SEVEN ELEMENTS OF JURISDICTION

In order for any government agency, subsidiary or law to be challenged, it must be at the very beginning of the trial. To
applied to an individual American Citizen, it must be first allow the trial to continue at all is to admit to jurisdiction.
proved or assumed that the government has jurisdiction in this Below are the seven issues of jurisdiction in any and every
matter over that particular individual for that time. Specifically, court case. Remember, if any one of these seven are not proven
before an individual can be charged and convicted with a crime, beyond a reasonable doubt, the case cannot continue.
the government official or agency must prove jurisdiction. This
1. The accused must be properly identified; identified in
is seldom accomplished, and many individuals lose a case and
such a fashion there is no room for mistaken identity.
even go to jail when no one proved this legally essential issue.
The individual must be singled out from all others; otherwise,
Nowhere is this more common than in Internal Revenue Service anyone could be subject to arrest and trial without benefit of
cases against so-called tax protesters. The IRS almost never "wrong party" defence. Almost always, means of identification
attempts to prove jurisdiction. In fact, jurisdiction is almost is a person's proper name, BUT, any means of identification is
never even addressed. If the individual is correct in his/her equally valid if said means differentiates the accused without
claims that he/she is not a taxpayer as defined in the Internal doubt. (BTW, there is no constitutionally valid requirement that
Revenue Code, then the IRS HAS NO JURISDICTION! With you must identify yourself to the judge or to anyone.) For stop
no jurisdiction comes no case and no conviction! But to win, and identify issues (4th Amendment) see Brown v. Texas, 443
jurisdiction MUST be challenged by the individual, and if US 47 and Kolender v Lawson, 461 US 352.
challenged successfully, the case is dismissed. 2. The statute of offence must be identified by its proper
There are seven elements of jurisdiction, all of which must be or common name. A number is insufficient. Today, a citizen
proved by the prosecution if challenged. If not challenged, it may stand in jeopardy of criminal sanctions for alleged
will ALWAYS be assumed by the court that competent violation of statutes, regulations, or even low-level bureaucratic
jurisdiction is proved and accepted by all parties. orders (example: Colorado National Monument
 Superintendent’s Orders regarding an unleashed dog, or a dog
If any element of the seven is not proved, the case defecating on a trail). If a number were to be deemed sufficient,
must be dismissed. government could bring new and different charges at any time
by alleging clerical error. ("I'm sorry, your Honour. I assumed
The normal process in a case against a so-called tax protester is that the regulation indicated by that number was a legitimate
to ignore the jurisdiction issue altogether, or else to challenge statute. My secretary must have made an error.") For any act to
jurisdiction while at the same time conforming to procedures be triable as an offence, it must be declared to be a crime.
and requirements that assume jurisdiction. In other words, one Charges must negate any exception forming part of the statutory
cannot allege the IRS has no jurisdiction over one while at the definition of an offence, by affirmative non-applicability. In
same time one continues to file a Form 1040 each year. other words, any charge must affirmatively negate any
exception found in the law.
In the very few IRS cases where jurisdiction is challenged,
almost always the judge will proclaim jurisdiction from the Example of exception from a case where someone was on trial
bench. ["It is the opinion of this court that the prosecution has for Section 7203, Wilful Failure to File(a Form 1040): "...
jurisdiction in this case, and exercises it regularly, almost every thereof to make a return (other than a return required under
day. I don't think we need to go through all that today."] This is authority of 6015)... Indictment or information is defective
a total violation of law and accepted court procedures. But most unless every fact which is an element in a prima facie case of
federal judges won't let that stop them! But the one alleging guilt is stated. The assumption of an element is not lawful.
