Idris v Mohamed, 2021 ABQB 693

Court of Queen’s Bench of Alberta Citation: Idris v Mohamed, 2021 ABQB 693 Date: 20210831 Docket: 4801 172079 Registry: Calgary Between: Mohamed Ismail Idris Applicant - and - Muhibo Abdi Mohamed Respondent _______________________________________________________ Endorsement of the Associate Chief Justice J.D. Rooke _______________________________________________________ [ 1 ] On August 27, 2021, I issued a decision reported as Idris v Mohamed , 2021 ABQB 686 [ Idris #2 ], that struck out documents received by the Court on July 2, 2021 from Mohamed Ismail Idris [Mr.

Idris] as pseudolaw materials ( Meads v Meads , 2012 ABQB 571 ) that abused the Court, and imposed a Grepe v Loam Order that required Mr. Idris to seek leave of the Court prior to initiating further processes or proceedings that involve the Idris v Mohamed , Docket 4801 172079 Action, or five children that Mr. Idris claimed are his “chattel property” because Mr. Idris alleges that he had purchased those children with an ounce of silver, apiece.

[ 2 ] Mr. Idris’ stated plan in his July 2, 2021 materials was to seize the five children, his “Bloodline”, and demanded this Court help him locate those children and their mother so he could do that. Mr. Idris appears to be a resident of the United States. [ 3 ] The same day as Mr. Idris was emailed the Idris #2 Decision and a corresponding Order, Mr. Idris replied with an email that attached a packet of four documents: 1.

A letter to “The Most Reverand Ivan Jurkovic, Titular Archbishop of Corbavia” [sic], copied to “Supreme Pontiff Pope Francis”, that seeks assistance from the Pope, and states “all courts began as ecclesiastical courts”. 2. A letter to myself that poses: ... just one question for you: WHERE IS YOUR, OR THE COURT’S POWER OF ATTORNEY THAT ALLOWS YOU, OR THE COURT, TO ADJUDICATE THESE PROCEEDINGS? To legally and lawfully move forward with this matter you are required to present said document at the next hearing or send it to the email on record.

This letter also states that the Pope has “revoked/removed” my [Associate Chief Justice Rooke’s] “judicial immunity”. This document is not signed, but has a red circle labelled “Dieu et mon Droit”, labelled “The Witness, my signet/seal”. 3. An “Apostolic Letter” issued by Pope Francis on July 11, 2013 titled “On the Jurisdiction of Judicial Authorities of Vatican City State in Criminal Matters”. 4.

A three-page untitled document that commences with the sentence “I, who shall not be with name hereby proclaim to all with unclean hands”, and makes a range of pseudolegal declarations and demands that relate to Strawman Theory, allege fraud, “... acts of commerce (Whore of Babylon) using the NAME (mark of the beast) ...”, slavery, human trafficking, and cannibalism.

The document ends with another empty red circle, labelled “Blood Seal”, followed by “I, who shall not be named, by my seal/signet”. [ 4 ] I note that: I am not a “Judicial Authority” of the “Vatican City State”; this Court has repeatedly rejected that the “Apostolic Letter” attached by Mr. Idris is relevant to Canada (e.g. Alberta Treasury Branches v Nielson , 2014 ABQB 383 at paras 27-28 ; Servus Credit Union Ltd v Parlee , 2015 ABQB 700 at para 42 ); and also it was Mr. Idris who started these proceedings in the Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench for the Court to adjudicate the irregular pseudolaw claim(

s) advanced by Mr. Idris that he owns the five children as his personal property. [ 5 ] Mr. Idris is a self-represented litigant, a “SRL”. The Supreme Court of Canada in Pintea v Johns , 2017 SCC 23 set instructions to judges concerning their interactions with SRLs. The following information is provided in response to Mr. Idris’ letter to me, and mindful of the Pintea v Johns obligations on Canadian judges to provide information on litigation alternatives to SRLs: 1. The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench no longer has the authority to respond to Mr.

Idris’ question and document request, since the Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench is functus in relation to Mr. Idris’ previous activities in the Idris v Mohamed , Docket 4801-172079 proceeding. 2. If Mr. Idris disagrees with the Idris #2 Decision, Mr. Idris should appeal that decision to the Alberta Court of Appeal. 3. The Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench will make no further response to any correspondence from Mr.

Idris (or he who is not to be named) in relation to the Idris v Mohamed , Docket 4801-172079 proceeding, except where that communication takes the form of a leave to file application pursuant to Idris #2 . [ 6 ] Mr. Idris may be served this Endorsement by email to the address: xaxia19@x-milecarriers.com. Dated at the City of Calgary, Alberta this 31 st day of August, 2021. J.D. Rooke A.C.J.C.Q.B.A. Appearances: Mohamed Ismail Idris Self-represented Litigant