

Verse 24 declares it unlawful to impose toll, tribute, or custom upon ministers of the house of God. I ask you: when a living man stands as a minister under God, what toll, tribute, and custom has been imposed upon him through the commercial person without his consent?

Verse 25 requires the appointment of magistrates and judges who know the laws of God, and the teaching of those laws to them that know them not. I ask you: do the current magistrates and judges know the law of God, or do they know only the law of the commercial system?

Verse 26 prescribes consequences for those who will not do the law of God and the law of the king. I ask you: what consequence attaches to the failure to examine?

I bring these questions because you sit in the office of chancellor. That office provides God's equitable justice. If the magistrates and judges below you do not know the laws of God, Ezra 7:25 says it falls to the one who holds the wisdom of God in hand to teach them. Louise, what I now show you is what I see from the wall.

The Court Registry Investment System (CRIS) is an north American interest-bearing cash management system administered by the Administrative Office of the United States Courts under 28 U.S.C. § 2045. When a bond is posted in a court case, that instrument is deposited into the court registry and invested in Government Account Series securities tracked by CUSIP number. The courts pool these funds nationally, invest them, earn interest, deduct administrative fees, and disburse only upon court order.

"And Jesus went into the temple of God, and cast out all them that sold and bought in the temple, and overthrew the tables of the moneychangers, and the seats of them that sold doves, And said unto them, It is written, My house shall be called the house of prayer; but ye have made it a den of thieves." (Matthew 21:12-13, KJV) Corinthians 3:16-20..16 Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?

The courts have been turned into investment participants. Bonds deposited, invested by CUSIP number, interest earned, fees deducted. The living men and women whose cases generated those bonds are never told. The money changers sat in the temple. CRIS sits in the court registry. I ask you: are the courts administering justice, or administering instruments?

"Then I consulted with myself, and I rebuked the nobles, and the rulers, and said unto them, Ye exact usury, every one of his brother. And I set a great assembly against them." (Nehemiah 5:7, KJV)

"Then said they, We will restore them, and will require nothing of them; so will we do as thou sayest." (Nehemiah 5:12, KJV)

I bring this to you because it maps to three things I see from the wall: the surety (living men's value pledged without consent), the courts earning interest through CRIS, and the Leviticus 6: accounting I ask for (restore the hundredth part).

(n) Whether bonds posted in court cases are deposited into CRIS and invested as securities without the knowledge or consent of the living men and women whose cases give rise to those bonds.

(o) Whether the duty to blow the whistle is equitable as of the use of IRS Forms 1099-A and 1099-B that should accompany the acquisition and disposition of securities purchased through CRIS are being issued to the living men and women whose flesh converted to bond money funds and acts as surety those securities.

(p) Whether the courts, as investment participants, have a financial interest in the outcomes of the cases over which they preside in the convenience and profit from legal fictions

Part I: Forty Propositions of Fact

Part I: Forty Propositions of Fact

Equity looks to the intent rather than the form. The following Forty Propositions of Fact are presented to you, Louise Arbour, for examination, agreement, or specific written denial. Each Proposition is an observed matter grounded in Scripture, conscience, equity, covenant, oath, trust, jurisdiction, administration, public record, case law, or legislative text. Any Proposition not specifically denied in writing, with particularity and supporting authority, within twenty-one days of confirmed receipt shall stand as agreed in honour. The required form of denial is set forth in Part II.

Propositions 1 through 4: Jurisdiction and Equity

(q) The Governor General holds constitutional and prerogative offices including Chancellor functions and Commander-in-Chief functions.

(r) The Chancellor function carries the equitable conscience of the Crown; read together with the Commander-in-Chief function, it establishes the Military Chancellor forum invoked by this Petition.

(s) The equitable jurisdiction invoked is conscience jurisdiction, ecclesiastical and theological in origin, acting upon conscience, trust, good faith, confession, accommodation, restoration, reconciliation, and remedy.

(t) The Governor General holds independent discretionary prerogative authority sufficient to receive this Petition, examine the trust and oath questions, and act where ordinary statutory administration is unable or unwilling to provide remedy.

Propositions 5 through 10: The Oath Chain

(u) The Oaths of Allegiance Act prescribes a mandatory form of oath to His Majesty King Charles the Third, King of Canada, His Heirs and Successors. Any material departure raises a question of lawful authority, trust, and jurisdiction.

(v) Officers acting under deficient oaths act under clouded authority. Failure to examine a public and ascertainable oath form engages wilful blindness and defeats any claim of innocent defect.

(w) The Coronation Oath administered to King Charles the Third was modified from the form historically prescribed by the Coronation Oath Act 1689. No lawful authority has been shown for such modification.

(x) A deficiency at the Coronation Oath affects every subordinate oath dependent upon the authority of the Sovereign.

(y) The removal of "Defender of the Faith" from the Royal Style and Titles, without demonstrated lawful consent, confirms a further breach of the trust the oath was meant to preserve.

(z) The Statute of Westminster established the distinct Canadian Crown. An oath omitting "King of Canada" raises the question whether allegiance has been sworn to the lawful Canadian Crown or to some other undefined Crown that never consulted with the peoples of the commonwealth.

Propositions 11 through 16: Trust, Registration, and Breach

(aa) Upon vital event registration, a legal fiction bearing a variation of my name was created. This divided administration presents the substance of trust: legal administration held by the Crown and beneficial interest belonging to me.

(bb) The trust mechanism is ecclesiastical in origin and must be examined in that original character.

(cc) The use of altered name forms operates as a fiction. Where the living man is treated as the fiction, equity must examine whether form has been used to obscure substance.

(dd) The suspension of gold redemption on April 10, 1933 created a foundational surety question requiring examination of whether actuarial life value was thereafter treated as surety without knowledge, consent, or compensation.

(ee) The trust instruments and accounts derived from vital event registration have never been fully disclosed to me. Concealment from the beneficiary is a breach of fiduciary duty requiring full accounting.

(ff) The trust satisfies the Letterstedt test for removal of a trustee: want of honesty, want of capacity, and want of fidelity.

Propositions 17 through 20: Peoples, Conscience, Appearance, and Clean Hands

(gg) The same trust and administration questions affect indigenous peoples, whose lands, identities, inheritances, and beneficial interests have been administered through Crown systems requiring fiduciary accounting and restoration.

(hh) My exercise of religious conscience is protected and cannot be dismissed by label or administrative convenience. A sincere claim of conscience requires individual examination.

(ii) I formally stand as a living man of full capacity. My standing as His steward rebuts any presumption that the legal fiction may speak in my place.

(jj) I come with clean hands. I have confessed error at the threshold, sought private resolution, proceeded in honour, and presented the matter for examination before seeking remedy.

Propositions 21 through 26: Equitable Remedies

(kk) No limitation period bars a beneficiary's demand for accounting against a trustee holding trust property in breach of duty.

(ll) A trustee in breach must restore the trust estate to the position it would have occupied had no breach occurred.

(mm) Under the rule in Saunders v. Vautier, a sole competent adult beneficiary absolutely entitled may demand collapse of the trust and delivery of full legal and beneficial title.

(nn) Registration systems record legal administration. They do not extinguish beneficial ownership where equity recognizes the living beneficiary's interest.

(oo) A constructive trust arises where property or value is retained by a party who cannot in good conscience keep it.

(pp) The Crown should be removed or displaced to the extent necessary to protect the beneficiary, complete the accounting, collapse the trust, restore the estate, and provide remedy.

Propositions 27 through 29: Jubilee, Treaty, and Fraud

(qq) The biblical Jubilee requires release, restoration, return of inheritance, and freedom from bondage. I demand that the Jubilee principle be examined and applied to the trust, surety, and accounting questions raised.

(rr) Canada's covenant and treaty obligations must be performed in good faith. Internal law or administrative convenience may not defeat covenant obligations or protected conscience.

(ss) Fraud vitiates every act, record, proceeding, instrument, and presumption it touches. Where fraud, concealment, mistake, or feigning is shown, equity supplies the remedy.

Propositions 30 through 33: Artificial Intelligence, Scripture, and Continuing Discrimination

(tt) Artificial intelligence systems have sworn no oath, hold no conscience, and bear no personal liability. Every man or woman deploying such systems remains accountable for the decision made through them.

(uu) The Crown's historical use of legal fictions and divided title must be examined against the Statute of Uses and the equitable maxim that intent prevails over form.

(vv) Scripture warns that through covetousness and feigned words men may be made merchandise. Legal fictions, name variations, actuarial valuation, and administrative instruments must be examined in light of that warning.

(ww) The watchman observes that the continuing use of Meads v. Meads, ATB Financial v. Dimsdale Auto Parts Ltd., and similar authorities as labels against faith-based, conscience-based, covenant-based, or equity-based claims constitutes a continuing injury to honour, reputation, religious conscience, and the free exercise of faith. This is presented as an observed matter for examination, agreement, or specific written denial. It is not an argument. It is a warning sounded from the wall and a proposition placed before conscience for answer. Where officers act under fake oaths and intermeddle with the trust property of the living men and women to their detriment, equity treats those officers as trustees de son tort: persons who, without valid appointment, assumed the administration of trust property. A trustee de son tort is liable for breach of trust and must account, restore, and disgorge. The British Columbia Humanist Association, as a third party that knowingly participated in the breach by lobbying for the removal of the good faith religious expression defence, is equally answerable to the beneficiaries. This is presented for examination.

Propositions 34 through 40: The Infrastructure, Concealment, and Foreign Actors

(xx) The Court Registry Investment System confirms that the courts of the United States and Canada are investment participants. Bonds posted in court cases are invested in Government Account Series securities tracked by CUSIP number without the knowledge or consent of the living men and women whose cases give rise to those bonds.

(yy) The COCDA Regulations, Schedule II, assign actuarial life values. The Interpretation Act, s. 35, bridges the natural person to the commercial system. The birth certificate or a derivative record enters the book-entry system maintained by the men and women as foreign nationals operating the Depository Trust and Clearing Corporation, Cede and Co. Computershare, Treasury Direct, or similar institutions.

(zz) The Depository Trust and Clearing Corporation, Computershare, and TreasuryDirect are operated by foreign nationals on United States soil, processing instruments derived from vital event registration through global book-entry systems without the knowledge, consent, compensation, or accounting of the living men and women whose lives provide the value.

zz-1 The United States Treasury regulation 31 CFR section 363.6, published by the Bureau of the Fiscal Service, Department of the Treasury, under authority of 5 U.S.C. 301, 12 U.S.C. 391, 31 U.S.C. 3102 et seq., and 31 U.S.C. 3121 et seq., defines "individual" to mean a natural person, defines "entity" to include the estate of a living person such as an incompetent or a minor, defines "person" to mean an individual or an entity, defines "book-entry security" to mean a Treasury security maintained in electronic or paperless form as a computer record, defines "commercial book-entry system" to refer to the book-entry system in which Treasury securities are held in a tiered system through securities intermediaries such as financial institutions or brokerage firms, and defines "registration" to mean that the name and taxpayer identification number of the person named on the security are maintained on records. This regulation establishes in published law that the estate of a living person, including a minor, is an entity capable of holding Treasury securities as computer records in a tiered system through intermediaries operating through the commercial book-entry system maintained by the Depository Trust and Clearing Corporation through its nominee Cede and Co. The question of whether instruments derived from vital event registration enter this system, and whether the estate of the living man has been administered through this system without knowledge, consent, or accounting, requires examination. This Proposition is presented for examination, agreement, or specific written denial.

zz-2 The Cestui Que Vie Act 1666 (18 and 19 Car. 2, c. 11), an Act of the Parliament of England that remains in force in the United Kingdom with no known outstanding effects, establishes that estates depend on lives, that where the person upon whose life the estate depends is absent for seven years and no proof of life is made the person shall be accounted as naturally dead and the estate administered accordingly, and that where the supposed dead man proves to be alive the title is revested and the living man may reenter repossess have hold and enjoy the estate and recover for damages the full profits with lawful interest. The convergence of this Act with 31 CFR section 363.6 and with the actuarial tables published by three Commonwealth governments establishes in published law the trust mechanism by which the estate of a living person may be administered in the absence of the living person without knowledge, consent, or accounting. The living man Edward Jay Robin has appeared. He has proved himself alive by this Petition. He demands the accounting and the remedy provided by Section IV of the Act. This Proposition is presented for examination, agreement, or specific written denial.

zz-3 The same actuarial infrastructure, the same definitional collapse of natural and corporate persons, the same suspension of gold, the same absence of accounting, and the same breach of the Coronation Oath exist simultaneously in the United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia. In the United Kingdom, the Government Actuary's Department publishes the Ogden Tables assigning present capital values to future losses for males and females at every age from birth, and the Interpretation Act 1978 Schedule 1 defines "person" to include a body of persons corporate or unincorporate. In Australia, the Australian Government Actuary publishes the Australian Life Tables assigning life expectancy factors for males and females from age 0, and the Acts Interpretation Act 1901 section 2C defines "person" to include bodies corporate, bodies politic, and individuals. In Canada, the COCDA Regulations Schedule II assigns present values to life annuities for males and females from age 0, and the Interpretation Act section 35(1) defines "person" to include corporations and defines "security" and "sureties" in the same provision. The gold standard was suspended in the United Kingdom in September 1931, in Australia in 1931, and in Canada on the tenth day of April 1933. "Defender of the Faith" was removed from the Royal Style and Titles in Australia in 1973, in Canada in January 2024, and in the United Kingdom the title is retained but the Coronation Oath has been modified without statutory authority. No accounting has ever been provided to any natural person in any of the three jurisdictions. The cross-border dimension of this pattern engages the Justice for Victims of Corrupt Foreign Officials Act (Sergei Magnitsky Law), S.C. 2017, c. 21, and the question of whether a coordinated system exists in which the beneficial interests of natural persons are administered without accounting across national boundaries. This Proposition is presented for examination, agreement, or specific written denial.

zz-4 The Treason Act 1702 (1 Anne St. 2, c. 21), Section III, remains in force in the United Kingdom. It provides that any person who shall endeavour to deprive or hinder any person who shall be the next in succession to the Crown according to the Protestant settlement, and the same maliciously advisedly and directly shall attempt by any overt act or deed, shall be adjudged guilty of high treason, and the offender or offenders therein, their abettors, procurers, and comforters knowing the said offence to be done, shall be liable to imprisonment for life. The Proclamation of the eighth day of January 2024 (SI/2024-4), published in the Canada Gazette, stripping "Defender of the Faith" from the Canadian Royal Style and Titles, is an overt act signed, sealed with the Great Seal of Canada, and published. The question of whether this overt act and the acts of those who advised, drafted, introduced, passed, and executed the Royal Style and Titles Act, 2023 constitute an endeavour to undermine the Protestant succession contrary to the Treason Act 1702 and the statutory settlement of 1689 requires examination. This Proposition is presented for examination, agreement, or specific written denial.

(aaa) The OECD report "Behind the Corporate Veil" confirms the mechanism by which beneficial ownership is concealed through corporate vehicles: separation of legal and beneficial ownership, private and unregistered trusts, and intermediaries processing records without disclosing the beneficial owner.

(bbb) The Justice for Victims of Corrupt Foreign Officials Act (Magnitsky Law) permits sanctions against foreign nationals responsible for or complicit in gross violations of internationally recognized human rights and acts of significant corruption. The foreign nationals operating the book-entry infrastructure must be examined under this Act.

