Upload
others
View
4
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
BOARD OF LAND AND N AT U R A L RESOURCES
STATE OF HAWAI‘I
IN THE MATTER OF CASE NO. BLNR-CC-16-002
Contested Case HearingReConservation DistrictUse Application (CDUA) PIA-3568 For theThirty Meter Telescope at the Mauna Kea ScienceReserve,Ka‘ohe Mauka, Hamakua, Hawai‘iTMK (3) 4-4-015009
Quo WarrantoDemand of Jurisdiction
Name of PartyzBraann Kamahana Keglgha
DATED:7/25/16 revious date rec nized 7/18/16) W
Zvekvxr‐ m l ”‘wtureybartyorLawyér)
Attachment 10-21-2016)
Kamahana Kealoha: MOTION invoking Quo Warranto, respectfully, a demand of Jurisdiction; Declaratory Judgment on a Constitutional Issue/Violation RESUBMITTED 8/8/2016
KamahanaKealoha’sMOTIONinvokingQuoWarranto,respectfully,ademandofJurisdiction;DeclaratoryJudgmentonaConstitutionalIssue/Violation
Irespectfullyassertandrequest,asseemstobesupportedunderSupremeCourt
law,underarticleIVattached,thatthehonorableproceedingsofficerAmano
provideabsoluteproofofherjurisdiction.Theabsoluteproofshouldnotinclude
incongruenttermslike“ceded”landswhileusinganinternallawofanation,“house
resolution,”asafraudulentsubstituteforatreatyofcessation.Iproposethatatleast
one,ormore,conflictsofinterestsexiststhatrequirethehonorableproceedings
officertorecusethemselffrommakingjudgmentorparticipatinginmaking
judgmentforanypartofthiscontestedcasehearing.Ialsosubmitthattheentities
involvedinassertingthesemeetingsanditsadministrationareinvalidifsuch
evidencecannotbeprovidedandthereforethesehearingshavenoauthorityandare
alsoinvalidandshouldbeimmediatelydiscontinued.
Inmylimitedunderstanding,andwithmylimitedaccesstolegalsupportforthisso-
called“user-friendly”processmeantforthepublictoaccessinareasonablemanner,
thelawsinvokedinthismotionrequireAmanotoprovideevidence,andnotjust
repetitive,conflictingevidenceforherauthorityinthesematter.Theonusisonthe
hearing’sofficertoprovidetangible,unclouded,anddefinitiveevidenceofthisproof
ofjurisdictionandauthority,howeverinpastmotions,distinctlydifferentfromthis
one,thehearing’sofficerhasrepeatedandregurgitatedblatantlyincongruent
claimsusingterms“ceded”andresolution,seeminglyambivalenttothefactthatfor
acessationtotakeplacetheland-owningentitymustengageintransactionof
conveyingitsownershipofland,withitsbordersidentifiedandclearlydelineated,
toanotherentity.
Onesuchincidentamongothers,clearlydemonstratingconflictofinterestinthis
casesinceIhavebeenaparty,amongothers,hearingofficerAmanohasinfluenced,
coordinated,facilitatedandmadesignificantjudgmentonpartymotionsthat
directlyimplicatethehearingofficerinitsallegationsandinturndirectly,and
unjustly,moldtheoutcomeofthiscontestedcourtcasesothatthispermitting
processsupportsonepre-meditatedoutcome,there-permittingoftheThirtyMeter
Telescopeprojectuponthehistoricalandpresent-daylivingburialgroundsofmy
ancestor’s,familiars,andmyself.
TheincidentIwouldliketoreferenceinthisjustopportunityandrighttore-submit
thisintended,andclearmotionofdemandofJurisdiction,canbefoundinDoc-84,
“MaelaniLeemotiontointervene(motiontotakejudicialnotice,tworequests).”
Respectfully,onAugust5,2016hearing’sofficerAmano,whileatthesametime
claimingtodeferissuesofpossibleconflictofinteresttotheBLNR,blatantlydidthe
oppositeandsubsequentlyalsoproceededtodistortaclearissueofmeetsand
boundswiththatofsimply“jurisdiction.”Tobeclear,withoutandetailedland
surveyofthemeetsandboundsoftheoccupyingStateofHawaiilandsuchasthe
summitofMaunaKeahavenotbeenconveyedlawfully,orcededinanytreatyof
cessation,totheoccupyingStateofHawaii,ortheUnitedStatesGovernmentthe
landsfraudulentlyhandedtotheDLNR/BLNRandsubsequentlyfraudulently
handedovertotheUniversityofHawaiiandfraudulentlysub-leasedtotheTMT
CorporationarenotlandsthatbelongtotheoccupyingStateofHawaiinorthe
occupyingUnitedStates,thereforethesemeetingsaremootandinvalidandshould
beterminatedimmediately.
