EoP Application to Concourt in CCT 06-11: LJ v SANEF et al is one of the EoP Legal Submission cases involving EoP scientific and cultural law recommendations to shut down the WiP Ponzi profiteering of resource conflict and misery economy, by ‘turning off the tap’ — i.e. the breeding / consumption above ecological carrying capacity limitscauses of resource conflict and war; by implementing an Ecology of Peace New World Order Social Contract that (a) requires all citizens of all races, religions, nations, to breed and consume below ecological carrying capacity limits; or be humanely eliminated from the planetary genepool; (b) nationalizes all property and provides all responsible freedom oath citizens: (i) cultural law self rule for groups with subjective racial, religious & gender identities; and (ii) a property ration to enable their shelter and survival self-sufficiency to enable the rebuilding of a relocalized low-tech organic agrarian sustainable future.


Summary: CCT 06-11: L J v SANEF et al;

The applicants application for direct access, as a Pauperis Propria Persona / Litigant in Person; for a [I] writ of Habeus Mentem [A] and [II] writ of Certiorari/Review.

Writ of Habeus Mentem:

A writ of Habeus Mentem – the right of a wo/man to their own mind and culture — is invoked in accordance with the Constitutional rights to invoking[1] cultural law[2] in S. 15 (3), 30, 31, and 185, and psychological integrity in Section 12; the former which may require the application of choice of law rules.

Note on Habeus Mentem:

The title of the writ — Habeus Mentem – is borrowed from Aldous Huxley’s A Brave New World Revisited; where he describes the insidious conspiracy to manipulate the masses by propaganda and lies, so as to make them controllable under the “steadily increasing pressures of over-population and of the over-organization imposed by growing numbers and advancing technology”

It is perfectly possible for a man to be out of prison, and yet not free — to be under no physical constraint and yet to be a psychological captive, compelled to think, feel and act as the representatives of the national State, or of some private interest within the nation, want him to think, feel and act. There will never be such a thing as a writ of habeas mentem; for no sheriff or jailer can bring an illegally imprisoned mind into court, and no person whose mind had been made captive by the methods outlined in earlier articles would be in a position to complain of his captivity. The nature of psychological compulsion is such that those who act under constraint remain under the impression that they are acting on their own initiative. The victim of mind-manipulation does not know that he is a victim. To him, the walls of his prison are invisible, and he believes himself to be free. That he is not free is apparent only to other people. His servitude is strictly objective.

A Writ of Certiorari / Review of:

[B]   South African Press Council and SA Press Appeals Panel (SAPAP) [1] lack of transparent administrative decision-making, and secrecy of complaints statistics; [2] 24 June 2009 ruling by Ombudsman: Joe Thloloe, [3] 11 October, 3 and 4 November 2010 rulings by Deputy Ombudsman: Johan Retief, and [4] 17 and 24 November 2010 rulings by SA Press Appeals Panel Judge Ralph Zulman; and

[C]     SA Media and Journalists Respondents (“SA Media”) endorse: (a) Media Corruption and legal, political and cultural persecution of minorities, and (b) Media “Rainbow-Rule-of-Law[3] Reasonableness[4]” Intellectual Incompetence[5]; and preference for propaganda smear campaigns, and repudiation of scientific journalism i.e.: [5] ‘SA Media’s’ Deliberate Indifference to Radical Honesty/White Refugee legal and political persecution; [6] ‘SA Media’s’ endorsement of media corruption (negligent and/or deliberate intellectual incompetence), and [7] repudiation of scientific journalism[6]: censorship of root cause “the most potent weapons of war are the penis and the womb[7] problem solving, as per their endorsement of censorship of issues raised in Dr. T. Michael Maher’s study: How and Why Journalists Avoid Population – Environment connection[8]; and Dr. Brad Blanton’s Radical Honesty About Anger and Forgiveness[9] expert witness affidavit as to how sincere forgiveness vs fake forgiveness affects the common law ‘reasonable reader’

[1] Ex parte Minister of Native Affairs: In re Yako v Beyi 1948 (1) SA 388 (A) at 397: Appellate Division held that neither common nor customary law was prima facie applicable. Courts had to consider all the circumstances of a case, and, without any preconceived view about the applicability of one or other legal system, select the appropriate law on the basis of its inquiry.

