IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE ADMINISTRATIVE COURT – LONDON
Case Ref: AC-2025-LON-001909
Claimant: The King (applicant of Malik) v Berkshire Magistrate Court and other
💠 Affidavit of Codified Jurisdiction
I, the Man known as :Waseem: Malik., submit this affidavit as supplementary evidence in support of my Judicial Review claim (AC-2025-LON-001909), dated 16 July 2025, codifying the foundational doctrine upon which all lawful action in this matter is based.
🔺 Codified Jurisdictional Hierarchy:
- GOD – The Source: Supreme authority from which all law flows.
- Man – Living Being: Operates under Natural/Common Law, possesses dominion.
- Vatican / Holy See: Trust administrator via ecclesiastical instruments (Papal Bulls / Nihilism).
- State / Babylon / Legal Fiction: Administrative corporate entities governed by code (e.g. Thames Valley Police, HMCTS, Abri, NHS and more…).
⚖️ Declaratory Standing:
- This doctrine affirms my lawful standing as superior to the subordinate statutory entities.
- All notices, actions, and rebuttals derive from Natural Law principles and are issued in Honour.
- This framework rejects parity conflict and reasserts Lawful dominion over corporate procedure.
Understanding De Jure and De Facto
- De Jure (By Right / By Law): This is the LAWFUL BLUEPRINT. It's how things should be according to the law, the rules, the constitution, the contract. A court order is a de jure command. A tenancy agreement is a de jure contract. The Magna Carta is a de jure declaration of rights. It is based on legitimacy and authority.
- De Facto (In Fact / In Reality): This is the REALITY ON THE GROUND. It's how things are, regardless of the rules. It is power exercised without necessary lawful authority. It is the action, the fact of the matter.
The government that was lawfully elected before the coup was the De Jure government. They held power by right and by law.
The new military government that takes over by force is the De Facto government. They hold power "in fact"—they have the tanks, the guns, the control—but they do not have the lawful right to rule. They are a de facto power acting without de jure legitimacy.
This Applies DIRECTLY to My Case