Thehearingofficerthenproceededtogroupthemeetsandboundsissueproposed
byDoc-84withthatofjurisdictionandcommandeertheintentandclearlanguageof
themotioninDoc-84thatputforththefactthatMaunaKea,andinparticularthe
exactareaofthesummitregionthisprojectintendstobuildin,werenever
conveyedinanytreatyorlanddeed,inanylawfulwayorform,fromthetitle-
holdingentity,theHawaiianKingdom,andthereforenocleartitletotheBLNRexists
andthesubsequentappropriationoftheselandstotheUniversityofHawaiifor
furthersub-leasingisnotsupportedbyclear-titleoranytypeofcessation.
HearingOfficerAmanolumpedthismotionthatdirectlyinvolvesthequestionof
authorityofherselfandoftheBLNRandtheUniversityofHawaii,amongothers,as
asimplematterofjurisdiction.HearingOfficerAmano,indeliberatingand
subsequentlydenyingthismotionmakesajudgmentthatdirectlyevidencesthe
conflictofinteresthereindescribedandthereforewarrantstheimmediatedismissal
oftheseproceedings.Furthermore,andjustasimportant,HearingOfficercitesin
particularthattheSupremeCourtofHawaii,makingjudgmentuponchargesagainst
itsselfaswell,claimsthetitleoftheseso-called“ceded”landsis“unclouded.”
EssentiallythisjudgmentisalsoaconflictofinterestastheUnitedStates
governmentbecomesnotonlytheperpetratorofillegalseizureoflandbelongingin
cleartitletotheHawaiianKingdom,butthejudgeandjuryofanyallegationsagainst
itself.
HearingOfficerAmano,byherveryownstatement,claimsthata“resolution”anda
biasedSupremeCourtdecisionclaiming“unclouded”titletotheseso-calledceded
landsseemstooverlooktheobviouswhilerelegatingDoc-84asdeniedandasa
simple“jurisdictionissue.”
Intheblatantlyincongruentuseoftheword“ceded,”usedwhilereferencingan
internalhouseresolutionassupportfordenyingDoc-84,HearingOfficerAmano
demonstratesaclearexampleofconflictofinterestbecausetheapprovalofthis
motionwouldmakeinvalidtheseproceedings,inparticularherparticipationinitas
thehearing’sofficer,andallentitiesclaimingfalselythataninternalhouse
resolutionhasanylawfulpoweroutsideofthecountrythatcreatessuchaninternal
law.Theso-calledcededlandsthisinitiativeintendstobuildonwasinfactnever
cededasnotreatyofcessationexists.Ahouseresolution,aninternallaw,doesnot
substituteasatreatyofcessationandthehearingofficer,continuingtomaintainthe
term“ceded”whileusinga“houseresolution”asevidencenotonlycontinuesa
blatantandwellknownfraud,butalsomaintainsthefalsejurisdictionofherseaton
thisinitiativeandtheBLNR,UniversityofHawaii,andotherentitiesthatwould
otherwisedisqualifytheauthorityoftheseproceedings.
ThisisoneofexampleofothersinwhichhearingofficerAmano,inconflictof
interest,influencesdirectlyissuesthatinvolvehervalidityashearingofficer.Her
choicetomaintainthefraudofatreaty,byusinganirrelevanthouseresolution
whileusingtheterm“ceded,”influencingandrelegatingmotionsof“meetsand
bounds”tojurisdiction,andherdenyingofmotionsbasedonincongruentfallacies
likeequatingcessationwithaninternalhouseresolutionarejustafewexamples,in
oneincidentaloneamongmore,thatdemonstratetheclearreasonwhyconflictof
interestinvalidatesthisproceedingsandherownauthoritytoinfluence,deliberate
anddecideonanyoftheseissuesthatinvolvethelandsneverceded-theCrownand
GovernmentlandoftheHawaiianKingdomthattheStateofHawaiihasnosuch
thingascleartitleto.