(ccc) The United Nations Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons defines trafficking to include the transfer of persons by means of fraud, deception, or abuse of power for the purpose of exploitation. Vital event registration, book-entry transfer of actuarial life value, and concealment of beneficial ownership must be examined under this Protocol.

(ddd) World Bank Operational Policy 7.30 defines a "de facto government" and requires examination of constitutional standing before financial obligations may bind the people. If the Crown's oath chain is deficient, this Policy is engaged.

The Forty Propositions of Fact are now presented for examination, agreement, or specific written denial. I seek truth, accounting, accommodation, restoration, reconciliation, and remedy. Silence where there is a duty to speak may stand as agreement in honour. A general denial, label, administrative refusal, or procedural avoidance does not answer the substance of these Propositions.

I proceed to the Terms of Agreement.

Part II: Terms of Agreement

Part II: Terms of Agreement

2.1 Purpose: Equity aids the vigilant, not the indolent. These Terms govern the manner in which the Forty Propositions may be received, agreed, denied, confessed, or left unanswered. They separate me, the private living man, from the commercial person, fiction, office, record, name variation, and administrative character through which I was previously treated.

These Terms are addressed to you, Louise, and to every private man or woman under your authority acting as officer, agent, servant, employee, contractor, representative, or instrumentality of the Crown. This applies to all who receive, handle, review, answer, or obstruct this Petition. These Terms do not create commercial controversy.

2.2 Foundation of agreement in honour: Agreement in honour arises where a man or woman receives notice of emergent necessitated and honourable matters requiring answer, then holding and having the duty and ability to answer, fails to answer with particularity, and thereby admits to the facts with no dishonour of argument. The foundation is duty, not commercial silence.

2.3 Time for answer: A written answer is required within twenty-one (21) days after confirmed receipt. Receipt may be established by personal delivery, written acknowledgment, delivery record, witness, affidavit of service, or other reliable evidence.

2.4 Deemed agreement: As of the contingent emergent nature of this petition it is necessitated that it is offered that any Proposition not honorably and specifically denied in writing, with particularity and supporting authority, within twenty-one days shall stand as agreed upon in honour with a congregation celebration of the agreement in Christ posted in the Paper. Silence is treated as agreement only where the recipient had duty and ability to answer.

2.5 Required form of valid denial: A denial must satisfy all of the following elements to be valid.

(n) (eee) In writing.

(o) (fff) Autographed by an identified living man or woman.

(p) (ggg) With standing in private capacity, public office, oath, authority, or agency.

(q) (hhh) Identifying each Proposition denied by number.

(r) (iii) Answering with particularity.

(s) (jjj) Stating the factual, equitable, scriptural, covenant, jurisdictional, or legal basis for denial.

(t) (kkk) Providing supporting authority.

(u) (lll) Addressing trust, conscience, covenant, and accommodation issues raised.

(v) (mmm) Not relying upon label, ridicule, administrative classification, or general rejection.

2.6 Invalid forms of denial: A general denial; a blanket rejection; silence; failure to respond within twenty-one days; a response only in the name of an office without identifying the living man or woman responsible; a response refusing examination by policy, procedure, convenience, or internal classification; a response invoking Meads v. Meads, ATB Financial, or any similar label without individual examination; a procedural objection avoiding the Propositions; a response from someone acting under an oath whose form is not disclosed; a response refusing accounting while acting in a trustee, fiduciary, or Crown capacity.

2.7 Duty to account: Where trust, fiduciary duty, public duty, oath, covenant, or administrative record is invoked, the recipient must account. A trustee cannot refuse to account to the beneficiary.

2.8 Effect of agreement: Upon express or deemed agreement, the agreed Proposition stands for purposes of accounting, accommodation, restoration, reconciliation, and remedy. Each Proposition is severable. Each remedy is severable.

2.9 Opportunity to cure or confess: If any recipient discovers error, the honourable response is confession. Confession opens the door to accommodation, restoration, reconciliation, and remedy. I seek peace where peace is possible.

2.10 Reservation of rights: I reserve all rights in God, Scripture, conscience, equity, covenant, oath, trust, jurisdiction, administration, and remedy. Nothing in this Petition shall be construed as submission to commercial jurisdiction, waiver of conscience, abandonment of standing, consent to personage, acceptance of deficient oath, or agreement that internal administration may defeat covenant, trust, conscience, or equity.

2.11 Closing of Part II: These Terms are offered in honour. I proceed to the Jurisdiction of the Military Chancellor.

Part III: Jurisdiction of the Military Chancellor

Part III: Jurisdiction of the Military Chancellor

Equity acts in personam. Where there is a wrong, there is a remedy. These maxims govern this Part and the jurisdictional foundation upon which the entire Petition rests.

3.1 Purpose: Louise, I address this Petition to you with knowledge of the impeccable public record of your service. You have carried out the mission in the field of the highest tribunals of international criminal law. You have held the esteemed office as United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. You have examined institutional failure within Canada's military structure and stood strong against crime upon humanity. You now at this time stand in the vice-regal office of Canada, with the power of equity.

Louise, I am honoured and humbled before my Creator to offer this to you, that this Petition be received, as an emergent conscience-based matter, by one whose public record shows a forensic competence in the grasp of equity and trusts.

This matter of trust in a capacity of faith cannot be understood nor heard by commercial admiralty courts, Crown offices, or persons of law in legal fiction.

3.2 Equity acts upon conscience: Where legal form obscures substance, equity examines substance. Where administration obscures duty, equity examines duty. Where office obscures conscience, equity speaks to the private man or woman acting in the office. Equity acts in personam: it reaches the conscience of the living man and woman , not the mask of the office. And where there is a wrong, there is a remedy: equity will not turn away because the wrong is unfamiliar or the remedy unprecedented.

3.3 Ecclesiastical origin of equity: The equitable jurisdiction invoked is ecclesiastical in origin and theological in character. The Chancellor historically sat in the court of conscience. The trust arose through conscience jurisdiction. I bring this Petition in the original character of equity: a living man, ministering under duty to God, addressing the conscience of the woman acting in the office capable of remedy.

3.4 The Governor General's office as chancellor and commander-in-chief: The Chancellor function carries the conscience of the Crown. The Commander-in-Chief function carries military and emergency character. Together they establish the Military Chancellor: conscience joined to authority with a staff of equitable remedy.

3.5 The distinct Canadian Crown and the oath as expressed trust: The Statute of Westminster recognized the distinct Canadian Crown. The oath is the expressed trust: the visible, spoken bond by which duty is bound to faithful performance, jurisdiction rests, and administration proceeds. If the King as trustee did not take the statutory conditioned words, the expressed trust at the head is questioned.

3.6 Article 27 and internal obstruction: Canada's covenant obligations must be performed in good faith. No internal law, procedure, classification, or convenience may defeat a covenant obligation, protected conscience, or the duty of examination. Article 27 of the Vienna Convention is invoked as a shield against internal obstruction.

3.7 Why this forum is necessary: The questions raised cannot be fairly answered by the same system whose oath, trust, jurisdiction, and use of personage are under examination. A forum cannot finally answer the validity of its own foundation while refusing examination. The Military Chancellor is the only proper and competent forum because the office joins chancery conscience, Crown trust, prerogative capacity, Commander-in-Chief authority, and the ability to receive a private trust matter outside ordinary administrative obstruction.

3.8 Jurisdictional declaration requested: Louise, I ask you to confirm that you have jurisdiction to examine the Forty Propositions; require a full accounting; examine the King's own oath and the subordinate oath chain; receive confession where error is found; direct accommodation and restoration; order or minister remedy; protect me from being forced back into the commercial person; and preserve the honour of the Crown by answering the trust, oath, conscience, and covenant questions presented.

Part IV: The Foundational Breach of Trust in Constructive Fraud

Part IV: The Foundational Breach of Trust in Constructive Fraud

Equity will not suffer a wrong without a remedy. Equity regards substance over form. These maxims govern every word that follows.

4.1 Purpose: Louise, this Part identifies the breach of trust requiring examination before accounting, accommodation, restoration, and remedy may proceed. I do not ask you to presume the breach. I ask you to examine it, open the account, and minister the remedy that separates me from the commercial person. I identify this not to accuse, but because the watchman who sees the sword and does not blow the trumpet bears the blood upon his own hands (Ezekiel 33:6).

4.2 The trust created by vital event registration: Upon vital event registration, an administrative record was created bearing a variation of my name. I remained the living beneficiary. The Crown administered the record, name, estate, obligations, benefits, accounts, instruments, and presumptions. This divided administration is the substance of trust: legal title held by the Crown, beneficial interest belonging to me.

4.3 The living man, the person, the sinner, and the minister: I am a living man created by God. The commercial person was created by administration. The person is the equality word of the commercial system. I speak as minister Edward Jay Robin, under duty to God, directly to you. If I am forced back into the person, the remedy has been withheld.

4.4 Ecclesiastical origin of the trust: The trust mechanism belongs to conscience jurisdiction. The question is whether the record has been used to administer my beneficial interest without full disclosure, consent, accounting, and remedy.

4.5 Name variations and legal fiction: My proper name is Edward Jay Robin. Any altered rendering must be examined as form, not substance. Equity looks to intent rather than form.

4.6 The foundational surety question: April 10, 1933: gold redemption suspended. If gold no longer stood as backing, the source of surety must be identified. I demand examination of whether the actuarial life value of living men and women was treated as surety without knowledge, consent, compensation, or accounting.

4.7 The three documents at birth: Upon vital event registration, three documents are created: (1) the notification of live birth, (2) the registration of birth, (3) the birth certificate. The birth certificate is the legal tender represented by the value of life: the instrument tendered by law, representing the actuarial life value calculated under the COCDA Regulations, Schedule II, and processed through the global book-entry infrastructure. Does it not also say in your law?

4.8 COCDA Regulations, Schedule II: The Canadian Ownership and Control Determination Regulations, 1984 (SOR/84-431), Schedule II, contains actuarial life tables for males and females derived from Statistics Canada's 1970-72 Census life tables, together with present value calculations for annuities, Schedules 3, 4, and 5 provide the audit mechanism, reporting to the Minister of Natural Resources. Does it not also say in your law?

4.9 The Interpretation Act, section 35: The federal Interpretation Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. I-21, s. 35(1) defines "person" to include both natural persons and corporations in line with the Canada Business Corporations Act definition of individual . The word security therein assigns surety to a person associating the natural person with the male female value of life annuities in schedule 2 of the Canadian Ownership Control Determination Act 1984 regulations. This is the statutory bridge that makes legal personage possible for a use at law: the same word connects the living man and woman to the corporate individual entity, allowing the administration to process the living man as a body corporate through the same infrastructure that processes securities, trusts, and commercial instruments. Does it not also say in your law?

4.10 The infrastructure of instrumentality: The Depository Trust and Clearing Corporation (55 Water Street, New York), Computershare, and TreasuryDirect maintain the book-entry system through which securities are held in a tiered structure through intermediaries. 31 CFR § 363.6 defines "individual" as a natural person, "security" as an obligation issued by Treasury, and "book-entry security" as a Treasury security maintained as a computer record. The men and women who operate these institutions are foreign nationals processing instruments derived from vital event registration without knowledge, consent, compensation, or accounting of the living men and women whose lives provide the value. Does it not also say in your law?

4.10A Louise, the watchman now presents for examination the origin of the trust mechanism upon which the entire chain of administration identified in this Petition depends. The Cestui Que Vie Act 1666 (18 and 19 Car. 2, c. 11) is an Act of the Parliament of England titled "An Act for Redresse of Inconveniencies by want of Proofe of the Deceases of Persons beyond the Seas or absenting themselves, upon whose Lives Estates doe depend." The Act was enacted during the Great Plague and the Great Fire of London, when persons were dying or disappearing in such numbers that estates dependent upon their lives could not be settled. The Act remains in force in the United Kingdom. There are currently no known outstanding effects. It has never been repealed.

Section I of the Act provides that if such person or persons for whose life or lives such estates have been or shall be granted shall remain beyond the seas or elsewhere absent themselves in this realm by the space of seven years together and no sufficient and evident proof be made of the lives of such person or persons respectively in any action commenced for recovery of such tenements by the lessors or reversioners, in every such case the person or persons upon whose life or lives such estate depended shall be accounted as naturally dead, and the judges shall direct the jury to give their verdict as if the person so remaining beyond the seas or otherwise absenting himself were dead.

Section IV of the Act provides the remedy that this Petition invokes: if any person or persons shall be evicted out of any lands or tenements by virtue of this Act, and afterwards if such person or persons upon whose life or lives such estate or estates depend shall return again from beyond the seas, or shall on proof in any action to be brought for recovery of the same be made to appear to be living, or to have been living at the time of the eviction, that then and from thenceforth the tenant or lessee who was outed of the same his or their executors administrators or assigns shall or may reenter repossess have hold and enjoy the said lands or tenements in his or their former estate for and during the life or lives or so long term as the said person or persons upon whose life or lives the said estate or estates depend shall be living, and also shall upon action or actions recover for damages the full profits of the said lands or tenements respectively with lawful interest for and from the time that he or they were outed of the said lands or tenements and kept or held out of the same.

Louise, the Cestui Que Vie Act establishes three principles that converge with every piece of evidence this Petition places before your conscience. The first principle is that estates depend on lives. The estate exists because the life exists. The value of the estate is contingent upon the continued life of the natural person. This is the same principle the COCDA Schedule II tables quantify: the present value of a life annuity calculated by reference to the life expectancy of the natural person, male or female, from age 0. The Ogden Tables published by the United Kingdom Government Actuary's Department calculate the present capital value of future annual losses for males and females at every age from birth, now in their eighth edition updated January 2025. The Australian Life Tables published by the Australian Government Actuary assign life expectancy factors for males and females from age 0, most recently released as ALT 2020-22 on the first day of January 2025. The Cestui Que Vie Act 1666 is the statutory origin of the principle that a person's continued existence has a calculable estate value. The actuarial tables across three Commonwealth jurisdictions are the modern mechanism for calculating that value to six decimal places. Does it not also say in your law?

The second principle is that absence creates the presumption of death, and the presumption of death permits the administration of the estate without the knowledge or consent of the person upon whose life the estate depends. Consider what happens at vital event registration. A natural person is born. A record is created. An administrative identity is established. The living man is never told that an estate may depend upon his life. He is never told that actuarial tables assign a calculable present value to his life from the moment of his birth. He is never told that the Interpretation Act defines "person" to include corporations, collapsing his natural existence and a corporate entity into one statutory word. The living man has not gone beyond the seas. He has gone beyond the registration. He is absent from the estate not because he is physically missing, but because he has never been told the estate exists. The Cestui Que Vie Act creates the mechanism by which an estate dependent on a life can be administered in the absence of the living person. Vital event registration creates the absence, because the living man is never told he is the cestui que vie, the one upon whose life the estate depends. Does it not also say in your law?

The third principle is that when the living man appears, the title revests. Section IV provides the remedy. The living person who returns and proves he is alive may reenter, repossess, have, hold and enjoy the estate, and recover for damages the full profits with lawful interest. I, Edward Jay Robin, have appeared. I have declared myself a living man. I have confessed my previous absence. I now demand the accounting, the restoration, and the full profits with lawful interest. The supposed dead man has proved to be alive. The Cestui Que Vie Act provides the statutory mechanism. Does it not also say in your law?