jurisdiction must prove jurisdiction if jurisdiction is challenged. Otherwise, the accused will not be thoroughly informed. 26
Usually the defendant charged with a crime is too intimidated USC 6012 is a necessary element of the offence. Since 6012
or ignorant to successfully challenge a judge on this, but the isn't cited, the information is fatally defective. Additionally, the
judge MUST be challenged if he/she proclaims that the information did not negate the exception (other than required
prosecution (IRS) has jurisdiction in this case. If he/she is not under authority of section 6015)."
successfully challenged, almost always the individual will lose After reading 6012 and 6015, and knowing that the essential
the case. section 7203 elements are: A. Required to perform. B. Failed to
perform. C. Failure was wilful you may wish to ask, "how often
One of the easiest and most common means of alleging
is a valid Section 7203 indictment or other information or
jurisdiction on the part of the prosecution (IRS) is to refer to the
indictment brought? Very seldom. How many citizens have
accused as a "taxpayer." If that word is ever used in reference to
been convicted on a fatally defective process? Perhaps
the so-called tax protester," it MUST be immediately
thousands, all with the knowing or willing participation of a
challenged. ["I object, your Honour. The prosecution has just
federal judge. It is the judge's job to assure that justice is
labelled me a taxpayer. Whether or not I am a taxpayer is the
accomplished. But the judge will almost always stop short of
very root issue in this case, and has not been proven by the
doing his/her job and wait until the defence takes the important
prosecution. I respectfully request that the word 'taxpayer' be
steps. The fact that most defence attorneys don't know how to
stricken from the record and that the prosecution be instructed
fight a case against the IRS doesn't seem to matter to the judges.
to not use that word again until it has proven that I am indeed a
Nor does it seem to matter to the defence attorney or prosecutor
taxpayer."] If the defendant does not challenge that word, and
similar techniques used by the IRS, the judge will have legal 3. The acts of alleged offence must be described in non-
justification to assume jurisdiction. Of course, if the defence has prejudicial language and detail, so as to enable a person of
done its job, the issue of taxpayer and jurisdiction would average intelligence to understand nature of charge (to enable
already be established. The time to challenge jurisdiction is at preparation of defence); the actual act or acts constituting the
the beginning of the trial, not at the end when it looks like the offence complained of. The charge must not be described by
individual is about to lose. If jurisdiction is to be successfully parroting the statute; not by the language of same. The naming
of the acts of the offence describe a specific offence whereas
the verbiage of a statute describes only a general class of
offence. Facts must be stated. Conclusions cannot be considered
in the determination of probable cause.
4. The accuser must be named. He may be an officer or a foregoing, ask your attorney to see a copy of "regarding Lawyer
third party. Some positively identifiable person (human being) Discipline & other rules" Also Canons 1 through 9.
must accuse. Some certain person must take responsibility for
the making of the accusation, not an agency or an institution. Corpus Juris Secundum assumes courts will operate in a lawful
This is the only valid means by which a citizen may begin to manner. If the accused makes this assumption, he may learn, to
face his accuser. Also, the injured party (corpus delicti) must his detriment through experience, that certain questions of law,
make the accusation. Hearsay evidence may not be provided. including the question of personal jurisdiction, may never be
Anyone else testifying that he heard that another party was raised and addressed, especially when the accused is
injured does not qualify as direct evidence. represented by the bar. (Often licensed counsel appears to take
on the characteristics of a fox guarding the hen house.)
5. The accusation must be made under penalty of
perjury. If perjury cannot reach the accuser, there is no Jurisdiction, once challenged, is to be proven, not by the court,
accusation. Otherwise, anyone may accuse another falsely but by the party attempting to assert jurisdiction. The burden of
without risk. proof of jurisdiction lies with the asserter. The court is only to
rule on the sufficiency of the proof tendered. Se McNutt v.