Despitethedirectandunconscionableharmthisprocess,permittingrequest,and
administrationofthisprocessiscausingmanyothersandmyselfdirectly,Isubmit
thiswiththegreatestalohaandhopeforjustice.InparticularIwouldliketoexpress
alohaforhearingofficerAmanoandmyhopesthatthisissuewillbeservedall
justiceitisdue.
Ifanymistakesregardingthisstatementormyparticipationandsubmissionstothis
so-calleduserfriendlyprocessaremade,IrequestthatIbeallowedtorectifyor
amendthembeingthatalthoughthisprocessiscalled“userfriendly”thereisno
publicresource,website,manualorguidanceavailablethathasbeenmadeknown
tomeoranyoftheotherpartieswhomIhaveapproachedaccordingtothem.The
coercionofsilence,lackofguidance,pre-setstatementsoffacilitatingascheduleof
deadlinesandpriordeliberations,notonlysuggestapre-setoutcomebutevidence
theknowndisingenuoususeoftheterm“userfriendly”fortheBLNR’sConservation
DistrictUseApplicationandContestedCourtCaseprocess.Forany“userfriendly”
processresourcesandguidanceshouldbeavailable,yethereitisnot.Iappreciate
anyguidanceandleewaytomodifyanyinteractionswiththisprocessandapologize
aheadoftimeforwhomever,individualorentity,thatmayhaveanagendaor
scheduleinconveniencedasweengageinwhatisproclaimedas-atleastonpaper-a
“userfriendly”systemunderseeminglaw.
Becauseofculturalmoresthatmaintainprivacyingenealogicalandburialmatters,
inthismotionandsubmissionIreserveanyandallrightsknownandunknown,in
particulartherighttoclarifyanyandallstatementsmadehereinwithofficial
documentationunderavarietyofculturalstandards,andtherighttosubmitinthe
futureanyandallevidenceandwitnessesinthefuturethatmaybelacking
presentlyorinthefuturerequested,requiredandorpertinent,asaliving,direct,
linealdescendant,amongmany,toourlivingiwi,remains,burialsandentireburial
groundsandlandssituatedonthesenon-ceded,HawaiianKingdomCrownand
Governmentlandsheldunderfraudoftreatyandinternalhouseresolution-the
sacred,andprotectedsummitofMaunaKea.
ThedocumentssupportingmyrighttodemandQuoWarrantoareattached.ALOHA.
AFFIDAVITQUOWARRANTO
DEMANDOF JURISDICTION
QuoWarranto is the legal term for awrit (order) used to challenge another's right toeither public or corporate office or challenge the legality of a corporation's charter.When the authority of an official or corporation to take action is challenged, aQuo
Warranto action may beused to demand that the right upon which they base the actionbestated.
"(a) An action may be commenced under this article, in the name of the state, against theoffending corporation, on the information of any person for the purpose of vacating the charter orannulling the existence of any corporation, other than municipal, whenever such corporation:
1. Offends against any of the acts creating, altering or renewingsuch corporation;2. Violates the provisions of any law, by which such corporationfmfeits its charter, by
abuse of itspowers;3, Hasforfeited itsprivileges orfi'anchises byfailure to exercise itspowers;4. Hasdone or omittedany act which amounts to a surrender of its corporate rights,
privileges andfi‘anchises; or5. Exercises a.franchise or privilege not conferredon it by law.
(b) The judge of the circuit court, whenever he believes that any of the acts or omissionsspecified in subsection (a) of this section can be proved and it is necessary for the public good,must direct the district attomey to commence anaction, or anaction may be commenced withoutthe direction of the judge on the informationof any person giving security for the costs of theaction, to beapproved by the clerk of the court in which the action is commenced.
(c) Actions under this section must becommenced in the circuit court of the county in which thecorporation has its principal office or, if it has noprincipal office, of any county in which it doesbusiness; or if it has noprincipal.
DeclaratoryJudgment On A ConstitutionalIssue/Violation
Per "...this Constitution for the United States of America,” Article I V, section 4 “Section 4.
The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of
Government, and shall protect each ofthem against Invasion; and on Application of the
Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot beconvened) against domestic
Violence.”
INTRODUCI ‘I O NA N D OPENINGSTATEMENT
nowCOMES,Declarant I Brannon K a m a h mKealoha , ( Now Knownasthe Declarant),
with this DeclarationofChallenge; a Declaratory Judgment OnA Constitutional lssue/Violat ion in the f o r mof a QuoWarran to , inhm pawns.