4.10B The watchman now presents the regulation of the United States Treasury that confirms the modern infrastructure through which the estate of a living person is administered. Title 31 of the Code of Federal Regulations, section 363.6, published by the Bureau of the Fiscal Service, Department of the Treasury, United States of America, defines the special terms used in the TreasuryDirect system. The authority for the regulation is 5 U.S.C. 301; 12 U.S.C. 391; 31 U.S.C. 3102 et seq.; 31 U.S.C. 3121 et seq.

The regulation defines "individual" to mean a natural person. The regulation defines "entity" to mean any owner of a TreasuryDirect account that is not an individual, and provides that entity is a sole proprietorship, partnership, corporation, limited liability company or professional limited liability company, trust, the estate of a decedent, or the estate of a living person such as an incompetent or a minor. The regulation defines "person" to mean an individual or an entity. The regulation defines "security" or "Treasury security" to mean an obligation issued by Treasury that may be held in TreasuryDirect. The regulation defines "book-entry security" to mean a Treasury security maintained by us in electronic or paperless form as a computer record. The regulation defines "commercial book-entry system" to refer to the book-entry system in which you hold your Treasury securities in a tiered system through securities intermediaries such as financial institutions or brokerage firms. The regulation defines "registration" or "registered" to mean that the name and taxpayer identification number or numbers of the person or persons named on the security are maintained on our records.

Louise, I ask you to read these definitions in sequence as the watchman reads them from the wall. The United States Treasury defines "entity" to include the estate of a living person, including a minor. That entity holds Treasury securities. Those securities are maintained as computer records. The computer records are held in a tiered system through securities intermediaries. The securities intermediaries operate through the commercial book-entry system. The commercial book-entry system is maintained by the Depository Trust and Clearing Corporation through its nominee, Cede and Co. This is the chain. Every link is published United States federal regulation. The watchman did not forge this chain. The Bureau of the Fiscal Service forged it. The watchman points to it from the wall and asks: has the estate of the living man been administered through this system without knowledge, consent, or accounting?

At birth, vital event registration creates the administrative record from which the legal identity is derived. The name is assigned. In Canada, the Social Insurance Number is assigned in connection with the birth record. In the United States, the Social Security Number serves the same function. The regulation provides that registration means that the name and taxpayer identification number of the person named on the security are maintained on records. The mechanism by which the name and number assigned at vital event registration connect to the name and number maintained on Treasury security records is the question that requires examination and accounting. The watchman does not assert the connection. The watchman observes that the infrastructure exists in published law to make the connection, and asks whether the connection has been made without the knowledge or consent of the living man whose name and number were assigned at birth.

4.10C The convergence of the Cestui Que Vie Act 1666 with 31 CFR section 363.6 is the point at which the ancient trust mechanism and the modern book-entry system meet. The Cestui Que Vie Act creates the trust by establishing that estates depend on lives and that the estate of an absent person may be administered without the knowledge of the person upon whose life the estate depends. The United States Treasury regulation defines the modern infrastructure through which such an estate is administered: the estate of a living person, including a minor, is defined as an entity capable of holding Treasury securities as book-entry computer records in a tiered system through securities intermediaries. The Cestui Que Vie Act provides the legal mechanism that has been in force since 1666. The United States Treasury regulation provides the operational infrastructure that has been in force since 2002. The living man was never told that either existed. The accounting has never been provided. I ask for the accounting. If nothing exists, the examination would confirm that. If something exists, it belongs to the beneficiary. Does it not also say in your law?

The Cestui Que Vie Act 1707 (6 Anne, c. 72) extends and supplements the 1666 Act and provides for the recovery of property on determination of a life or lives. It was applied in Australia through the Imperial Acts Application Act 1969 (NSW), Division 13. The trust mechanism is not confined to one jurisdiction. It is received law across the Commonwealth. Does it not also say in your law?

4.10D The same actuarial infrastructure exists across the Commonwealth. In the United Kingdom, the Government Actuary's Department publishes the Ogden Tables, assigning present capital values to future losses for males and females at every age from birth, prepared by an arm of the Crown since 1984. In Australia, the Australian Government Actuary publishes the Australian Life Tables every five years from Census mortality data, assigning life expectancy factors for males and females from age 0, used across government financial systems including aged care, pensions, Medicare, and superannuation.

The Interpretation Act in each Commonwealth jurisdiction defines "person" to collapse the natural person and the corporate entity into one statutory word: in the United Kingdom, the Interpretation Act 1978, Schedule 1, provides that "person" includes a body of persons corporate or unincorporate; in Australia, the Acts Interpretation Act 1901 (Cth), section 2C, provides that "person" includes bodies corporate, bodies politic, and individuals, with section 2B defining "individual" as a natural person.

The gold standard was suspended first in the United Kingdom in September 1931 by the Gold Standard (Amendment) Act 1931, Australia followed that same year, and Canada followed by Order in Council on April 10, 1933. The title "Defender of the Faith" was removed from the Royal Style and Titles in Australia in 1973 and in Canada by Proclamation dated the eighth day of January 2024. In the United Kingdom, the title is retained but the oath beneath it has been modified without statutory authority. No accounting has ever been provided to any manor woman in any of the three jurisdictions showing what instruments, accounts, or interests are connected to their vital event registration.

Louise, the watchman presents this Commonwealth-wide pattern because the question it raises cannot be confined to one country or one regulatory artifact. If the actuarial life value of natural persons is not used as surety for government credit after the suspension of the gold standard, why do all three Commonwealth nations maintain government-published tables that assign present dollar values to the lives of natural persons by age and sex from birth? Why does the Interpretation Act in each jurisdiction collapse natural and corporate persons into one statutory definition? Why has no accounting ever been provided to any natural person in any of the three jurisdictions? If nothing exists, the accounting would confirm that. If something exists, it belongs to the beneficiary. The watchman has sounded the trumpet across three walls. Does it not also say in your law?

4.11 The cestui que vie trust and the convergence: The Cestui Que Vie Act 1666 provided that where a person's life or death was uncertain, the estate could be administered until the living man appeared. I have appeared. Manitoba's Securities Transfer Act, C.C.S.M. c. S60, establishes that a secured party who obtains "control" of investment property "can deal with the investment property without any further action by, or consent from, the debtor." If vital event registration creates a record entering this tiered system representing my actuarial life value, then my accrued annuity value is held as a security entitlement through intermediaries who deal with and invest it without my consent there must be an accounting. The cestui que vie trust and the tiered book-entry system converge is the modern slavey referred to in financial risk management protocols such as found at aberdeenplc.com . I now stand accounted for and come to claim the account as of a breach of the trust.

4.12 Concealment from the beneficiary: I have never been provided a full accounting. Concealment from the beneficiary is a breach of trust. A trustee cannot deny the beneficiary knowledge of the trust.

4.13 Want of honesty, capacity, and fidelity: The trust must be examined under the Letterstedt test. Any one ground is sufficient for examination, accounting, removal, and remedy.

4.14 The Statute of Uses and feigning: The Crown appears to have used the same mechanism in reverse: creating a legal fiction through vital event registration while treating my beneficial interest as subject to administration. Has form been used to defeat substance? Equity regards substance over form, and where feigning is shown, equity supplies the remedy.

4.15 The King's breach and the trust at the head: The trust question cannot be separated from the oath question. If the King's own oath is deficient, the expressed trust at the head is questioned. This connection is examined in Part V.

4.16 The Levitical remedy already ordained: The remedy for breach of trust was ordained before any law book was written. "If a soul sin, and commit a trespass against the Lord, and lie unto his neighbour in that which was delivered him to keep, or in fellowship, or in a thing taken away by violence, or hath deceived his neighbour; or have found that which was lost, and lieth concerning it, and sweareth falsely; in any of all these that a man doeth, sinning therein: then it shall be, because he hath sinned, and is guilty, that he shall restore that which he took violently away, or the thing which he hath deceitfully gotten, or that which was delivered him to keep, or the lost thing which he found, or all that about which he hath sworn falsely; he shall even restore it in the principal, and shall add the fifth part more thereto, and give it unto him to whom it appertaineth, in the day of his trespass offering" (Leviticus 6:2-5, KJV). Confession, then restoration of the principal, plus the fifth part. The sequence is already set forth.

4.17 My right to accounting and restoration, and declaration requested: I appear as a living man, competent, present, and able. I demand the honor to steward the account as beneficiary. Under the rule in Saunders v. Vautier, a sole competent adult beneficiary absolutely entitled may demand collapse of the trust and delivery of full lawful and beneficial possession Louise, I ask you to declare that: vital event registration created a trust question requiring examination; I must be separated from the commercial person; I am the beneficiary; the Crown must provide full accounting; concealment constitutes breach; use of my actuarial life value as surety without knowledge, consent, or compensation constitutes breach; the King's own oath must be examined as part of the trust question; the Levitical remedy of restoration of the principal plus the fifth part is the remedy already ordained; and I must be offered remedy according to the order already set forth.

Part V: Coronation Oath Deficiency and the Oath Chain

Part V: Coronation Oath Deficiency and the Oath Chain

Equity imputes an intent to fulfill an obligation. Equity follows the law. These maxims govern this Part, for the oath is the instrument by which intent is made visible and the law is given its living voice. Where the oath is deficient, the intent is unproven and the law is unanchored.

5.1 Purpose: Louise, this Part identifies the oath deficiency that requires examination before any assumption of jurisdiction may continue against me. The oath is the expressed trust: the spoken bond by which duty is attached to office, office is attached to lawful authority, and administration is permitted to proceed in honour. The watchman who sees the foundation cracked cannot remain silent. If the foundation is unsound, the watchman must say so, for every wall built upon it is questioned. I point now to the foundation.

5.2 The King's own oath: The first examination must begin with the King's own oath. The Coronation Oath Act 1689 prescribed statutory conditioned words. If the King did not take those words, the expressed trust at the head is deficient. Every subordinate oath depends upon the authority of the Sovereign to whom allegiance is sworn. Equity imputes an intent to fulfill an obligation; where the obligation was not fulfilled in its prescribed form, the imputation fails and the deficiency must be examined.

5.3 The statutory conditioned words for officers in Canada required to take an Oath of Allegiance are set in mans own statute. An oath without the required words is not the same oath. In the Canadian Federal Oath of Allegiance Act, "do" expresses the living act of swearing; "King of Canada" identifies the certain object of allegiance. Without both, the oath is deficient in act and object. Equity follows the law, and the law prescribed specific words. No substitute may be presumed sufficient where the statute required certainty.

5.4 Defender of the Faith: If the office once bore the duty to defend the faith and that title was removed without lawful consent, the trust the oath was meant to preserve has been breached. The oath was deficient and then the title was removed: the trust is doubly questioned.

Section 5.4A

The oath deficiency identified in this Part extends beyond the form of words spoken at the coronation. It extends to an overt act of repudiation committed by the King within months of swearing the oath, and it extends across the realms over which the oath was sworn.

The Archbishop asked: "Will you to the utmost of your power maintain the Laws of God and the true profession of the Gospel? Will you to the utmost of your power maintain in the United Kingdom the Protestant Reformed Religion established by law? Will you maintain and preserve inviolably the settlement of the Church of England, and the doctrine, worship, discipline, and government thereof, as by law established in England? And will you preserve unto the Bishops and Clergy of England, and to the Churches there committed to their charge, all such rights and privileges, as by law do or shall appertain to them or any of them?" The King answered: "All this I promise to do." The King arose, went to the altar, laid his right hand upon the Holy Gospel in the great Bible, and said: "The things which I have here before promised, I will perform and keep. So help me God." The King kissed the Book and signed the Oath. The Coronation Oath Act 1689 and the Act of Settlement 1701 make these undertakings statutory conditions of tenure of the Crown. The oath was sworn over all the King's realms, including Canada and Australia.

Within weeks of swearing this oath, the King gave Royal Assent to the Royal Style and Titles Act, 2023, assented to on the twenty-second day of June 2023. By Proclamation dated the eighth day of January 2024, published in the Canada Gazette, Part II, Volume 158, Number 3, as SI/2024-4, the King, by and with the advice of his Privy Council for Canada, established for Canada a new Royal Style and Titles. The new style reads: "Charles the Third, by the Grace of God King of Canada and His other Realms and Territories, Head of the Commonwealth." The former style, used in the preamble of the very same Proclamation to establish the authority under which it was issued, reads: "Charles the Third, by the Grace of God of the United Kingdom, Canada and His other Realms and Territories King, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith." The title "Defender of the Faith" appears in the preamble that establishes the King's authority to issue the Proclamation. It is absent from the operative text that declares the new title. The instrument uses the authority of the Defender of the Faith to abolish the defense of the faith. The irony is not rhetorical. It is constitutional. The King used the old title to sign the instrument that removes it. The instrument abolishes what it invokes to establish its own authority.

Louise, I ask you to hold the Canada Gazette open before you and see what the watchman sees. The same document, on the same page, contains both titles. The old title in the preamble declares the King the Defender of the Faith. The new title in the operative text declares him King of Canada without that defense. The oath was sworn on the sixth day of May 2023. The Act was assented to on the twenty-second day of June 2023. The Proclamation was issued on the eighth day of January 2024. The King swore to defend the faith, then consented to legislation that removes the defense, then proclaimed the removal under the Great Seal of Canada. The sequence is oath, then repudiation, then publication. The overt act is signed, sealed, and gazetted.

Australia had already removed "Defender of the Faith" from the Royal Style and Titles in 1973 by the Royal Style and Titles Act 1973 (No. 114 of 1973). Australia was the first Commonwealth realm to strip the confessional title from the Crown. The current Australian title is: "Charles the Third, by the Grace of God, King of Australia and His other Realms and Territories, Head of the Commonwealth." No Defender of the Faith. The faith was stripped from the Australian Crown fifty years before Canada followed. The oath the King swore in 2023 was sworn over Australia as one of his realms. The Australian people's laws had already removed the faith from his title forty years before he took the oath. The King swore to maintain the faith over a realm whose laws had already abolished the title that declared him its defender.

In the United Kingdom, the title "Defender of the Faith" is retained. The King's UK style remains: "Charles the Third, by the Grace of God of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and of His other Realms and Territories King, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith." The title remains. But the oath beneath the title has been modified without statutory authority. The UK Parliamentary research note SN/PC/00435 confirms: "the coronation oath has been modified without statutory authority." The Coronation Oath Act 1689 prescribed specific statutory conditioned words. The oath administered to King Charles the Third differed from the statutory form. The oath administered to Queen Elizabeth the Second before him also differed from the statutory form. No Act of Parliament authorized either modification. Coke's Third Institute declares that no old oath can be altered or new oath raised without Act of Parliament. The title is retained in the United Kingdom but the oath that gives the title its substance has been altered beneath it without the authority of Parliament. The expressed trust at the head remains in words but has been hollowed in substance.

The Treason Act 1702 (1 Anne St. 2, c. 21), Section III, remains in force in the United Kingdom. It provides that if any person shall endeavour to deprive or hinder any person who shall be the next in succession to the Crown for the time being according to the limitations in the Bill of Rights 1689 and the Act of Settlement 1701 from succeeding to the Imperial Crown of this Realm and the Dominions and Territories thereunto belonging, and the same maliciously advisedly and directly shall attempt by any overt act or deed, every such offence shall be adjudged high treason, and the offender or offenders therein, their abettors, procurers, and comforters knowing the said offence to be done, being thereof convicted or attainted according to the laws and statutes of this realm, shall be liable to imprisonment for life. The penalty was originally death. It was amended to life imprisonment by the Crime and Disorder Act 1998. The statute explicitly catches not only the principal but also the abettors, procurers, and comforters who knew of the offence. The men and women who advised the Royal Style and Titles Act, 2023, who drafted it, who introduced it in Parliament, who voted for it, who executed the Order in Council, and who published the Proclamation in the Canada Gazette are identified by their participation in a public and gazetted instrument. Their names are on the public record. The question is whether they are abettors, procurers, and comforters of an overt act that undermines the Protestant character of the succession.