[2] SALC, Sept 1999: Report on Conflicts of law: P.22: ‘1.58. The Constitution now provides an entitlement for invoking customary law in legal suits. Because ss 30 and 31 specifically guarantee an individual and a group’s right to pursue a culture of choice, it could be argued that application of customary law has become a constitutional right. Previously, the state had assumed complete discretion in deciding whether and to what extent customary law should be recognized, an attitude typical of colonial thinking, for Africans were subject to whatever policies the conquering state chose to impose on them. Now, however, the state has a duty to allow people to participate in the culture they choose, implicit in this duty is a responsibility to uphold the institutions on which that culture is based.’

[3] In Bolam v. Friern Hospital Management Committee , Judge McNair’s judgement dealt with the application of the common law reasonableness test in regards to negligence, where the ‘reasonableness test’ circumstance involved a special skill or competence.

[4] In Affidavit of Brad Blanton, Ph.D, evidencing the legal, psychological, and socio-political ‘citizens privilege’, Nuremberg Principles skills and competencies of Individual Responsibility, required for acts of civil disobedience to perceived illegitimate authority; and their application to the common law ‘reasonableness test’  filed as Expert Witness Affidavit in High Court, W.C. # 19963-09; Dr. Blanton explains what happens in cultures of ideological obedience; how and why studies show that 92% of citizens lack the psychological and emotional – sincere forgiveness — skills for non-violent disobedience. In Practicing Radical Honesty, Dr. Blanton describes the importance of sincere forgiveness to changing the statistics of the Stanley Milgram studies of Obedience, which proved that 92% of humans are as culturally, racially, ideologically or religiously obedient, and unquestioning to their beliefs as Adolf Eichmann was to Nazism. In a clash between their ideology and scientific evidentiary truth, their obedience to their ideology, causes them to consign the truth to the collateral damage refuse bin. Individuals who practice sincere forgiveness, and who are not obedient to ideology, but to scientific truth, always side in favour of scientific truth.

[5] Put simply the Dunning & Kruger effect “is a cognitive bias in which an unskilled person makes poor decisions and reaches erroneous conclusions, but their incompetence denies them the metacognitive ability to realize their mistakes.”

[6] “WikiLeaks coined a new type of journalism: scientific journalism. We work with other media outlets to bring people the news, but also to prove it is true. Scientific journalism allows you to read a news story, then to click online to see the original document it is based on. That way you can judge for yourself: Is the story true? Did the journalist report it accurately?” — Don’t shoot messenger for revealing uncomfortable truths , by Julian Assange, The Australian, December 08, 2010

[7] “We must all understand that the most potent weapons of war are the penis and the womb. Therefore, if you cannot convince a group to control its population by discussion, debate, intelligent analysis etc., you must consider their action in using the penis and the womb to increase population an act of war.” –– Jason G. Brent, Attorney and author of Humans: An Endangered Species, as quoted in Boer Volkstaat for African White Refugees Briefing Paper 10/31/16

[8] How and Why Journalists Avoid Population-Environment Connection, by T. Michael Maher, Ph.D.

[9] Being Specific About Anger and Forgiveness; excerpts from Practicing Radical Honesty, by Dr. Brad Blanton.


Cultural Membership:

Please Note: As noted at LJ v Brad Blanton;  As of 17 October 2013, Lara Johnstone is no longer a member of the Radical Honesty culture; but is a member of the Ecology of Peace: Radical Honoursty culture.



  • 25 Nov 2010: Filing Sheet, Notice of Motion, Founding Affidavit & Proof of Service [PDF]
  • 01 Feb 2011: Court Order [PDF]



EoP Leg Sub LJ v SANEF correspondence.