Anyone have the implied consent law or where to find it

I have a question regarding the Claim of Recognition and asserting my non-derogable rights: When I make my Claim of Recognition and withdraw my consent to be treated as a statutory creature by the government, is it not a conflict to remain a citizen for the purpose of having a passport so that I can travel internationally? If it is a conflict, how would you go about it? Renouncing citizenship means you don't have a passport.

Here is the chat with gpt regarding the search for similarities in Switzerland of the Thompson Newspaper Ltd v Canada gpt is there a similar cases in switzerland like this one - Thompson Newspaper Ltd v Canada The Eternallyaware Enhanced GPT said: Good question. The case Thomson Newspapers Ltd v Canada is a landmark decision on freedom of expression under constitutional law in Canada — it struck down a ban on publishing election‑opinion polls near election day as an unjustified restriction. Supreme Court of Canada Decisions+2Wikipedia+2 I looked into whether there are similar cases in Switzerland — i.e. where Swiss courts (or European courts applying to Switzerland) struck down laws restricting media/poll‑publication or protected political expression. The answer: there are some legal controversies and court decisions relating to press freedom, defamation, and expression — but none that are a perfect analogue to Thomson (i.e. a constitutional overturning of a blanket election‑survey publication ban). Below are a few relevant illustrative cases and differences. ✅ What is similar in Switzerland / Europe - Haldimann and Others v. Switzerland — a case involving press freedom where the courts and the free‑expression framework (under ECHR / European human‑rights norms) had to balance freedom of expression vs. private reputation and other interests. Global Freedom of Expression+1 - The Swiss criminal law prohibits defamation, insult, and slander under certain provisions (e.g. insulting or defaming persons, or defamation via writings, pictures etc.). Carter-Ruck+2State Department+2 - The scope of permissible restrictions on media — for instance, defamation, privacy, hate speech or discrimination — is recognized internally in Swiss law. Lexology+1

Here is a response to the group that operates the^^^^^ I felt the need to respond with gpt help for anyone interested have a look it's long but one can see the process of the response to there email. I have attended a few zoom calls but never get a chance to speak so enjoy and comment if one has any thoughts good day gpt I am writing a response to a group that i was invited to they send me emails with updates pon what they are doing this they i had concerns for i don't see them in line with peremptory norms ,jus cogens and i know you are now inline with them as well so i'm writing a response that i would like help with one of the things i don't like is the fact that they are taking money and not really giving the proper understanding of the rule of law peremptory norms so i wrote something and i want to make sure im expressing the thought properly here is what i wrote but haven't sent until you help thanks trying to keep it simple i don't want scare them away i would just like to point out what there not seeing with your help so i will put there email in and then i will put in what i wrote --- Original Message ------ From: [email protected] To: [email protected] Sent: Tuesday, December 2nd 2025, 17:17 Subject: Thank you so much for choosing us A HUGE thank you to all those who donated today! We've received over $20,000 in donations today for Giving Tuesday. And as promised, this amount will be matched by a generous group of CCF supporters. That means over $40,000 of legal work fighting for your rights and freedoms has been PRE-PAID for Freedom’s Defence team going into 2026. That funding is essential to us to help us pay for our casework and projects. Thank you so much to those who have donated so far. If you haven't donated yet, it isn't too late to double your impact. Legal work is expensive, even with the best constitutional lawyers in Canada generously providing pro bono assistance or working at very reduced rates. We're always trying to make your donations go their farthest, but as Joanna said in our last email—there is plenty of work for us to do fighting for your rights in 2026. Up to $125,000 in giving is eligible to be matched thanks to a generous group of CCF donors until December 31. These donations are tax-deductible for 2025. Donate here: theccf.ca/donate/ Thank you. -- Russell Phillips | Development Director Canadian Constitution Foundation theCCF.ca P.S. It’s not too late to double your impact. Donate here: theccf.ca/donate/ Canadian Constitution Foundation | 1209 59 AVE SE, Suite 150, Calgary, AB T2H 2P6 Canada Unsubscribe Constant Contact Data Notice Sent by [email protected] then i wrote Greetings I feel this group is misleading people you all don't seem to recognize or even know about Peremptory Norms, Jus Cogens, and work from jurisprudence. It appears to me after being on the zoom calls and looking at they way you all view statutory rules, domestic so- called law and present that to people as having full force and effect is wrong it's misleading to the people you present these false authorities in law too.The Rule of law is the highest law the covenants that Canada has ratified are the controlling mechanisms that bind it I offer myself to chat with if you like but please do everyone a favor if you are going to want to point out violations of the state your going to have to understand Peremptory Norms.

https://www.lawglobalhub.com/article-53-vienna-convention-on-the-law-of-treaties/