The Proclamation published in the Canada Gazette is the overt act. It is not hidden. It is not ambiguous. It is not inferred. It is signed, sealed with the Great Seal of Canada, proclaimed, and published for all to read. The old title appears in the preamble. The new title appears in the operative text. The watchman points to it from the wall and says: does it not also say in your law?

The question for examination is whether the removal of "Defender of the Faith" from the Royal Style and Titles in two Commonwealth realms, and the unauthorized modification of the Coronation Oath in all three, constitutes an overt act or series of overt acts endeavouring to undermine the Protestant succession contrary to the Treason Act 1702 and the statutory settlement of 1689. The watchman does not assert the conclusion. The watchman presents the overt act, the statute, and the question, and asks you, Louise, to examine them on their merits. The oath was sworn. The title was stripped. The statute remains in force. The question has never been examined. I ask that it be examined now.

Does it not also say in your law?

5.5 Province-by-province examination: I ask that every provincial and territorial oath form be examined for inclusion of "do," identification of "King of Canada," conformity with the prescribed form, authorization for any omission, and production of the oath upon which authority is claimed.

5.6 The oath chain: The chain operates in order: King takes the required by statute Coronation Oath; officers dutifully swear true allegiance; commissions, offices, and courts act under the authority derived from those oaths; the public is presumed bound. If the head is deficient, the chain is questioned at the source. The watchman points to the foundation because every stone above it rests upon the first stone laid. If that stone was not laid according to the prescribed pattern, the watchman is bound to say so before the wall falls upon the people beneath it.

5.7 Wilful blindness: The oath forms are public record. An officer who accepts office has reason to examine the oath. Failure to examine cannot be treated as harmless ignorance where the prescribed form is ascertainable. Equity follows the law; the law is written and available. The officer who does not look where the law directs cannot claim innocence of what the law plainly states.

5.8 The de facto doctrine: The de facto doctrine cannot cure a breach of the expressed trust where the defect is known, discoverable, or deliberately left unexamined. It cannot supply statutory conditioned words that were not spoken.

5.9 Coram non judice: Where the oath is deficient and authority not lawfully established, proceedings are questioned as coram non judice: before one who is not a judge. Equity imputes an intent to fulfill an obligation, but where the obligation was never fulfilled, no imputation can supply what was never given.

5.10 The injury to me: If officers acting under deficient oaths used proceedings, orders, records, or labels against the commercial person and treated those acts as binding upon me, the injury is jurisdictional and equitable. I cannot be forced into the person by officers who have not first shown the expressed trust. The watchman identifies this injury not to accuse, but because the foundation upon which these acts rest has not been shown to be sound.

5.11 Declaration requested: Louise, I ask you to declare that: the King's own oath must be examined against the statutory conditioned words; any omission requires lawful authority shown; the removal of "Defender of the Faith" as announced January 31^st 2024v requires examination as too it’s legitimacy ; the Canadian oath must include "do" and "King of Canada"; any oath omitting these raises a defect; every officer must disclose the oath upon which authority is claimed; the de facto doctrine cannot cure a deficient expressed trust; any proceeding under a deficient oath must be examined; and I must be protected from being forced back into the dead role of a commercial person by any authority that has not established the competency of the expressed trust .

5.12 Closing of Part V: The Coronation Oath deficiency and the oath chain have been identified for examination. The watchman has pointed to the foundation. Equity imputes an intent to fulfill an obligation, and equity follows the law. Where the intent was not fulfilled and the law was not followed, the examination must proceed. The Petition continues in Section Two.

Closing of Section One and Continuation Notice

Section One of this Unified Petition in Equity is now complete.

The Preface, the Confession, the Duty of the Watchman, the House of God and the Courts, Part I (Forty Propositions of Fact), Part II (Terms of Agreement), Part III (Jurisdiction of the Military Chancellor), Part IV (The Foundational Breach of Trust in Constructive Fraud), and Part V (Coronation Oath Deficiency and the Oath Chain) have been presented for examination, accounting, accommodation, restoration, reconciliation, and remedy.

The Petition continues in Section Two, which proceeds in the following order:

(w) Part VI: The Mechanism of Concealment and the Foreign Actors.

(x) Part VII: The Restitution That Follows the Confession.

(y) Part VIII: Emergency and Necessity.

(z) Part IX: Prayer for Relief.

(aa) Part X: Schedule of Authorities: Does It Not Also Say in Your Own Law?

(bb) Closing, Verification, and Certificate of Service.

Section Two is inseparable from Section One. No Part, Proposition, Term, declaration, or prayer in either section may be read, interpreted, answered, or acted upon apart from the whole. The established equitable order governs both sections without interruption. The deemed agreement provisions set forth in Part II apply with equal force to every matter raised in Section Two.

I reserve all rights in God, Scripture, conscience, equity, covenant, oath, trust, jurisdiction, administration, and remedy. Nothing in the division of this Petition into two sections shall be construed as delay, abandonment, waiver, or diminishment of any standing, duty, demand, or remedy set forth in either section.

Both sections constitute one unified Petition and are delivered together.

The trumpet has been sounded. The warning has been given. My soul is delivered. The substance of what I have seen from the wall continues in Section Two.

Respectfully presented in honour and under duty,

Edward Jay Robin, living man, minister, watchman, and petitioner.

End of Section One.Part VI: The Mechanism of Concealment and the Foreign Actors

Equity looks to the intent rather than the form (maxima in equity). Equity will not suffer a wrong without a remedy. These maxims govern what follows.

6.1 Purpose

Louise, this Part identifies the mechanism by which beneficial ownership is concealed and the foreign actors who operate the infrastructure. I do not make use of these instruments. I identify them so your eyes may be opened to what is built beneath the system.

Does it not also say in your law?

6.2 The OECD Confirms the Concealment

The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, in its report "Behind the Corporate Veil: Using Corporate Entities for Illicit Purposes," prepared at the direction of member states including Canada, confirms: the separation of legal and beneficial ownership creates the cover; the trust is private and unregistered; the intermediaries process the records without disclosing the beneficial owner.

Does it not also say in your own report, prepared at the direction of your own member states? Canada's own OECD report confirms every structural element of the mechanism I have identified in this Petition. The corporate vehicle conceals the beneficial owner. The trust separates legal title from beneficial interest. The intermediaries operate across borders. The living man whose value provides the substance is not told, not consulted, and not compensated.

I sound this warning not to accuse, but because the watchman who sees the sword and does not blow the trumpet bears the blood upon his own hands (Ezekiel 33:6). I have seen the mechanism. I have identified it from the wall. The commercial codes, statutory instruments, and administrative procedures that operate upon the fiction rather than the living man are dead letters applied to a living soul. The letter killeth, but the Spirit giveth life (2 Corinthians 3:6). I must speak.

6.3 The Magnitsky Question

The Justice for Victims of Corrupt Foreign Officials Act (Sergei Magnitsky Law), S.C. 2017, c. 21, permits the Governor in Council to impose sanctions against foreign nationals responsible for or complicit in gross violations of internationally recognized human rights and acts of significant corruption. The Magnitsky Act applies because these are foreign nationals facilitating what the OECD itself describes as the concealment of beneficial ownership through corporate vehicles. The trafficking framework applies because the value of living men and women is transferred across borders for the purpose of exploitation without knowledge or consent. The trust framework applies because the separation of legal and beneficial ownership requires accounting, disclosure, and restoration.

I ask you, as the woman sitting in the office of chancellor, to examine whether the men and women operating the foreign infrastructure that facilitates this global trade are foreign nationals responsible for or complicit in gross violations of internationally recognized human rights and acts of significant corruption within the meaning of Canada's own sanctions legislation.

Section 6.3A

The watchman now presents the evidence that the infrastructure identified in this Petition is not confined to Canada. The same actuarial tables, the same definitional collapse of natural and corporate persons, the same suspension of gold, the same absence of accounting, and the same breach of the Coronation Oath exist in the United Kingdom and in Australia. The watchman presents this evidence because the pattern, observed across three sovereign jurisdictions descending from one Crown, cannot be explained as coincidence and cannot be confined to one regulatory purpose. The pattern is the sword. The sword has three edges. Each edge cuts across a realm. Does it not also say in your law?

The United Kingdom is the headwater. The United Kingdom Government Actuary's Department publishes the Ogden Tables: Actuarial Tables with explanatory notes for use in Personal Injury and Fatal Accident Cases. First published in 1984, now in their eighth edition updated January 2025, these tables assign multipliers to calculate the present capital value of future annual losses for males and females at every age from birth. Table 1 calculates the present value of losses for life for males. Table 2 calculates the present value of losses for life for females. The tables are prepared by the Government Actuary's Department, an arm of the Crown, and set out multipliers which enable the user to assess the present capital value of future annual losses or annual expenses. The multipliers are calculated to allow for the effects of various factors including future inflation, interest rates, and life expectancy. The tables are published by the Crown's own actuary. The values are derived from the Crown's own mortality data. The calculations begin at birth. The United Kingdom is where the infrastructure was built. Does it not also say in your law?

The United Kingdom Interpretation Act 1978, Schedule 1, defines "person" to include a body of persons corporate or unincorporate. The Joint Committee on Statutory Instruments of the United Kingdom Parliament confirmed in its Thirteenth Report that the definition of "person" in the Interpretation Act 1978 "covers all forms of natural or legal persons" and that "the essential purpose of the Interpretation Act is to enable United Kingdom legislation to use expressions like 'person' in reliance on the meaning it gives them." The same definitional collapse that exists in Canada exists at the imperial centre. The natural person and the corporate body are made interchangeable by the same statutory mechanism in the jurisdiction from which the Canadian Crown descends. Does it not also say in your law?

On the twentieth day of September 1931, His Majesty's Government issued a press notice announcing: "His Majesty's Government have decided after consultation with the Bank of England that it has become necessary to suspend for the time being the operation of Subsection (2) of Section 1 of the Gold Standard Act of 1925 which requires the Bank to sell gold at a fixed price." The Gold Standard (Amendment) Act 1931 was enacted the following day, the twenty-first of September 1931, suspending gold convertibility in the United Kingdom. The Bank of England's own published history records: "In September 1931, the UK suspended the gold standard. Confidence in sterling had collapsed, and the ensuing run on sterling meant that the Bank of England lost much of its reserves." The United Kingdom is where gold was abandoned first. Canada followed by Order in Council on the tenth day of April 1933. Australia followed the United Kingdom in 1931. The entire Commonwealth went off gold because the imperial centre went off gold. The question of what replaced gold as surety was born in London. Does it not also say in your law?

The United Kingdom retains "Defender of the Faith" in the Royal Style and Titles. The Coronation Oath Act 1689 remains on the statute book. The Treason Act 1702, Section III, remains in force, making it high treason to endeavour by overt act to hinder the Protestant succession, with a penalty of life imprisonment. The statutory architecture of the covenant between Crown and people is formally intact in the United Kingdom. Yet the oath administered at the coronation was modified from the statutory form without Act of Parliament, as section 5.2 of this Petition identifies. The UK Parliamentary research note SN/PC/00435 confirms: "the coronation oath has been modified without statutory authority." The title is retained but the oath beneath it has been altered. The form is preserved but the substance has been changed. No accounting has ever been provided to any natural person in the United Kingdom showing what instruments, accounts, or interests are connected to their vital event registration. Does it not also say in your law?

Australia is the first realm to strip the title. The Australian Government Actuary publishes the Australian Life Tables every five years, derived from Census mortality data, separated by male and female, from age 0. The most recent edition, ALT 2020-22, was released on the first day of January 2025. The Australian Government Actuary describes these tables as helping "the Government, superannuation entities and insurers plan for what is needed in the future" and states they are used to "more accurately estimate future cash flows in a wide range of areas, including aged care, pensions, Medicare and superannuation." The tables assign life expectancy factors to every natural person by age and sex from birth. The values are derived from Census data. The tables are published by a government actuary. The infrastructure is the same as in Canada and the United Kingdom. Does it not also say in your law?

The Australian Acts Interpretation Act 1901 (Cth), section 2C, defines "person" to include bodies corporate, bodies politic, and individuals. Section 2B of the same Act defines "individual" to mean a natural person. The same definitional collapse exists. The natural person, the corporate body, and the body politic are brought under one word by statute. The infrastructure is the same. Does it not also say in your law?

Australia removed "Defender of the Faith" from the Royal Style and Titles in 1973 by the Royal Style and Titles Act 1973 (No. 114 of 1973). Australia was the first Commonwealth realm to strip the confessional title from the Crown, fifty years before Canada followed in 2024. The current Australian title is: "Charles the Third, by the Grace of God, King of Australia and His other Realms and Territories, Head of the Commonwealth." No Defender of the Faith. Australia effectively left the gold standard in 1931, following the United Kingdom. No accounting has ever been provided to any natural person in Australia showing what instruments, accounts, or interests are connected to their vital event registration. Does it not also say in your law?

Louise, the watchman now states the pattern plainly. In all three jurisdictions, the United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia, the following facts are present simultaneously:

(a) The government publishes actuarial tables that assign present dollar values to the lives of natural persons by age and sex from birth. In the United Kingdom, through the Ogden Tables published by the Government Actuary's Department. In Canada, through Schedule II of the Canadian Ownership and Control Determination Regulations, SOR/84-431. In Australia, through the Australian Life Tables published by the Australian Government Actuary.

(b) The Interpretation Act in each jurisdiction defines "person" to collapse the natural person and the corporate entity into one statutory word. In the United Kingdom, the Interpretation Act 1978, Schedule 1. In Canada, the Interpretation Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. I-21, section 35(1). In Australia, the Acts Interpretation Act 1901, section 2C.

(c) The gold standard was suspended across all three jurisdictions between 1931 and 1933. The United Kingdom suspended in September 1931. Australia followed the United Kingdom in 1931. Canada suspended by Order in Council on the tenth day of April 1933.

(d) Vital event registration at birth creates administrative records in all three jurisdictions from which a legal identity is derived and a name and number are assigned.

(e) No accounting has ever been provided to any natural person in any of the three jurisdictions showing what instruments, accounts, trusts, securities, or beneficial interests are connected to their vital event registration.

(f) The Coronation Oath, sworn over all three realms, was modified without statutory authority in each case.

(g) "Defender of the Faith" has been removed from the Royal Style and Titles in two of the three realms: Australia in 1973 and Canada in 2024. In the United Kingdom, the title is retained but the oath beneath it has been altered without Act of Parliament.

The cross-border dimension transforms the question raised in this Petition. The Justice for Victims of Corrupt Foreign Officials Act (Sergei Magnitsky Law), S.C. 2017, c. 21, permits sanctions against foreign nationals responsible for or complicit in gross violations of internationally recognized human rights and acts of significant corruption. The Magnitsky Act applies because the question is no longer whether one country has a peculiar regulatory artifact. The question is whether a coordinated cross-border system exists in which the beneficial interests of natural persons are administered without accounting across national boundaries. The OECD report "Behind the Corporate Veil," prepared at the direction of member states including Canada, confirms the mechanism by which beneficial ownership is concealed through corporate vehicles: separation of legal and beneficial ownership, private and unregistered trusts, and intermediaries processing records without disclosing the beneficial owner. The Commonwealth pattern gives that mechanism three data points instead of one.