I I .Jurisdictionof the “ one supreme Court”
All facts andallegationsset forth in paragraphs 1and 2 are incorporatedherein in their entirety
by reference.
1. “...this Constitution for the UnitedStates of America” Article 1,Section 1,andSection2,clause 1.
Section 1.
The Judicial Powerof the UnitedStates,shallbevested in one supreme Court, and in such
inferiorCourts asthe Congress may from time to time ordain andestablish.The Judges, both
of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall holdtheir Offices duringgood Behavior,andshall, at
StatedTimes, receivefor their Services, a Compensation,which shall not bediminished during
their Continuance in Office.
Section2, clause 1.
The Judicial Powershall extendto allCases, in Lawand Equity,arisingunder this Constitution,
the Laws of the UnitedStates, andTreaties made,or which shallbemade,under the Authority;-‐‑
to allCasesaffectingAmbassadors,other public ministersandConsuls;-‐ to allCases of admiralty
andmaritimeJurisdiction;‐‐- to Controversies to which the UnitedStates shallbea Party;‐~- to
Controversies betweentwo or moreStates;‐-‐betweenaState andCitizens of another State;«~
betweenCitizens of different States;~‐‐betweenCitizens of the same State claiming Landsunder
Grants of different States,andbetweena State,or the
Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.
111.Declaratory JudgmentIssuePer “...this Constitution...”
All facts and allegations set forth in paragraphs 1through 3are incorporated herein in their
entirety by reference.
3. Per “...this Constitution for the United States of America,” Article I V, section 4, does “this
Constitution” declare and create aRepublican form of government or aDemocratic form of
government ?
I V. in formapauperis
Al l facts and allegations set forth in paragraphs 1through 7 are incorporatedherein in their
entirety by reference.
4. This Declarant points to "...this Constitution for the UnitedStates ofAmerica,” Article 1,
section 10, clause 1.Section 10.No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or
Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills ofCredit; make
any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any
BillofAttainder, expost facto Law,or Law impairingthe Obligation of Contracts, or
grantany Title of Nobility.
5. This Declarant also points to FL . 1,48 Stat C l.
6. This Declarant also points to the Federal Reserve Act of 1913. section 16,with the clear
intent of the venue and use of Federal ReserveNotes: “Federal reserve notes, to be issued at
the discretion of the Boardof Governors of the Federal Reserve System for the purpose of
making advances to Federal reserve banks through the Federal reserve agents ashereinafter
set forth and for no other purpose, are authorized. The said notes shall beobligations of the
United States and shall be receivable by all national and member banks and Federal reserve
banks and for all taxes, customs, and other public dues. They shall be redeemed in lawful
money on demand at the Treasury Department ofthe United States, in the city of
Washington, District of Columbia, or at any Federal Reserve bank.”
7. This Declarant also points to P.L.40, 40 stat L 411,section 5, subdivision (b) of the
October 6, 1917 Act as it is written in P.L.I, 48 stat C 1.And, therefore, files this action in
fbrmapauperz‘s because of the lack of access to “gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment
of Debts.”
V. Quo Warranto Challenge
All facts and allegations set forth in paragraphs 1through 9 are incorporated herein in their
entirety by reference.
8. the RESPONDENT,, appears to be in violation of “...this Constitution for the United States
ofAmerica,” Article 4, Section 4 by declaring our form of government to beunder a
“Democracy.”
9. This Declarant CITES THAT, under the Constitutionally , declared and mandated
“...Republican Form of Government...” in compliance with “...this Constitution for the United
States of America,” Article I V, section 4 in force before it was systematically destroyed by
Franklin D. Roosevelt, and succeeding others. See the “TRAINING MANUAL } WAR
DEPARTMENT, No. 2000-25 } WASHINGTON, November 30, 1928,” Section IX, Lesson
9 - “Representative Government” starting at paragraph 118 for a published and
governmentally approved statement of the form of government for these United States of
America. Roosevelt and others systematically took this manual out of circulation to eliminate
any evidence of previous administration's written intent of the Founders of this nation.
Examinethismanual for yourselfto seewhat hasbeencontinually usurped.over the years.
fiomtheAmericanPeople inSection1x,lesson9startingatparagraph118andapecifically
in paragraph 121asapprovedforpublicationbyBYORDEROFTHESECRETARYOF
WAR: C.P. SUMMERALL,lilajorGeneral. ChiefofSrqfl.‘ SeetheNationalrecordsfor the
evidence of itspublication.
