Due Process—

The government officials who conspired against me felt like it was okay to strip another human being of numerous constitutional rights

The Constitution states only one command twice. The Fifth Amendment says to the federal government that no one shall be “deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law.” The Fourteenth Amendment ratified in 1868, uses the same eleven words, called the Due Process Clause, to describe a legal obligation of all states. These words have as their central promise an assurance that all levels of American government must operate within the law (“legality”) and provide fair procedures.

The promise of legality and fair procedure: Historically, the clause reflects the Magna Carta of Great Britain, King John’s thirteenth century promise to his noblemen that he would act only in accordance with law (“legality”) and that all would receive the ordinary processes (procedures) of law. It also echoes Great Britain’s Seventeenth Century struggles for political and legal regularity, and the American colonies’ strong insistence during the pre-Revolutionary period on observance of regular legal order. The requirement that government function in accordance with law is, in itself, ample basis for understanding the stress given these words. A commitment to legality is at the heart of all advanced legal systems, and the Due Process Clause often thought to embody that commitment.

Access to justice is a basic principle of the rule of law. In the absence of access to justice, people are unable to have their voice heard, exercise their rights, challenge discrimination or hold decision-makers accountable. The Declaration of the High-level Meeting on the Rule of Law emphasizes the right of equal access to justice for all, including members of vulnerable groups, and reaffirmed the commitment of Member States to taking all necessary steps to provide fair, transparent, effective, non-discriminatory and accountable services that promote access to justice for all.

Delivery of justice should be impartial and non-discriminatory. In the Declaration of the High-Level Meeting on the Rule of Law, Member States highlighted the independence of the judicial system, together with its impartiality and integrity, as an essential prerequisite for upholding the rule of law and ensuring that there is no discrimination in the administration of justice

Intentionally turning a blind eye, dismissing, or hindering justice by not investigating a series of federal offenses or criminal activities done against a person, who has evidence of the crimes committed against them, amounts to several crimes within itself that include: a dereliction of duty, obstruction of justice, misconduct, discrimination, oppression, tyranny and a gross violation of that person’s humans rights, honor, dignity, liberation, freedom, and right to pursue happiness and damages incurred as a result of these actions or inactions. The government and multiple organizations attempted to bar and deny me equal access and protection of the law and therefore have broken the law!

—Cornell Law & Un.org

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s