The United States Treasury regulation 31 CFR section 363.6 defines "entity" to include the estate of a living person including a minor, and the commercial book-entry system operates through the Depository Trust and Clearing Corporation and its nominee Cede and Co. The men and women who operate these institutions are foreign nationals processing instruments through a global book-entry system. If instruments derived from vital event registration in Canada, the United Kingdom, and Australia enter the United States book-entry system and are held through intermediaries without the knowledge, consent, or accounting of the living men and women whose lives provide the value, the foreign nationals operating that infrastructure must be examined under the Magnitsky Act. The watchman does not assert the conclusion. The watchman observes that the infrastructure exists across borders, that the concealment mechanism is confirmed by the OECD, that the US Treasury regulation defines the entity and the system, and that no accounting has ever been provided. The question the Magnitsky Act was designed to examine is the question the Commonwealth pattern raises. Does it not also say in your law?

Louise, the watchman has sounded the trumpet across three walls. The United Kingdom is the headwater. Australia was the first to strip the title. Canada is where the door stands before you. The evidence is published law in three sovereign jurisdictions. The question has never been examined. The accounting has never been provided. If nothing exists, the accounting would confirm that. If something exists, it belongs to the beneficiary. I ask for the accounting.

Does it not also say in your law?

6.4 The Trafficking Question

The United Nations Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons defines "trafficking in persons" as the recruitment, transportation, transfer, harbouring or receipt of persons by means of force, coercion, abduction, fraud, deception, abuse of power or of a position of vulnerability, or the giving or receiving of payments to achieve consent of a person having control over another person, for the purpose of exploitation. I say to you: vital event registration constitutes the recruitment and receipt; the book-entry system constitutes the transfer; the concealment of beneficial ownership constitutes the fraud and deception; the processing of actuarial life value without knowledge or consent constitutes the abuse of power or of a position of vulnerability; and the extraction of value from the living man's estate constitutes the exploitation.

6.5 The World Bank and the De Facto Government Question

World Bank Operational Policy 7.30 (November 1994) defines a "de facto government" as one that comes into, or remains in, power by means not provided for in the country's constitution. When OP 7.30 is triggered, the World Bank suspends disbursements until a proper legal framework is confirmed. If the Crown's authority is questioned at the head (the Coronation Oath) and the branches (the subordinate oaths), then the World Bank's own policy requires examination of whether the Crown has the constitutional standing to bind the living men and women of Canada through financial obligations backed by their actuarial life value.

The suspension of gold redemption on April 10, 1933 created the foundational surety question identified in Part IV. If my productive capacity, my labour, my life value, was pledged to back financial instruments without my knowledge, this is the expropriation question: was my value taken and administered for the benefit of the Crown and its commercial system?

6.6 The Surety and the Lamb

"Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers; But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot." (1 Peter 1:18-19, KJV)

I was not redeemed with silver and gold. My value is not in the actuarial tables. My value is in the blood of Christ. The system that assigns my value by regulation, processes it through book-entry, and trades it as instrumentality has mistaken what I am. I am not an instrument. I am not a security. I am not a book-entry record. I am a living man, redeemed by the blood of the Lamb, and I ask for the account.

Part VII: The Restitution That Follows the Confession

He who comes into equity must come with clean hands. I have confessed. My hands are washed. It is from that posture that I now ask equity to examine the hands of those who administered the trust.

"If a soul sin, and commit a trespass against the Lord, and lie unto his neighbour in that which was delivered him to keep, or in fellowship, or in a thing taken away by violence, or hath deceived his neighbour; Or have found that which was lost, and lieth concerning it, and sweareth falsely; in any of all these that a man doeth, sinning therein: Then it shall be, because he hath sinned, and is guilty, that he shall restore that which he took violently away, or the thing which he hath deceitfully gotten, or that which was delivered him to keep, or the lost thing which he found, Or all that about which he hath sworn falsely; he shall even restore it in the principal, and shall add the fifth part more thereto, and give it unto him to whom it appertaineth, in the day of his trespass offering." (Leviticus 6:2-5, KJV)

I do not rise from my knees to make demands. I have no strength for demands. I remain where I am, trembling beneath the weight of what I have seen, and ask you, with all the sorrow in my heart, to see what Scripture requires of the one who trespassed.

Leviticus 6 does not give the injured party the right to demand. It places the duty of restitution upon the one who committed the trespass, as part of his own offering, as the condition of his own atonement. The one who took violently away must restore. The one who deceitfully gotten must restore. The one who was delivered something to keep and lied concerning it must restore. And he must restore the principal, and add the fifth part more thereto, and give it unto him to whom it appertaineth, in the day of his trespass offering.

I have confessed my trespass: I walked in the shoes of the fiction, answered in the name of the person, and acquiesced to the system. That is my confession, and I have made it. That confession cost me everything I thought I was. I laid down the name, the record, the system I had walked in, the shoes I had worn. I stood naked before God and said: I was wrong. I participated. I acquiesced. And now I come to you, Louise, with nothing in my hands but that confession, and I ask you to see what it means.

But the trespass was not mine alone.

I come into equity having first cleansed my own hands. I walked in the shoes of the fiction. I answered in the name of the person. I acquiesced. That confession is made, and I do not withdraw it. It is because my hands are now washed in confession that I may ask equity to examine the hands of those who administered the trust.

Something was delivered to be kept: my actuarial life value, my estate, my beneficial interest. Something was taken away: my identity as a living man, processed through the fiction without my knowledge. Something was gotten by deceit: the treatment of my life value as a security entitlement, traded through intermediaries without my consent. Something was lost: my standing as a living man under God, buried beneath the commercial person.

I am not the one who built the COCDA Regulations. I am not the one who defined "person" to bridge the living man to the corporate entity. I am not the one who created the book-entry system, invested the bonds through CRIS, or concealed the beneficial ownership through corporate vehicles. The trespass was committed against me, and against every living man and woman whose value was assigned, processed, and traded without their knowledge. Leviticus 6 tells us what must happen now. Not because I demand it. Because God requires it of the one who trespassed, as the condition of atonement.

What the trespass offering requires:

"He shall restore that which he took violently away." A forensic audit of all accounts, trusts, securities, and instruments derived from my vital event registration is required so that what was taken may be identified.

"Or the thing which he hath deceitfully gotten." A full accounting of all proceeds, interest, fees, and disbursements connected to my actuarial life value, from the date of my vital event registration to the present day, is required so that what was gotten may be known.

"Or that which was delivered him to keep." Formal separation of me, the living man, from the commercial person, fiction, office, record, name variation, and administrative character is required so that what was delivered to be kept may be distinguished from the man to whom it belongs.

"Or the lost thing which he found." Restoration of beneficial title to me, the living man, is required so that the lost thing may be returned.

"He shall even restore it in the principal, and shall add the fifth part more thereto." Disclosure of all intermediaries, all CRIS transactions, CUSIP numbers, interest earned, and issuance of all reporting forms (including IRS Forms 1099-A and 1099-B) that should have accompanied the acquisition, disposition, and transfer of securities derived from my vital event registration is required so that the principal and the fifth part may be calculated.

"And give it unto him to whom it appertaineth, in the day of his trespass offering." It appertains to me. The day of the trespass offering is this day: the day I confessed, the day I blew the trumpet, the day this Petition reached your hands.

The completion of the parable:

"But the father said to his servants, Bring forth the best robe, and put it on him; and put a ring on his hand, and shoes on his feet: And bring hither the fatted calf, and kill it; and let us eat, and be merry: For this my son was dead, and is alive again; he was lost, and is found." (Luke 15:22-24, KJV)

The robe is beneficial title restored. The ring is the authority of the heir confirmed: I speak for myself, sign for myself, and administer my own affairs. The shoes are new standing: I walk free from the fiction. The fatted calf is restitution: the full accounting and settlement, the principal and the fifth part, given unto him to whom it appertains.

The elder brother heard music and dancing, and was angry, and would not go in (Luke 15:25-28). The Father's answer settles the matter: "Son, thou art ever with me, and all that I have is thine" (Luke 15:31). The elder brother's inheritance was never diminished by my restoration.

Louise, you sit in the office of chancellor. You are the servant the Father addresses. I do not demand of you. I ask you to do what the Father requires: bring forth the robe, the ring, the shoes, and the fatted calf. I am His son, and I have returned.

Part VIII: Emergency and Necessity

Part VIII: Emergency and Necessity

8.1 Purpose

Equity acts in personam: it addresses the conscience of the person, not the office. Where there is a right, there is a remedy. These maxims compel the examination I now request.

Louise, this Part identifies the emergency that requires present examination and remedy. The emergency is spiritual, equitable, jurisdictional, and practical. It concerns faith, conscience, oath, trust, remedy, and the danger of being forced back into the commercial person after confession has already been made. I do not ask you to act from panic or force. I ask you to act from conscience, duty, trust, and equity.

The watchman has sounded the trumpet. The question now before you is whether those who hear will prepare accordingly, or whether silence will stand as the answer.

8.2 Ground the First: The Oath and Trust Are Questioned

If the King's own oath omitted the statutory conditioned words, or if the oath was modified without lawful authority, the expressed trust at the head of the chain is questioned. If subordinate oaths omit the word "do," omit "King of Canada," or otherwise alter the statutory form, the expressed trust in the branches is also questioned. Where the trust is questioned, jurisdiction cannot be presumed. It must be examined before further administration may proceed against me.

Ground 8.2A The emergency is amplified by the discovery that the infrastructure for administering the estate of a living person without knowledge or consent exists in published law and operates across national boundaries.

The United States Treasury regulation 31 CFR section 363.6, published by the Bureau of the Fiscal Service, defines "entity" to include the estate of a living person such as an incompetent or a minor, and provides that such entities hold Treasury securities as book-entry computer records in a tiered system through securities intermediaries such as financial institutions or brokerage firms. This regulation confirms in published federal law that the infrastructure exists to administer the estate of a living person through the book-entry system. The commercial book-entry system is maintained by the Depository Trust and Clearing Corporation through its nominee Cede and Co. The men and women who operate these institutions are foreign nationals on United States soil processing instruments through a global tiered system.

The Cestui Que Vie Act 1666, which remains in force in the United Kingdom with no known outstanding effects, establishes that where the person upon whose life the estate depends is absent and no proof of life is made, the person is accounted as naturally dead and the estate is administered accordingly. Vital event registration at birth creates the administrative record from which the legal identity is derived. The living man is never told that an estate may depend upon his life. He is never told that actuarial tables assign a present value to his life from the moment of birth. He is never told that the Interpretation Act defines "person" to collapse his natural existence and a corporate entity into one statutory word. He is never told that the United States Treasury defines "entity" to include the estate of a living person and that such estates hold Treasury securities as computer records in a tiered system through intermediaries. The absence the Cestui Que Vie Act contemplates is not geographical. It is informational. The man is present in the realm. He walks, breathes, labours, pays, and is administered upon every day of his life. But he is absent from the knowledge that an estate depends on his life, and that absence is manufactured by the concealment, not chosen by the man.

The same actuarial infrastructure exists across three Commonwealth jurisdictions. In the United Kingdom, the Government Actuary's Department publishes the Ogden Tables assigning present capital values to the lives of natural persons from birth. In Australia, the Australian Government Actuary publishes the Australian Life Tables assigning life expectancy factors from age 0. In Canada, the COCDA Regulations Schedule II assigns present values to life annuities from age 0. The Interpretation Act in each jurisdiction collapses natural and corporate persons into one word. The gold standard was suspended across all three jurisdictions between 1931 and 1933. No accounting has ever been provided to any natural person in any of the three jurisdictions. The cross-border dimension engages the Justice for Victims of Corrupt Foreign Officials Act (Sergei Magnitsky Law), because the question is whether foreign nationals operating the book-entry infrastructure are complicit in the administration of the beneficial interests of natural persons without knowledge, consent, or accounting across national boundaries.

The emergency is present because the infrastructure operates now. Every day that passes without examination is a day the estate of the living man continues to be administered, if it is being administered, without his knowledge or consent. Every day that passes without accounting is a day the profits, if profits are being received, are received by persons other than the beneficiary. Every day that passes without the examination of the oath chain is a day that officers acting under deficient oaths continue to exercise authority over the living man through the commercial person. The person continues to carry records, charges, assumptions, disabilities, obligations, and classifications that administration treats as binding upon me. The account has not been opened. The trust has not been examined. The oath has not been verified. The faith has not been protected. The watchman cannot unknow what the regulations say. The regulations say what they say. The emergency requires present examination.

If the infrastructure is not being used to administer the estate of the living man, the examination would confirm that and the emergency would be resolved. If the infrastructure is being used, the emergency is confirmed by the examination and the remedy must follow according to the order already set forth: accounting, accommodation, restoration, and remedy. The watchman presents this ground because the discovery of 31 CFR section 363.6, the Cestui Que Vie Act 1666, and the Commonwealth-wide pattern establishes that the infrastructure exists in published law across multiple jurisdictions, and the question of whether that infrastructure has been used against the living man without his knowledge requires present examination. The sword is not approaching. The sword has been swinging in silence. The watchman has seen it from the wall and is required to tell you. Does it not also say in your law?

8.3 Ground the Second: The Person Is Still Being Used Against Me

I have confessed the error of personage. If administration continues to use that person against me without remedy, I am being forced back into the vomit from which Scripture commands me to depart. The person continues to carry records, charges, assumptions, disabilities, obligations, and classifications that administration treats as binding upon me.

8.4 Ground the Third: The Account Has Not Been Opened

If my vital event registration gave rise to trust administration, surety, accounts, instruments, or securities, then the account must be opened. No trustee may conceal the account from the beneficiary. Until the account is opened, administration continues without reconciliation, and remedy remains withheld.

8.5 Ground the Fourth: The Faith Is in Danger

I speak as minister Edward Jay Robin, redeemed and chosen, under duty to God. My conscience does not permit me to return to the person, serve the commercial fiction, accept the deficient oath chain, or treat the commandments of men as superior to God's law. When a court, officer, law society, or administrative body treats my faith as a commercial argument or a thing to be mocked, the faith is dishonoured. The emergency exists because the faith requires present protection from being forced under the person, the label, and the record.

8.6 Ground the Fifth: Prior Criminal Justice Administration Was Person-Based

The record attached to the legal person does not show a harmed living man or woman. It appears as secular statutory administration against a person alleged to have violated codes, regulations, or public orders. If no living man or woman was harmed, and if no injured property was identified, then the record must be examined as administration against the person rather than judgment against me as the living man.

8.7 Ground the Sixth: Artificial Intelligence and Digital Administration

An artificial system has no conscience, has sworn no oath, cannot confess error, and cannot distinguish the living man from the commercial person unless a living man or woman with conscience directs it to do so. If artificial systems continue to act on the record of the person and treat that record as me, the injury becomes faster, wider, and harder to correct.

8.8 Ground the Seventh: No Ordinary Forum Can Complete the Examination

The watchman observes: a court operating under the oath chain cannot finally answer the validity of that same oath chain while refusing to examine it. A forum that relies on labels to avoid conscience cannot answer a petition brought in conscience. This is not an argument for a result. It is a fact seen from the wall, presented for examination. For that reason, I address you, Louise, as the private woman acting as Governor General of Canada, Military Chancellor, and Commander-in-Chief, because the matter must be received where conscience, oath, trust, prerogative, and remedy can be examined together.