VI.S W !of theFacts
All factsandallegations setforth inpuagrapbs l rlnougb l7are imorpomedherein intheir
entirety by refereme.
10.“...ThisConstitution for the UnitedStatesof America.” Article IV,section4, guarantees
the States in this Union“a Republicanformof government" andNOTa“democracy.”
11.FranklinD.Rooseveltinlgaspubliclydeclaredthiagwemmenttobea
“democrat?"therebyviolating"...thisConstitutionfor theUnitedStatesof
America"with itsguaranteeof“...aRepublicanFormof Government”forthePeopleof theUnitedStatesof America.
12.BarackObamahasdeclaredmany times this isa “Democracy"onNationalTV.
13.BarackObamabeingaconstiurtional lawyermustbeawareof this fact (“...aRepublican
poemof Government"),but.yet.hedeclares this government sobea“Demcracy” and
pushesthatlthia form of government intoother foreignnations.
14.This Declarantwasanational.write-incandidatefor thepresidency in theelectionof
November6, 20l2 underthe Carmimtionallymandated “RepublicanFormof Govertunent.”
VII:ConclusionAllfaetsandallegationsaetfortbinparasraflrs 1though Mare incorporatedherein intiteir
entirety by reference.
Contested Case HearingReConservationDistrict UseApplication (CDUA) HA-3568
BOARDOFLANDANDNATURALRESOURCE
STATEor HAWAl'l
for the Thirty MeterTelescope at the MaunaKea Science Reserve, Ka’oheMauka,Hémakua, Hawai’i,TMK (3)440152009
CERTIFICATEOFSERVICE
BLNRContested Case HA-16-02Document title: MinuteOrder 13
The undersigned hereby certifies that the above referenced document was served upon the followingparties by the means indicated:
MichaelCainOffice of Conservation andCoastalLands1151Punchbowl,Room 131Honolulu,HI [email protected] of the Records(original4-digital copy)
Judge RikiMayAmano (Ret)rmaScchahoocomHearingOfl’icer
Julie China, DeputyAttorney Generaliulie.h.chinthawaii.govCounselfor the Boardof LandandNaturalResources
Carlsmith Ball LLPisandisocharlsmith.comCounselfor the applicant UniversityofHawai’iat Hilo
Richard N.WurdemanRNWurdemanQRNWLaw.comCounselfor thepetitionersMaunaKeaAnaina Hou, ClarenceKukauakahiChing, Flores-Case ’Ohana,DeborahJ.Ward, PaulK.Neves, andKahea: TheEnvironmentalAlliance
Watanabe lng LLPrshinyamaQwik.comdougingQwikcomCounsel for TMTObservatory, LLC
International
Harry Fergerstromhankhawaiiananhoo.com
Richard LDeLeonkekagkikeQmsncom
Mehana Kihoi
C.M. Kaho'okahi Kanuhakahookahngmailcom
Joseph Kualii LindseyCamarakualiithotmailcom
Torkildson, Katz, Moore, Hetherington& HarrisIsa t rkilds n.comnicQtorkildsonxomCounselfor PerpetuatingUniqueEducationalOpportunities (PUEO)
J.Leina'ala [email protected]
Maelani LeemaelanileeQxahoocom
LannyAlan [email protected] The Temple of Lona
Kalikolehua KanaeleakuleleQxahoocom
Stephanie-Malia:[email protected]
Signature: MMZ/Q
Tiffnle Kakaliatiffniekakalianmailcom
Glen Kilamakakilanmailcom
DwightJ.Vicente2608Ainaola DriveHilo,Hawaiian Kingdom
Brannon Kamahana KealohabrannonkQhawaii.edu
Cindy FreitashanahanaiQhawaiiJmom
William Freitaspohaku7flyahoocom
Wilma H.HoliP. O. Box 368Hanapepe, Hl 96716
Moses Kealamakia,Jr.mkealamaflyahoocom
CrystalW. WestMWPatricia lkedagehekeanilanmail.com
\
Name (Print): MichaelCain, ustodian of the RecordsDate: July 21, 2016
I hereby certify that a copy of the attached motion was duly served on the following parties by electronic e-mail unless indicated otherwise:
Kamahana Kealoha: MOTION invoking Quo Warranto, respectfully, a demand of Jurisdiction; Declaratory Judgment on a Constitutional Issue/Violation RESUBMITTED 8/8/2016