PANI Affidavit, Part 8

In Part 8 of her affidavit to the court in Puriscal, Costa Rica, PANI attorney Patricia Mesen Arroyo mentions that we brought more information and requests to her office on July 18. At this point she states that we did not include personal information such as state ID. She recognises the documents we sent in to the ministry of health requesting information regarding their relationship to the constitution. It is the constitution that requires the establishment of jurisdiction over anybody. Jurisdiction cannot be assumed when the defendant raises the issue. To simplify, we ask a few easy questions.  She does not acknowledge any of these questions, but insists that we still do not provide her with the information requested by the ministry of health. The information she needs to continue the process does not exist and the only thing that protects us from being forced into a relationship with this religious body (United Nations and one of their policing arms, PANI,) are constitutional articles 11, 19, 25, 27, 35.  Without registration (13.3,) the commercial nature of this action cannot proceed. That is why we are asking them the simplest thing, 'Are you subject to the constitution?' If they are foreign agents, unrestrained by the constitution, then the constitution is no longer a modality of protection from religious zealots who force people to do things they do not want. In other words, the republic is under a foreign law unbeknownst to the people.

In a situation like this, a court of law is the place where the defendant can make a plea in abatement and demand for a bill of particulars which in effect puts the onus on the prosecutor to establish the facts pertaining to jurisdiction. THAT IS OF COURSE, if the constitution still stands as the primary directive of the government. Patricia Mesen Arroyo, representative of the autonomous entity, PANI, a policing agency of the United Nations, fails to prove jurisdiction over my children.