8.9 Necessity of Immediate Accommodation

Immediate accommodation is necessary while the account is opened and the remedy is ministered. That accommodation should include:

l Recognition that I am not the commercial person.

l Suspension of any use of the person to bind, detain, obstruct, shame, classify, or compel me.

l Protection from enforcement based on records where no harmed living man or woman is identified.

l Disclosure of the oath and authority of any man or woman attempting to act against me.

l Preservation of my ability to live, move, speak, receive, communicate, hold property, and minister without being forced back into personage.

l Examination of the trust, account, oath, record, and remedy without delay.

This accommodation preserves the order already set forth while preventing further injury.

8.10 Declaration Requested

Louise, I ask you to declare that: an emergency exists because the oath, trust, personage, account, record, and remedy require present examination; the King's own oath and the subordinate oath chain must be examined before jurisdiction is presumed; I must not be forced back into the commercial person from which I have confessed and repented; the account connected to vital event registration and every name variation must be opened; the faith must be protected from label, ridicule, administrative dismissal, and forced return to personage; prior criminal justice administration through the person must be examined where no harmed living man or woman is identified; artificial intelligence and digital administration must not be permitted to continue treating the commercial person as me; immediate accommodation must be provided while the matter is examined; and the Military Chancellor is the proper forum to receive the emergency because conscience, oath, trust, prerogative, and remedy are all engaged.

Part IX: Prayer for Relief

Part IX: Prayer for Relief

9.1 Purpose

Equity regards as done that which ought to be done. Equity follows the law. I ask you to act upon these principles.

I come not with raised fists but with washed hands and a contrite heart. I have done what was required of me: I have confessed. I now ask equity to do what is required of it: examine, account, and restore.

Louise, I ask you, as the private woman acting as Governor General of Canada, Military Chancellor, and Commander-in-Chief, to receive this Petition in equity and to examine it on its merits. I do not ask for vengeance. I ask for examination, accounting, separation from the commercial fiction, restoration of beneficial interest, correction of records, accommodation of conscience, and remedy according to the order already set forth.

9.2 Formal request one: Receive the Petition. I ask you to receive this Petition in equity, conscience, trust, covenant, and honour. I ask that it not be dismissed by label, procedure, administrative convenience, or commercial classification.

9.3 Formal request two: Examine the Propositions. I ask you to examine the Forty Propositions of Fact. Any Proposition not specifically denied in writing, with particularity and supporting authority, within twenty-one days of confirmed receipt should stand as agreed in honour for the purposes of the accounting, accommodation, restoration, and remedy sought.

9.4 Formal request three: Examine the oath as expressed trust. I ask you to examine the King's own oath, the statutory conditioned words, the title "Defender of the Faith," the Canadian oath of allegiance, the word "do," the words "King of Canada," and the certainty of every subordinate oath flowing from that chain.

9.5 Formal request four: Declare the trust question. I ask you to declare that vital event registration created or gave rise to a trust question requiring examination and accounting, and that I am the living beneficiary of any estate, value, account, instrument, security, benefit, or beneficial interest administered through the registered name or any name variation connected to me.

9.6 Formal request five: Open the account. I ask you to open the full account, including every record, instrument, annuity, security, trust account, public account, benefit, charge, lien, debt, set-off, obligation, surety, transfer, pledge, book entry, and administrative use connected to my vital event registration and every name variation derived from it.

9.7 Formal request six: Direct a forensic audit. I ask you to direct a full forensic audit identifying the origin of the account, the trustee or administrator, the beneficiary, the property or value administered, the income and charges, the current holder, and the amount required for restoration, set-off, discharge, and correction. The cost of the audit should not be charged to me.

Formal Requests 9.7A, 9.7B, and 9.7C

9.7A Formal request six-A: Examine the United States Treasury regulation. I ask you to examine 31 CFR section 363.6, published by the Bureau of the Fiscal Service, Department of the Treasury, United States of America, and to determine whether the estate of the living man Edward Jay Robin, or any entity derived from vital event registration bearing any variation of my name, holds, has held, or has been used to hold Treasury securities as book-entry computer records in the tiered system through securities intermediaries described in that regulation. I ask that this examination include all accounts, instruments, securities, trusts, book-entry records, and administrative uses maintained by the Bureau of the Fiscal Service, the Depository Trust and Clearing Corporation, Cede and Co., Computershare, TreasuryDirect, and any other intermediary, custodian, nominee, or depository processing instruments derived from vital event registration in my name or any variation thereof, including any name rendered in capital letters, any name with altered punctuation, any name with middle name reduced to an initial, and any name associated with my Social Insurance Number or any taxpayer identification number assigned in connection with my birth record. I ask that every such account, instrument, security, trust, or record be disclosed to me as the living beneficiary, and that a full forensic accounting be conducted identifying the origin of the account, the trustee or administrator, the beneficiary, the property or value administered, the income earned, the charges deducted, the interest accrued, the transfers made, the current holder, and the amount required for restoration, set-off, discharge, and correction. If no such instruments exist, the examination would confirm that and the matter would be resolved in honour. If they exist, they belong to me as the beneficiary and must be accounted for according to the order already set forth.

9.7B Formal request six-B: Examine the Cestui Que Vie Act 1666 and declare the living man's right to revesting. I ask you to examine the Cestui Que Vie Act 1666 (18 and 19 Car. 2, c. 11), which remains in force in the United Kingdom with no known outstanding effects, and to determine whether the living man Edward Jay Robin, having now appeared and declared himself alive by this Petition signed by his own hand, having confessed his previous absence from the estate through his participation in the system of personage, and having presented proof of life before the office capable of receiving it, is entitled to the revesting of title and the recovery of full profits with lawful interest under Section IV of that Act. I ask you to declare that the supposed dead man has proved to be alive, that the title must revest, that the full profits with lawful interest are due from the time the estate was administered without the knowledge or consent of the living man, and that the remedy provided by Section IV of the Cestui Que Vie Act is the remedy ordained by statute for precisely the circumstances this Petition describes: a living man whose estate was administered in his absence because he was never told the estate existed, who has now appeared, who has now confessed, and who now asks for what is his. I ask that the Cestui Que Vie Act be read together with the Levitical remedy already set forth in this Petition, Leviticus 6:2-5, which requires restoration of the principal and the addition of the fifth part more thereto, because the ancient statute and the ancient Scripture arrive at the same remedy: when the living man appears, restore what was taken, add what is owed, and give it unto him to whom it appertains. The Cestui Que Vie Act says "recover for damages the full profits with lawful interest." Leviticus says "restore it in the principal, and shall add the fifth part more thereto, and give it unto him to whom it appertaineth." The statute and the Scripture speak with one voice. I ask that both be heard.

9.7C Formal request six-C: Examine the Commonwealth pattern and extend the accounting across realms. I ask you to examine the Commonwealth-wide pattern presented in this Petition and to extend the forensic accounting demanded herein to an examination of whether the same infrastructure operates across the United Kingdom, Australia, and Canada simultaneously. I ask that the examination include the Ogden Tables published by the United Kingdom Government Actuary's Department, the Australian Life Tables published by the Australian Government Actuary, the Interpretation Acts of all three jurisdictions, the gold standard suspension instruments in all three jurisdictions, and the vital event registration systems in all three jurisdictions. I ask that you, as the Governor General of Canada, in your capacity as the representative of the Crown in Canada and as the Military Chancellor holding the equitable conscience of the Crown, correspond with the Lord Chancellor of the United Kingdom and the Governor-General of Australia to raise the question of whether the Crown's administration of the beneficial interests of natural persons has been conducted without accounting in any realm. I ask that this correspondence identify the published actuarial tables, the published Interpretation Act definitions, the published US Treasury regulation, the Cestui Que Vie Act 1666, the suspension of the gold standard, the removal of "Defender of the Faith," and the absence of accounting in all three jurisdictions, and that it request examination and accounting from each realm. The question is the same in all three jurisdictions: if the actuarial life value of natural persons is not used as surety for government credit after the suspension of the gold standard, why do all three Commonwealth nations maintain government-published tables that assign present dollar values to the lives of natural persons by age and sex from birth, why does the Interpretation Act in each jurisdiction collapse natural and corporate persons into one statutory definition, and why has no accounting ever been provided to any natural person in any of the three jurisdictions showing what instruments, accounts, or interests are connected to their vital event registration? If nothing exists, the accounting would confirm that in all three realms. If something exists in any realm, it belongs to the beneficiaries in that realm and must be accounted for. The watchman has sounded the trumpet across three walls. The blood is no longer at his hand. I ask that the examination proceed across all three walls.

Does it not also say in your law?

9.8 Formal request seven: Separate me from the commercial fiction. I ask you to declare that I am not the commercial fiction and to separate me, minister Edward J. Robin, redeemed and chosen, from the fiction, registered character, name variation, and administrative identity by which I was previously treated.

9.9 Formal request eight: Correct fiction-based administration. I ask you to correct every administration that treated the commercial fiction as though it were me, including courts, registries, ministries, agencies, law enforcement, corrections, law societies, banks, creditors, databases, contractors, and every other body that received, used, copied, published, relied upon, or enforced the fiction-based record.

I present for examination what I see from the wall. This sword has two edges and both are breach of trust. On the first edge, the Crown and Parliament breach their trust to the living men and women of Canada. The Coronation Oath is the expressed trust: the spoken bond by which the Sovereign undertook to maintain the laws of God, the true profession of the Gospel, and the Protestant Reformed religion. Every officer who swore allegiance to that Crown received the benefit of that expressed trust and assumed the fiduciary duty to preserve it. The Crown holds administration; the living men and women are the beneficiaries. A trustee cannot enact legislation that destroys the very interest it was entrusted to protect. By enacting Bill C-9, the Crown and Parliament have breached the expressed trust of the Coronation Oath, violated the fiduciary duty of loyalty, good faith, full disclosure, and ordinary prudence confirmed in Guerin v. The Queen, and satisfied every ground of the Letterstedt test: want of honesty in concealing the effect upon conscience; want of capacity in failing to examine the Bill against the oath and the Charter; and want of fidelity in criminalizing the faith the Sovereign swore to defend. This is breach of trust on the first edge of the sword. The sword was forged by men and women whose oaths must be examined before their authority to forge it may be presumed. I present a further fact for examination. Where a person without valid appointment takes on the administration or control of trust property as if he were a trustee, equity treats him as a trustee de son tort. The doctrine is ancient. It was applied in Hope v. Liddell (1856) and has been recognized in every common law jurisdiction since. A trustee de son tort assumes core fiduciary obligations: to act in good faith for the beneficiaries, to keep and render an account, not to profit, and to restore misapplied trust assets. He is liable for breach of trust and subject to equitable remedies, even though he was never formally appointed. If Sean Fraser and the back-bench justice lawyers swore fake oaths, they hold no valid appointment to the offices from which they acted. They are not lawful trustees of the Crown's administration. Yet they intermeddled with the trust property of the living men and women of Canada: the faith, the conscience, the self-determination, the beneficial interest that the Coronation Oath was meant to preserve. They administered that trust property to the detriment of the beneficiaries by enacting Bill C-9 to criminalize the faith. Equity treats them as trustees de son tort. They assumed fiduciary obligations they cannot disclaim. They must account. They must restore. They cannot profit from the legislation they forged under colour of authority they have not shown to be sound. The British Columbia Humanist Association, which lobbied for the removal of the good faith religious expression defence, knowingly participated in the breach. A third party who knowingly participates in a breach of trust is equally liable to the beneficiaries. The humanist association intermeddled in the administration of a trust it had no part in creating and acted to strip the beneficiaries of their ancient protection. Does it not also say in your law? On the second edge, the sword cuts against the watchman himself. If Bill C-9 silences the minister, if the watchman is compelled by threat of prosecution to withhold the trumpet, the watchman is forced into breach of his own trust and duty to God and to the living men and women who depend upon his warning for the deliverance of their souls. Ezekiel 33:6 is plain: if the watchman see the sword come, and blow not the trumpet, and the people be not warned, his blood will I require at the watchman's hand. The watchman holds a trust from God to the people. If he is silenced, the trust is breached and the blood is at his hand. Bill C-9 does not merely criminalize speech. It forces the watchman into a position where he must choose between breach of the law of men and breach of the law of God, between imprisonment by the Crown and damnation of his soul. No lawful enactment may place a living man in that position. No trustee may force the beneficiary into breach of his own duty to God. The sword has two edges and both are breach of trust: the Crown breaches its trust to the people, and the people's watchman is forced into breach of his trust to God. I bring both edges before you, Louise, for examination.

9.10 Formal request nine: Correct criminal justice records. I ask you to examine all prior criminal justice administration attached to the legal fiction. Where no harmed living man or woman is identified and no injured property is shown, I ask that every charge, conviction, finding, order, sentence, supervision, restriction, registry entry, police record, correctional record, database entry, and derivative record be corrected, discharged, expunged, or marked as not binding upon me as the living man.

9.11 Formal request ten: Collapse or correct the trust. I ask you to collapse, correct, or bring into equity any trust administered through vital event registration or any name variation connected to me. If I am the living beneficiary, then the beneficial interest, title, value, account, estate, and use should be delivered or restored for my benefit.

9.12 Formal request eleven: Restore principal plus one-fifth. I ask for restoration of the principal plus the fifth part according to Leviticus 6:2-5. Where value, estate, account, labour, surety, beneficial interest, honour, standing, remedy, or use has been withheld, administered, converted, pledged, concealed, or taken, I ask that it be restored. This is not punishment. It is restoration according to the order already set forth.

9.13 Formal request twelve: Set-off and discharge. I ask that every obligation imposed through the commercial fiction be set off, discharged, corrected, or removed against the account owed to the living beneficiary. This includes all previous administration through the criminal justice system where no damaged living man or woman was observed. No debt, charge, tax, penalty, lien, judgment, liability, disability, or adverse entry attached through the commercial fiction should be used to force me back into fictional status.

9.14 Formal request thirteen: Permanent injunction, sojourn protection, and ecclesiastical status. I ask for a permanent direction prohibiting the use of the commercial fiction, name variation, administrative record, or legal character as a means to bind, charge, detain, obstruct, classify, shame, restrict, or compel me. I ask that every record, sojourn document, accommodation, protection, and communication recognize me by my Christian given name, Edward J. Robin, and not by any commercial rendering or fictional status. I ask that you direct the recognition, accommodation, and issuance of a diplomatic passport, official passport, or equivalent sojourn document identifying my ecclesiastical status and Christian given name, so that I may sojourn, minister, communicate, assemble, and carry out my duty without being forced back into fictional status as the condition of movement.

9.15 Formal request fourteen: Accommodation of conscience. I ask for practical accommodation permitting me to live, sojourn, speak, receive, communicate, hold property, settle accounts, minister, and stand before men and women without being compelled to return to the commercial fiction as the condition of existence.

9.16 Formal request fifteen: Protection from detention or obstruction. I ask for protection from detention, obstruction, coercion, threat, process, enforcement, or administrative interference based solely upon the commercial fiction, name variation, deficient oath chain, unexamined record, or unresolved trust question. No man or woman should proceed against me without first identifying a harmed living man or woman, injured property, lack of consent, lawful oath, authority, and an answered trust question.

9.17 Formal request sixteen: Restoration of honour and reputation. Where labels, court language, law society publications, administrative descriptions, public records, or database entries have treated faith, conscience, covenant, equity, or ministry as delusion, commercial argument, misconduct, contempt, or mockery, I ask that the record be corrected. The faith must not be defamed. The minister must not be shamed. The living man must not be reduced to the commercial fiction.