6. To comply with the five elements above, that is for the GMAC, 298 US 178. The origins of this doctrine of law may be
accusation to be valid, the accused must be accorded found in Maxfield's Lessee v Levy, 4 US 308.
due process. Accuser must have complied with law,
procedure and form in bringing the charge. This includes court- NOTE: Today the courts are unconcerned with questions such
determined probable cause, summons and notice procedure. If as whether or not the 16th or 17th amendments were ever
lawful process may be abrogated in placing a citizen in lawfully ratified. If the courts were to address this type of
jeopardy, then any means may be utilized to deprive a man of question honestly, the government, with its huge bureaucracy
his freedom. All political dissent may be stifled by utilization of and patron special interests would be placed in jeopardy. This
defective process. potential threat is not allowed nor will it ever be. It is much
easier for the courts to label such potential threats as political
7. The court must be one of competent jurisdiction. To questions, point to the lateness of the clock and refuse to hear or
have valid process, the tribunal must be a creature of its rule. Whatever the political juggernaut does, it uses the facade
constitution, in accord with the law of its creation, i.e. (article of law to justify or reconcile it. The only way such questions
III judge). will have force and effect is if the general public becomes
Without the limiting factor of a court of competent jurisdiction, aware and concerned with justice being based upon law and not
all citizens would be in jeopardy of loss of liberty being just policy based on a facade of law.
imposed at any bureaucrat's whim. It is conceivable that the
If you doubt such words, please be assured that they are not just
procedure could devolve to one in which the accuser, the trier
words but are, in fact, an articulation of the unwritten,
of facts, and the executioner would all be one and the same.
unspoken, present public policy, as enforced by the courts in
The first six elements above deal primarily with the issue of dealing with challenges to governmental acts and authority. For
personal jurisdiction. The seventh element (also element #2) documentation, see US v WAYNE WOJTAS, 85 CR 48 in the
addresses subject matter and territorial jurisdiction. Subject US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern
matter jurisdiction is conferred by acts controlled by law; Division and Judge Shadur's opinion on the 16th Amendment.
territorial jurisdiction attaches by venue of the parties in relation You will see the beginnings and threat of disbarment of a
to the court and to any trans- jurisdictional acts and/or activities certain "aggressive" licensed attorney.
of the parties (extended territorial jurisdiction is conferred by
To be truly effective in the courts in any challenge to
controversial long-arm statutes).
governmental power and authority, the challenger must possess
SUMMING UP the LAW and the POLITICS a good understanding of politics. This is especially so since
government and the courts are primarily concerned with a
Lacking any of the seven elements or portions thereof, (unless
public perception of the balancing of the scales of justice rather
waived, intentionally or unintentionally) all designed to ensure
than the attainment of true justice under the law.
against further prosecution (double jeopardy); to inform court
Once it is realized that the court is primarily concerned with
of facts alleged for determination of sufficiency to support
politics, it then becomes necessary for any challenger to
conviction, should one be obtained. Otherwise, there is no
become proficient in the political arena. By politics, we speak
lawful notice, and charge must be dismissed for failure to state
not of the electoral process, but of the politics of association.
an offence. Without lawful notice, there is no personal
jurisdiction and all proceedings prior to filing of a proper trial Keeping this in mind, and truly understanding the concept, a
document in compliance with the seven elements is void. A man accused of breaking a "rule" for which he may suffer
lawful act is always legal but many legal acts by government penalties of imprisonment, fine and costs without benefit of trial
are often unlawful. Most bureaucrats lack elementary or Constitutional safeguards, may very will consider bringing a
knowledge and incentive to comply with the mandates of criminal charge against himself directly in court and thereby
constitutional due process. They will make mistakes. Numbers blunt his adversaries' attack. To the uninitiated, this may sound
beyond count have been convicted without benefit of like madness, but to the political scholar destined to appear
governmental adherence to these seven elements. Today, before a "master" to answer to alleged rule violation of the
informations are being filed and prosecuted by "accepted unauthorized practice of law, the self-accusatory route to the
practice" rather than due process of law. courts may be the only hope of victory; both legal and political.

See Corpus Juris Secundum (CJS), Volume 7, Section 4,