IN RESPONSE TO THIS EMAIL - forwarded to our EDA email address on January 9th, 2015.

OPENING CHARGE:
1. The Honourable Pierre Poilievre, Minister of State is operating under Maritime jurisdiction and has no
authority to argue anything, or make himself the arbitrator, or intervener in this issue with Ives Cote
because it is strictly a common law jurisdiction issue. Marc Boyer is a sentient real human being, who can
and is demanding that anyone under the employ of Ives Cote QC [or] that Honourable Pierre Poilievre are
directly forbidden to say 'NO' to anything Marc Boyer demands when it's the Office's duty to comply.

2. ON THIS: The Honourable Pierre Poilievre created a file # 2014-0187 that refers to an issue with Ive Cote,
but makes no reference to that file. AND IN SO DOING His jurisdiction is erroneously trying to get to seize
some kind of authority to rule on his file. We cannot stop you from creating a trap, but we are not falling for
your bullshit, when you are actually trying to invite yourself into a straight forward issue in order to create
conflict. The solution to this conflict already exists in the Elections Act, because there is no conflict.
As to the email, you admit that: As such, your complaints cannot be pursued by this [Maritime] Office.
We are not, and will not pursue this issue with your Office, so stay away from our commercial premise.

3. Under Sec 337 CC, We [our Marijuana Party EDAs] have the authority to demand a letter from Ives Cote
under common law to fix a mess created by the Harper government /Federal Courts making numerous
changes to banking and accounting regulations, which prohibit everyone from partaking in a marijuana
activity, and this is being interpreted to including any of our Marijuana Party's EDAs or our EDA agencies
political activities, and to operate a strictly common law account, because we cannot comply with all kinds
of regulation changes that occurred since the last time we formed an EDA. In this particular case Tim
Felger [the CEO of AMP] and Marc Boyer [the CEO of VQMP] both had no problems getting a bank
account last time we ran for Office, and neither of us can now get an EDA account.

4. The Commissioner of Canada Elections Ives Cote is the only one who can fix this conflict created by rule
changes in other branches of the government or the economy, because he is the clerk for Her Majesty
IN FACT, we can demand him to fix this mess because it's his duty [fiduciary trust] to make sure we are not
deprived from being able to get a bank account for our EDAs and agencies. Neither of us can, [and we
suspect no EDA can] get a common law bank account that is unfettered from obstructions to operate our
political activities without someone charging that it's the profits from marijuana activities.

5. We [our EDAS] can respectfully demand a letter of dispensation from Ives Cote that we can deliver to any
bank in Canada, in order to fix this problem, in order to protect our Free and Democratic society called the
Marijuana Party, under Sec 1 of the Charter, under the Trespass Act and especially under the Elections
Act, in order to operate our EDA activities strictly under common law jurisdiction.

6. FURTHERMORE: At the time Mr Lamothe attempt to misappropriate authority over FILE # 416520; we
pointed out in this conversation that we directly prohibited their 3rd party intervention. We, then followed
up by calling Elections Canada in order to complain about this misappropriation, and within the same day
[Dec 17th] this delivering of our mandamus was appropriated a new FILE # 416520-A, which then was
confirmed as having been successfully delivered to Ives Cote.
1. In Fairness, it should be pointed that this State Department responded to a 15-working day
window as requested by Elections Canada on file # 416520 was met with this erroneous reply
2. AGAIN IN FAIRNESS, with this file # 416520-A only being served onto the proper interested party on
Dec 17th means Ives Cote has until January 14th, 2015 to respond Honourably to our mandamus

7. BOTTOM LINE: We need this letter to open bank accounts for our EDAs, and because this letter comes
from the head trustee in Canada, means it falls under Trust law. It's not like it forces a bank to give us a
common law bank account, but with this letter they can offer us an EDA account. This letter will in 'deed'
be instrumental in our SCC filing as interveners in the Owen Smith case, and our inevitable filing with the
Federal Courts, in order to demonstrably illustrate that our common law inalienable rights are restored.

8. With respect to this Bhasin v. Hrynew, 2014 SCC 71. decision, Ives Cote must in good faith protect the
principle of contract law in Canadian common law provinces that we are seeking to Peacefully preserve

THIS IS THE EMAIL THAT WE RECEIVED THIS MORNING

Our File # 2014-0187
Dear Mr. Boyer,
The Commissioner of Canada Elections is responsible for ensuring that the Canada Elections Act (the Act), is complied with
and enforced.
Further to your discussion of December 17, 2014 with one of our investigators, Ronald Lamothe, we are writing to advise
you that there is no requirement in the Canada Elections Act (the Act), for a financial institution to open a bank account at
the request of the financial agent of a registered association. As such, your complaint cannot be pursued by our Office.
Should you be of the view that the Act should be amended to require that financial institutions open an account at the
request of the financial agent of a registered association, please note that the Minister of State for Democratic Reform, the
Honourable Pierre Poilievre, has been given responsibility for amendments to the Canada Elections Act.
If you have not already done so, you may contact Minister Poilievre at the following address:
Honourable Pierre Poilievre
Minister of State (Democratic Reform)
66 Slater Street
Ottawa, Ontario
KIA OA3
Thank you for your interest in the electoral process and for sharing your comments with us.
Yours truly,

Office of the Commissioner of Canada Elections

Here are other aritcles posted recently on this issue
Heres'a th SCC ruling on fairness and not lying under common law contract.
http://www.takebackyourpower.net/news/2014/12/20/supreme-court-canada-recognizes-good-faith-honesty-requirementcommon-law-contracts/
Here's our opening article in our common law defence that legalizes our cannabis industry
- https://www.scribd.com/doc/251587985/On-Smith-Ruling1
READ IT - this article deals with only the SCC Summary filed last month - the factum for the Crown is due any day.
READ THIS LEAFLET be inspired and act on it. - https://www.scribd.com/doc/251056966/Tax-Loophole102
We are making an offer to restore genuine common law rights in Canada
This initiative can only happen by you being an activist, not just a protester
This easy to read 1-page article should clear some confusion as to what we're doing at Canada Elections
- https://www.scribd.com/doc/250101156/Mandamus-2 - we are legalizing our cannabis industry thru a tax loophole.
Everything our EDA is doing can be done anywhere in Canada because it's an election year PLEASE BE INSPIRED
IMPORTANT ARTICLE for cannabis activists. [2-pages] https://www.scribd.com/doc/249206269/OUTLINE-Dec-4
it's time to file in court - this is the 1st of many documents - READ IT - you can protect yourself too, with this defence