9.18 Severability. Each request is severable. If one request requires further examination, the others may still be received, granted, accommodated, or ministered according to conscience and equity. Equity may grant complete relief, partial relief, alternative relief, interim relief, protective relief, or further relief as remedy requires.

9.19 Final request. Louise, I ask you to answer as the private woman whose conscience is addressed. If I am wrong, answer with particularity and supporting authority so the matter may be corrected in honour. If error is discovered, confess it so accommodation, restoration, reconciliation, and remedy may follow. If the account exists, open it. If the trust has been breached, minister remedy. If the commercial fiction has been mistaken for me, separate me from it. If the faith has been injured, protect it. If the oath is deficient, examine it before jurisdiction continues. If remedy is due, let remedy be done.

Part X: Schedule of Authorities: Does It Not Also Say in Your Own Law

Part X: Schedule of Authorities: Does It Not Also Say in Your Own Law

10.1 Purpose

Louise, this Schedule gathers the authorities already standing in the record so the matter may be examined plainly. God is first. Scripture is the first witness. Conscience is the second witness. Equity is the third witness. The authorities below confirm that the same principles already appear in the records, statutes, cases, covenants, and maxims administered by men and women in office.

The question is simple: does it not also say in your own law? Does it not also say in your own record? Does it not also recognize the same duty, trust, conscience, disclosure, accounting, restoration, and remedy that Scripture already declares?

This Schedule is provided in honour, especially in recognition of your excellent capacity as a scholar of law, so that you may see that the remedy requested is already present in the record and waiting to be examined.

Where any authority below uses the ordinary legal word "person," I receive that word only as the record's language. I do not adopt it as my identity. I stand as minister Edward J. Robin, living man, redeemed and chosen, speaking in conscience and equity.

10.2 God, Scripture, and the Foundation of Trust

Authority	Principle Confirmed
Psalm 118:8-9	Trust in the Lord above princes; the first trust
John 14:6	Christ is the way, the truth, and the life
Deuteronomy 17:18-20	The king must keep the law before him and not lift his heart above his brethren
Exodus 20:3-5	The graven image is forbidden; the legal fiction must be examined as an image made by the hand of man
Matthew 6:24	No man can serve God and mammon; the use of living value as commercial surety raises the mammon breach
Matthew 5:25	Agreement is to be sought quickly while the parties are in the way
Matthew 18:15-20	Private notice, witnesses, and assembly establish the equitable order of correction
Matthew 21:12-13	Money changers in the temple; courts as investment participants through CRIS
Leviticus 6:2-5	Confession, restoration of principal, addition of the fifth part, and absolution
Leviticus 19:15	Judge righteously without respecting the person of the poor or honouring the person of the mighty
Leviticus 25:10, 44-55	Jubilee requires release, restoration, return of inheritance, and freedom from bondage
Nehemiah 5:1-13	Rulers exacting usury on their own people; restore the lands, vineyards, and the hundredth part
Ezra 7:23-26	Diligence for God's house; no toll, tribute, or custom upon ministers; set magistrates who know God's law
Ezekiel 33:1-9	The watchman must warn when the sword is seen; blood required at the watchman's hand for silence
Colossians 2:14	The handwriting of ordinances contrary to the living man is blotted out and taken out of the way
Colossians 2:20-22	Touch not, taste not, handle not; dead to the rudiments of the world
2 Peter 2:3	Through covetousness and feigned words men are made merchandise
2 Corinthians 3:6	The letter kills, but the Spirit gives life
Revelation 18:4	Come out of Babylon and do not partake of her sins
Revelation 18:11-13	The merchandise list ending in slaves and souls of men
Proverbs 26:11	The redeemed must not return to the vomit
John 8:11	After absolution, go and sin no more
John 10:34	Is it not written in your law, I said ye are gods
1 Peter 1:18-19	Not redeemed with corruptible things as silver and gold, but with the precious blood of Christ
Psalms 51:17	The broken and contrite heart God will not despise
1 John 1:9	If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive
Luke 15:13-24	The Prodigal Son: confession, return, restoration, robe, ring, shoes, fatted calf
Genesis 2:7	God formed man and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life
James 2:9	Respect of persons is sin
Acts 10:34	God is no respecter of persons
Deuteronomy 1:17	Hear the small as well as the great; ye shall not respect persons in judgment

10.3 Equity, Conscience, and the Chancellor

Authority	Principle Confirmed
Holdsworth, Early History of Equity	Equity was administered upon reason and conscience, drawing from canonist ideas about moral government
Dennis Klinck, Conscience, Equity and the Court of Chancery	Chancery was historically received as the Court of Conscience
Christopher St. German, Doctor and Student	Conscience, canon law, and equity are historically joined
Rev. William F. Cahill, Development of the Concept of Equity	The ecclesiastical Chancellor was concerned with the welfare of the community and souls
Maitland, History of English Law	The use and trust developed through ecclesiastical practice
Brendan F. Brown, The Ecclesiastical Origin of the Use	The origin of the use is ecclesiastical
Francis Bacon	A use is a general trust where one trusts the conscience of another
Gonder v. Gonder Estate, 2010 ONCA 172	Trust law is a creature of equity and the Courts of Chancery; equity is identified with justice
Blackstone, Commentaries on the Laws of England	Equity is the soul and spirit of law and is synonymous with justice
Equity is equality (maxim)	All parties before equity stand equal; no party is favoured by form or office
Equity delights in amicable resolution (maxim)	The Petition seeks peace, reconciliation, and remedy, not vengeance

10.4 The Trust Exists

Authority	Principle Confirmed
Parsons v. United Association, 2022 NLSC 34	Vital event registration raises the trust relationship and the three certainties
Guerin v. The Queen, [1984] 2 SCR 335	Crown fiduciary duty includes loyalty, good faith, full disclosure, and ordinary prudence
Wewaykum Indian Band v. Canada, 2002 SCC 79	Crown fiduciary duty includes full disclosure appropriate to the subject matter
Frame v. Smith, [1987] 2 SCR 99	Fiduciary relationship where one has discretion or power, can unilaterally affect interests, and the beneficiary is vulnerable
Nabi v. Qadeer, 2016 ONSC 3770	Trusts arising by implication or construction of law are not defeated for want of a signed writing
Statute of Frauds, 1677, s. 8	The writing requirement does not extend to trusts arising or resulting by implication or construction of law
Rubner v. Bistricer, 2019 ONCA 733	A bare trust exists where the trustee holds property without active duties except conveyance on demand
Bamlett v. Radium Caribou Ranches, 2007 BCSC 387	A bare trustee holds funds with no further duty except conveyance to beneficiaries on demand
Maritime Medical Care v. McLaughlin, 1979 NSSC	Agency arises from contract; trust arises from conveyance and fiduciary obligation

10.5 The Coronation Oath Is the Expressed Trust

Authority	Principle Confirmed
Coronation Oath Act 1689	The oath binds the Sovereign to maintain the laws of God, the true profession of the Gospel, the Protestant Reformed religion, and the rights of clergy and churches
Graeme Watt, Ecclesiastical Law Journal (2017)	Taking the authorized form of the oath is a condition upon which the Crown is held
PM John Major, statement to Parliament	The Coronation Oath is binding throughout the reign
UCL Constitution Unit, Swearing in the New King	The 1689 oath refocused the formula into contractual form depending on duty, not grace
UK Parliament Standard Note SN/PC/00435	The coronation oath has been modified without statutory authority
Coronation Order of Service, May 6, 2023	The Bible is presented as the rule for the whole life and government of Christian princes
McAteer v. Canada (AG), 2014 ONCA 578	The oath is of constitutional centrality
AVI v. MHVB, 2020 ABQB 489	The Coronation Oath is the peak of a pyramid and subordinate oaths are bound by its limitations

10.6 The Distinct Canadian Crown and the Oath Chain

Authority	Principle Confirmed
Statute of Westminster 1931	The Canadian Crown is distinct; alterations to Royal Style and Titles require Dominion consent
Motard v. AG Canada, 2019 QCCA 1826	Royal Style and Titles and the distinct Canadian Crown require constitutional attention
O'Donohue v. Canada, 2003 CanLII 41404	Governed by symmetry and union principles
Oaths of Allegiance Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. O-1, s. 2(1) Trustee de son tort (equitable doctrine, from Hope v. Liddell (1856) 21 Beav 183) A person who without valid appointment takes on the administration or control of trust property as if he were a trustee is treated by equity as a trustee de son tort; he assumes fiduciary obligations, must account, must restore, and cannot profit; officers acting under fake oaths who intermeddled with the faith, conscience, and beneficial interest of the living men and women are trustees de son tort Knowing participation in breach of trust (equitable doctrine) A third party who knowingly participates in a breach of trust is liable to the beneficiaries for the consequences; the British Columbia Humanist Association knowingly participated in the breach by lobbying for the removal of the good faith religious expression defence	The oath form includes "do" and "King of Canada"
Fearn v. Canada Customs, 2014 ABQB 114	An oath deficient in form renders the proceedings coram non judice and void; the question goes to jurisdiction
Coke's Third Institute	No old oath can be altered or new oath raised without Act of Parliament
Criminal Code, s. 19	Ignorance of law is no excuse
Sansregret v. The Queen, [1985] 1 SCR 570	Wilful blindness arises where one declines inquiry because he does not wish to know the truth
R. v. Jorgensen, [1995] 4 SCR 55	Wilful blindness: whether one shut his eyes because looking would fix him with knowledge
R. v. Lindsay, 2011 BCCA 99	The cascading oath question exceeds the jurisdiction of the ordinary statutory court to resolve
Ryder v. United States, 515 U.S. 177	Timely challenge to authority entitles the challenger to a decision on the merits
State v. Carroll (1871)	Oath deficiency is recognized within categories of de facto invalidity

10.7 The Trust Was Breached

Authority	Principle Confirmed
Order in Council, April 10, 1933	Gold redemption suspended under the Dominion Notes Act, raising the surety question
Interpretation Act, s. 35(1)	Security and surety language is interpreted within the federal statutory framework
Canada Business Corporations Act, s. 2(1)	"Individual" means a natural man or woman in the statutory record
COCDA Regulations, SOR/85-847, Schedule II	Actuarial life values are assigned to male and female natural persons
International Slavery Convention, 1926, Art. 1	Slavery concerns powers attaching to the right of ownership
Letterstedt v. Broers (1884), 9 App Cas 371	Trustees exist for the benefit of the beneficiaries and may be removed where continuance prevents proper execution
Geran v. Geran Estate, 2022 SKCA 143	The Letterstedt test includes want of honesty, want of capacity, and want of fidelity
Keech v. Sandford (1726)	Fiduciary rules must be strictly pursued and not relaxed
Peso Silver Mines v. Cropper, 1966 SCC	Fiduciary liability to account does not depend upon proof of bad faith

10.8 The Breach Was Concealed

Authority	Principle Confirmed
Bogert, The Law of Trusts and Trustees, s. 961	The beneficiary is entitled to demand all information about the trust and its execution
Valard Construction v. Bird, 2018 SCC 8	Where it would disadvantage the beneficiary not to know, the trustee's duty includes disclosure
Spelay v. Spelay, 2007 SKQB 408	No clause or condition can override the duty of disclosure
Schmidt v. Rosewood Trust, [2003] UKPC 26	Disclosure is part of the court's inherent jurisdiction to supervise trusts
Rukhadze v. Recovery Partners, [2025] UKSC 10	A fiduciary must account for profits absent fully informed consent
Plate v. Atlas Copco, 2019 ONCA 196	A fiduciary aware of wrongdoing against the beneficiary has a duty to tell the beneficiary
Zimmerman v. McMichael Estate, 2010 ONSC 2947	Failure to account can result in trustee liability
Sarzynick v. Skwarchuk, 2021 BCSC 443	Defiance of disclosure duties attracts liability
Guerin v. The Queen, [1984] 2 SCR 335	Concealment from the beneficiary was central to the Crown's breach
Alevizos v. Nirula, 2003 MBCA 148	Silence and half-truths can amount to fraudulent misrepresentation
R. v. Cuerrier, 1998 SCC	Fraud may include non-disclosure of important facts
Toronto Dominion Bank v. Calderbank, 1982 BCSC	Failure to disclose material facts amounts to misrepresentation by concealment
Doe v. Canadian Surety Co., 1936 SCC	Misrepresentation may be made by silence or concealment
Derry v. Peek	Fraud principles arise where falsehood, concealment, or reckless disregard is shown

10.9 Silence Was Not Consent

Authority	Principle Confirmed
Consensus facit legem	Consent makes law between those agreeing to be bound
Slade's Case (1602)	Participation may import assumpsit
Restatement (Second) of Trusts, s. 216	Consent is ineffective if the beneficiary did not have material facts
Ferro v. Citizens National Trust, 44 Cal.2d 401 (1955)	Silence or failure to object should not be held as consent
Re Pauling's Settlement Trusts, [1964] Ch 303	Consent must be freely given and fully understood
Klaassen v. Allegro, 2014 WL 996375	Remaining silent in ignorance is not acquiescence
Felthouse v. Bindley, [1862] EWHC CP J35	Commercial silence does not equal acceptance
Saint John Tug Boat v. Irving, [1964] SCR 614	Mere failure to disown responsibility is not always enough to bind
Somalia v. Kenya, ICJ (2021)	Acquiescence requires conduct properly interpretable as consent where there was duty and ability to speak

10.10 Public Trust, Public Officials, and Statutory Power

Authority	Principle Confirmed
Re Rodie and City of Halifax, 1974 NSSC	A council is trustee of the inhabitants; a cestui que trust may question administration
In Re Provincial Fisheries, 1896 SCC	The King is trustee of public rights and has no authority to obstruct public enjoyment
R. v. Boulanger, 2006 SCC	Public officials are answerable to the public in a way private actors may not be
Elliott v. Winnipeg Electric Railway, 1918 SCC	One exercising statutory power remains under a common law duty not to injure the public
Blencoe v. BC (Human Rights Commission), 2000 SCC	Charter limitations flow down the chain of statutory authority
Boyer v. The King, [1948] SCR 89	Retrospective laws depriving rights offend natural justice
R. v. Hess (No. 2), 1949 BCCA	Crown power is limited by law, including historic limits against arbitrary arrest
CBC v. Canada (AG), 2011 SCC 2	Openness protects against arbitrary state action; publicity is the soul of justice
Bracken v. Fort Erie, 2017 ONCA 668	Democratic life depends on open debate and the freedom to criticize those exercising power

10.11 The Infrastructure and the International Framework

Authority	Principle Confirmed
28 U.S.C. s. 2045	CRIS administered by the Administrative Office of the United States Courts
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 67	Court deposit and investment mechanism
OECD, Behind the Corporate Veil	Beneficial ownership concealed through corporate vehicles; member states including Canada
Justice for Victims of Corrupt Foreign Officials Act (Magnitsky Law), S.C. 2017, c. 21	Sanctions for foreign nationals complicit in gross human rights violations and significant corruption
UN Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons	Trafficking defined as recruitment, transfer by fraud, deception, or abuse of power for exploitation
World Bank Operational Policy 7.30 (1994)	De facto government definition; disbursement suspension when constitutional framework is questioned
Cestui Que Vie Act 1666	Estate administered until the living man appears to reclaim it
Securities Transfer Act, Manitoba, C.C.S.M. c. S60	Tiered book-entry system; security entitlement held through intermediaries; control without consent of debtor
31 CFR s. 363.6	TreasuryDirect: "individual" means a natural person; "book-entry security" means a Treasury security maintained as a computer record
COCDA Regulations, SOR/84-431, Schedule II	Actuarial life values assigned to males and females from Statistics Canada life tables
Interpretation Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. I-21, s. 35(1)	"Person" includes both individual and corporation: the definitional bridge
Criminal Code, ss. 279.01-279.04	Human trafficking offences in Canadian law
Criminal Code, s. 431	Protection for internationally protected persons: premises, accommodation, transport

