There has to be some basis for people claiming that the laws of the land do not apply to them, but for the life of me, I can’t begin to understand it.
In: 89
A Canadian Judge [published the book](https://www.canlii.org/en/ab/abqb/doc/2012/2012abqb571/2012abqb571.html) on Organized Pseudolegal Commercial Argument [“OPCA”] Litigants (aka many things including Sovereign Citizens) in one of his decisions. His summary is:
>These persons employ a collection of techniques and arguments promoted and sold by ‘gurus’ (as hereafter defined) to disrupt court operations and to attempt to frustrate the legal rights of governments, corporations, and individuals.
>OPCA litigants do not express any stereotypic beliefs other than a general rejection of court and state authority; nor do they fall into any common social or professional association. Arguments and claims of this nature emerge in all kinds of legal proceedings and all levels of Courts and tribunals. This group is unified by:
>1. a characteristic set of strategies (somewhat different by group) that they employ,
>2. specific but irrelevant formalities and language which they appear to believe are (or portray as) significant, and
>3. the commercial sources from which their ideas and materials originate.
>This category of litigant shares one other critical characteristic: they will only honour state, regulatory, contract, family, fiduciary, equitable, and criminal obligations if they feel like it. And typically, they don’t.
I think that’s the best short description of the various groups that include most Sovereign Citizens.
Latest Answers