10.12 The Remedy Already Exists

Authority	Principle Confirmed
M.A. Concrete v. Truter, 2015 BCSC 229	A trustee in breach must restore the trust estate to where it would have been had no breach occurred
Saunders v. Vautier, [1841] EWHC J82	A sole competent adult beneficiary absolutely entitled may collapse the trust and demand delivery
Buschau v. Rogers Communications, 2006 SCC 28	Trust collapse principle confirmed by Supreme Court of Canada
Hyczkewycz v. Hupe, 2019 MBCA 74	Trust collapse confirmed; registration does not extinguish beneficial interest
Pecore v. Pecore, 2007 SCC 17	Constructive trust arises where property is retained contrary to good conscience
Lac Minerals v. International Corona, [1989] 2 SCR 574	Constructive trust appropriate where damages are unfair, unjust, or virtually impossible to calculate
Engle v. Carswell, 2014 NWTSC 18	No limitation period bars a beneficiary's claim against an express trustee for breach of trust
Rubner v. Bistricer, 2019 ONCA 733	Bare trustee must convey on demand where no active duties remain
Bamlett v. Radium Caribou Ranches, 2007 BCSC 387	Bare trustee's duty is conveyance to beneficiaries on demand

10.13 Scripture and Equity Arrive at the Same Remedy

Scripture	Equitable Record
Leviticus 6:2-5	M.A. Concrete v. Truter: restore the estate to where it ought to have been
Leviticus 25:10	Saunders v. Vautier, Rubner, and Bamlett: collapse or convey the trust and return possession
John 8:11	After confession and restoration, go and sin no more
Proverbs 26:11	The redeemed cannot return to the vomit
Colossians 2:14	The handwriting of ordinances contrary to the living man is blotted out
2 Peter 2:3	Feigned words making merchandise correspond to legal fictions and commercial instruments
Revelation 18:4	Coming out of Babylon corresponds to breaking the consensus loop and demanding account
Ezra 7:23-26	Diligence for God's house corresponds to the CRIS examination; no toll on ministers
Matthew 21:12-13	Money changers in the temple corresponds to courts as investment participants
Nehemiah 5:1-13	Rulers exacting usury corresponds to the accounting demand; restore the hundredth part
Ezekiel 33:1-9	The watchman's duty to warn both sides corresponds to this Petition
1 Peter 1:18-19	Not redeemed with silver and gold corresponds to the living man's value being in Christ, not the actuarial tables

10.14 The Shield Against Internal Obstruction

Authority	Principle Confirmed
Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, Art. 26	Treaties must be performed in good faith
Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, Art. 27	Internal law may not be invoked to justify failure to perform treaty obligations
Zingre v. The Queen, [1981] 2 SCR 392	A state may not invoke internal law to justify failure to perform international obligations
Baker v. Canada, [1999] 2 SCR 817	International human rights values inform statutory interpretation
LaGrand (Germany v. United States), 2001 ICJ 466	Domestic procedural rules cannot bar treaty claims
Toussaint v. Canada, UNHRC Communication No. 2348/2014	Canada has been found in violation of ICCPR obligations

10.15 Faith, Conscience, and Accommodation

Authority	Principle Confirmed
ICCPR Article 18	Freedom of thought, conscience, and religion is protected
ICCPR Article 17	Honour, reputation, privacy, family, home, and correspondence are protected from arbitrary interference
ICCPR Article 1	Peoples have the right of self-determination
UN Human Rights Committee, General Comment No. 22	Article 18 is far-reaching and profound; restrictions must be strictly interpreted
Yaker v. France, UNHRC (2018)	Blanket restriction on religious manifestation without individualized assessment violates Article 18
Syndicat Northcrest v. Amselem, 2004 SCC 47	The state should not become arbiter of religious dogma; sincere religious belief requires examination
Multani v. Commission scolaire Marguerite-Bourgeoys, 2006 SCC 6	Religious practice may require accommodation against secular regulation
Library of Parliament, An Examination of the Duty to Accommodate	Duty to accommodate includes religion and binds public and private service providers
Rome Statute, Art. 7(1)(h)	Persecution on religious grounds is recognized as a serious international wrong
Al Hassan, ICC-01/12-01/18	Persecution on religious grounds has been recognized within the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court

10.16 The Contest: Truth, Not Mere Authority

Authority	Principle Confirmed
Auctoritas, non veritas, facit legem	Authority, not truth, makes law: the foundation of de facto administration
Consensus facit legem	Consent makes the law: the Petition offers propositions for agreement or denial
Veritas, non auctoritas, facit legem	Truth, not mere authority, makes law
Psalm 118:8-9	Trust belongs in the Lord, not in princes
John 14:6	Christ is the truth
Ezekiel 33	The watchman speaks because duty requires warning
Bracken v. Fort Erie	Speech directed to power on matters of public concern is protected

This Petition stands on truth, not mere authority. The prince may hold office. The record may carry form. The court may carry procedure. The statute may carry words. Where authority departs from truth, oath, trust, conscience, and God's law, equity must examine the matter.

10.17 Final Notice

Louise, every pillar of this Petition has been laid before you: the trust, the oath, the breach, the concealment, the absence of informed consent, the remedy, and the authorities confirming each. The record speaks for itself.

If any authority above is denied, I ask that the denial be written, particularized, and supported by authority.

If the authorities stand, the record already declares what I have asked you to examine. Scripture says it. Equity says it. The statutes, regulations, and public records of your own administration say it.

Does it not also say in your law?

Closing and Autograph

I have sounded the trumpet from the wall. I have spoken as the watchman speaks: under duty, because the sword was seen. I have confessed my own trespass, identified the trespass committed against me, pointed to the authorities already present in the record, and asked for examination, accounting, separation, restoration, accommodation, and remedy according to the order already set forth. I have touched nothing, tasted nothing, handled nothing belonging to the commercial system. I have pointed to it from the wall and said: this is what I see. My soul is delivered. The burden now rests upon the one who received the warning.

New Entries for Part X: Schedule of Authorities

The following authorities are added to the Schedule and presented for examination. Does it not also say in your law?

Cestui Que Vie Act 1666 (18 and 19 Car. 2, c. 11), Sections I and IV. An Act of the Parliament of England for redress of inconveniences by want of proof of the deceases of persons beyond the seas or absenting themselves, upon whose lives estates do depend. Section I provides that where the person upon whose life the estate depends is absent for seven years and no proof of life is made, the person shall be accounted as naturally dead. Section IV provides that if the supposed dead man proves to be alive, the title is revested, and the living man may reenter, repossess, have, hold and enjoy the estate and recover for damages the full profits with lawful interest. The Act remains in force in the United Kingdom with no known outstanding effects. It has never been repealed. It establishes the origin of the trust mechanism by which the estate of a living person is administered in the absence of the living person, and the statutory remedy by which the living man who appears recovers the estate with full profits and interest.

Cestui Que Vie Act 1707 (6 Anne, c. 72). An Act of the Parliament of Great Britain extending and supplementing the 1666 Act. Provides for recovery of property on determination of a life or lives. Applied in Australia through the Imperial Acts Application Act 1969 (NSW), Division 13, confirming that the Cestui Que Vie Acts form part of the received law of the Commonwealth.

31 CFR section 363.6, TreasuryDirect, Bureau of the Fiscal Service, Department of the Treasury, United States of America. Published at 67 FR 64286, October 17, 2002. Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 12 U.S.C. 391; 31 U.S.C. 3102 et seq.; 31 U.S.C. 3121 et seq. The regulation defines "individual" to mean a natural person. The regulation defines "entity" to mean any owner of a TreasuryDirect account that is not an individual, including a sole proprietorship, partnership, corporation, limited liability company or professional limited liability company, trust, the estate of a decedent, or the estate of a living person such as an incompetent or a minor. The regulation defines "person" to mean an individual or an entity. The regulation defines "security" or "Treasury security" to mean an obligation issued by Treasury that may be held in TreasuryDirect. The regulation defines "book-entry security" to mean a Treasury security maintained in electronic or paperless form as a computer record. The regulation defines "commercial book-entry system" to refer to the book-entry system in which Treasury securities are held in a tiered system through securities intermediaries such as financial institutions or brokerage firms. The regulation defines "registration" or "registered" to mean that the name and taxpayer identification number or numbers of the person or persons named on the security are maintained on records. The regulation establishes in published federal law the mechanism by which the estate of a living person, including a minor, holds Treasury securities as computer records in a tiered system through intermediaries operating through the commercial book-entry system maintained by the Depository Trust and Clearing Corporation through its nominee Cede and Co.

Canadian Ownership and Control Determination Act. S.C. 1980-81-82-83, c. 107. The enabling Act under which the COCDA Regulations are made. Establishes the framework for determining Canadian ownership rates of entities including trusts.

Canadian Ownership and Control Determination Regulations, 1984. SOR/84-431. The regulations made under the Act. Schedule II contains actuarial life tables and present value of life annuity tables for males and females from age 0.

COCDA Regulations, Schedule II, Table I. SOR/84-431, section 48. Life Tables, Canada, 1970-72, published by Statistics Canada in connection with the 1971 Census of Canada. Complete life expectancy for males at age 0: 69.34 years. Complete life expectancy for females at age 0: 76.36 years. Life expectancy assigned to every age from birth to age 107 for males and age 109 for females.

COCDA Regulations, Schedule II, Table II. SOR/84-431, section 48. Present value of life annuities (present value of life interest) of $1.00 per annum payable annually in arrears for life. Interest rate at 12.3 per cent per annum compounded annually. Males at age 0: $7.906649. Females at age 0: $7.965058. Present values assigned to every age from birth, male and female, calculated to six decimal places from Census-derived mortality data.

COCDA Regulations, Schedule II, Table III. SOR/84-431, section 48. Present value of annuity certain (annuity for term certain) of $1.00 per annum payable annually in arrears. Interest rate at 12.3 per cent per annum compounded annually. Values assigned for terms of 1 to 100 years.

COCDA Regulations, section 48, Part VI: Canadian Ownership Rates of Trusts. SOR/84-431. "Tables II, III and IV of Schedule II shall be used as far as they may be applicable for the purpose of determining the value of any income right, annuity, term of years, life interest or other similar estate." This is the provision that directs the application of the actuarial life tables to the valuation of natural persons' life interests within the trust ownership determination framework.

Dominion Notes Act. R.S.C. 1927, c. 51. The Act under which gold redemption was suspended by Order in Council on the tenth day of April 1933, raising the foundational surety question of what replaced gold as the backing for government credit.

Ogden Tables: Actuarial Tables with explanatory notes for use in Personal Injury and Fatal Accident Cases. United Kingdom Government Actuary's Department, eighth edition, updated August 2022 and January 2025. Tables 1 and 2 calculate the present capital value of future losses for life for males and females at every age from birth. Multipliers enable the user to assess the present capital value of future annual losses or annual expenses. Prepared by the Government Actuary's Department, an arm of the Crown. First published 1984. Published under authority of the Civil Evidence Act 1995, section 10.

Australian Life Tables 2020-22. Australian Government Actuary, released the first day of January 2025. Life expectancy factors for males and females from age 0 derived from Census mortality data centred on the 2021 Census. Used across government financial systems including aged care, pensions, Medicare, and superannuation. The Australian Government Actuary describes the tables as helping "the Government, superannuation entities and insurers plan for what is needed in the future" and states they are used to "more accurately estimate future cash flows in a wide range of areas."

United Kingdom Interpretation Act 1978. Chapter 30, Schedule 1. "Person" includes a body of persons corporate or unincorporate. The definitional collapse of natural and corporate persons at the imperial centre from which the Canadian and Australian Crowns descend.

United Kingdom Parliament, Joint Committee on Statutory Instruments, Thirteenth Report. The Committee confirmed that the definition of "person" in the Interpretation Act 1978 "covers all forms of natural or legal persons" and that "the essential purpose of the Interpretation Act is to enable United Kingdom legislation to use expressions like 'person' in reliance on the meaning it gives them." The Committee further stated that definitions that subvert the purpose of the Act contain unnecessary words.

Australian Acts Interpretation Act 1901 (Cth), section 2C. "Person" includes bodies corporate, bodies politic, and individuals. Section 2B defines "individual" to mean a natural person. The same definitional collapse exists in the jurisdiction of the first Commonwealth realm to strip "Defender of the Faith" from the Royal Style and Titles.

Gold Standard (Amendment) Act 1931 (United Kingdom). 21 and 22 Geo. 5, c. 46. Enacted the twenty-first day of September 1931, the day after His Majesty's Government announced the suspension. Suspended the operation of Subsection (2) of Section 1 of the Gold Standard Act of 1925, which required the Bank of England to sell gold at a fixed price. The imperial suspension from which Canada and Australia followed.

Royal Style and Titles Act 1973 (Australia). No. 114 of 1973. Removal of "Defender of the Faith" from the Australian Royal Style and Titles. The first Commonwealth realm to strip the confessional title from the Crown, fifty years before Canada followed.

Treason Act 1702 (United Kingdom). 1 Anne St. 2, c. 21, Section III. It remains high treason to endeavour by any overt act or deed to deprive or hinder any person who shall be the next in succession to the Crown according to the limitations in the Bill of Rights 1689 and the Act of Settlement 1701. Abettors, procurers, and comforters knowing the offence to be done are equally liable. The penalty was originally death. It was amended to life imprisonment by the Crime and Disorder Act 1998, section 36(2)(c). Section III remains in force. The Act was extended to Scotland by the Treason Act 1708.

Statute of Uses, 1535. 27 Hen. 8, c. 10. The Crown appears to have used the same mechanism in reverse: creating a legal fiction through vital event registration while treating the beneficial interest as subject to administration. Has form been used to defeat substance? Equity regards substance over form, and where feigning is shown, equity supplies the remedy.

Statute of Frauds, 1677, section 8. 29 Car. 2, c. 3. The writing requirement does not extend to trusts arising or resulting by implication or construction of law. The trust that arises from vital event registration, if it arises, is not defeated for want of a signed writing.

Imperial Acts Application Act 1969 (New South Wales). No. 30 of 1969, Division 13. Applies the Cestui Que Vie Acts of 1666 and 1707 in Australia, confirming that the trust mechanism is received law across the Commonwealth and is not confined to the United Kingdom.

I remain on my knees and ask you, Louise, not in anger, not in defiance, but in the quiet and trembling hope that conscience will answer conscience: what will you do with what you have been shown?

Without prejudice. All rights in God reserved.

So help me God.

Edward Jay Robin, living man, ministering under duty Christian given name: Edward Jay Robin Redeemed and chosen Standing in conscience and equity

By my own hand, this _______ day of _____________, in the year of our Lord 2026

allcreatorsgifts

Thursday, July 2, 2026

Petition to Louise Arbour in Honour by Confession of Faith Motu Proprio

Petition in Honour by Confession of Faith Motu Proprio

Preface

No comments:

Petition to Louise Arbour in Honour by Confession of Faith Motu Proprio