Affidavit Five in Support of Motion One and Two To Stay Proceedings

AFFIDAVIT FIVE IN SUPPORT OF MOTION ONE AND TWO TO STAY PROCEEDINGS

NOTICE TO AGENT IS NOTICE TO PRINCIPAL

Order 34 2023

Emergency Stay – Judicial Review

Escalation to International court of Human Rights – Public Enquiry

I, Iain Clifford, a living man under God’s law, hereby affirm the following facts and declarations in support of my motion to stay proceedings in the matter styled as FCA v [IAIN CLIFFORD STAMP].

1. Jurisdictional Challenges

  1. The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) has failed to establish lawful jurisdiction under the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (FSMA).
  2. No evidence has been provided of a Crown Agent or valid delegation of prosecutorial authority.
  3. The proceedings have been initiated without proof of judicial oath or valid service, rendering them ultra vires.
  4. No lawful service has been established by the FCA.

2. FCA Misconduct and Entrapment

  1. The FCA has engaged in procedural deception, including impersonation and misrepresentation of authority.
  2. Alistair Mackenzie has no apparent standing to prosecute this case and has failed to provide proof of authority.
  3. No lawful service is available to the FCA.
  4. The FCA has a documented track record of abuse of its powers, as detailed in “FCA Entrapment by Design.”
  5. Over 400 sworn witness statements confirm that no FSMA-regulated activities were performed by [IAIN CLIFFORD STAMP] or any MATRIXFREEDOM member.

3. Procedural Defects

  1. Service of documents was defective and non-compliant with Civil Procedure Rules (CPR 6.3, 6.23, 6.26) and Practice Direction 6A.
  2. The FCA failed to produce required instruments, including warrants, oaths, and verified complaints.
  3. The prosecution has proceeded without lawful standing or verified cause of action.

4. Judicial Failures

  1. The presiding judge has failed to disclose his judicial oath under the Promissory Oaths Act 1868.
  2. The court has failed to provide any evidence of a Crown Agent.
  3. The court has ignored multiple motions and notices challenging jurisdiction and authority.
  4. There has been no remedy for fraud upon the court or denial of due process.

5. Financial Harm

  1. I have has suffered reputational and financial harm due to unlawful proceedings.
  2. £500,000 in member funds were frozen, including £400,000 in physical gold, which was forcibly liquidated.
  3. Two UK companies were destroyed, with estimated damages of £3,000,000.
  4. No evidence of any regulated services has ever been presented by the FCA.

6. Additional Declarations

  1. Iain Clifford is a man under God’s law and not subject to statutory jurisdiction without consent.
  2. The FCA and the court are trespassing on the decedent estate of [IAIN CLIFFORD STAMP].
  3. All liabilities of [IAIN CLIFFORD STAMP] belong to the Crown.
  4. Iain Clifford has declared diplomatic immunity.
  5. I will not appear as a living man under God’s law in any court of administration even pro se for fear of unlawful incarceration.
  6. I have appointed an Attorney-in-Fact and has declared that he will not appear in a court of administration acting upon the corporate fiction convened under administrative or statutory jurisdiction, as such courts do not have lawful authority over the living man. This position is supported by the principle that jurisdiction must be proven, not presumed, and by the maxim of law:
  1. “Consent makes the law. A contract is a law between the parties, which can acquire force only by consent.” — Bouvier’s Maxims of Law
  1. If the stay is not granted, the matter will be immediately referred to Judicial Review under Part 54 of the Civil Procedure Rules. Should that avenue be obstructed or denied, the Applicant will escalate the matter to the European Court of Human Rights under Article 6 (Right to a Fair Trial) and Article 13 (Right to an Effective Remedy) of the European Convention on Human Rights.

7. I reserve the right to convene a Sheriff-appointed Common Law Court with a jury of his peers and will hold all wrongdoers accountable. In such a court, constables acting as peacekeepers may enforce lawful arrest under the authority of natural and common law.

8. All documents referenced are in the public domain via Scribd and a documentary will be made covering this travesty of justice with all wrongdoers uncovered.

  1. Any arrest warrant issued will be challenged via judicial review and if this is railroaded in the European Court of Human Rights.
  2. If remedy is not provided, a Common Law Court with sheriff and jury will be convened.
  3. I affirm that the actions of the Financial Conduct Authority and the Southwark Crown Court are being closely observed by thousands of members of the MATRIXFREEDOM Private Members Association. All filings, affidavits, and correspondence are being made part of the public record and published transparently via Scribd and other public platforms. A documentary will be made that names and shames all parties to this fraud and travesty of justice. This ensures third-party witness, accountability, and lawful transparency in all matters concerning these proceedings.

9. Grounds for a Public Inquiry

  1. Allegations of Institutional Misconduct
    The affidavit outlines serious claims against the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), including:
    1. Lack of lawful jurisdiction
    2. Procedural deception and entrapment
    3. Misrepresentation of authority
    4. Destruction of businesses and financial harm
  1. Judicial and Governmental Failures
    It also accuses the judiciary of:
    1. Failing to disclose judicial oaths
    2. Ignoring motions and notices
    3. Denying due process
  1. Public Interest and Scale
    With thousands of MATRIXFREEDOM members affected and significant financial and reputational damage alleged, the scale and public interest threshold for a formal inquiry is arguably met.
  2. Transparency and Accountability
    A public inquiry would serve to:
  • Investigate whether public bodies acted lawfully and fairly
  • Restore public trust in regulatory and judicial institutions
  • Provide a forum for victims and witnesses to be heard
  • Precedent and Legal Basis
    Under the Inquiries Act 2005, a public inquiry can be established by a government minister when events have caused or are capable of causing public concern. The issues raised here—especially if supported by further evidence and public pressure—could qualify.

10. Supplementary Evidence from Parliamentary Reports

  1. In further support of this affidavit and the motions to stay proceedings, I submit the findings of the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Investment Fraud and Fairer Financial Services (APPG IFFFS), as published in their Final Call for Evidence Report and Supplementary Report dated 29th January 2025.
  2. These reports provide compelling evidence of systemic misconduct, regulatory failure, and institutional corruption within the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA). Key findings include:
  1. The FCA’s repeated failure to act on credible whistleblower reports and red flags.
  2. A toxic internal culture that discourages transparency and accountability.
  3. Evidence of regulatory capture, conflicts of interest, and a revolving door between the FCA and financial institutions.
  4. Dismissive treatment of victims and elected representatives seeking redress.
  5. Calls for the removal of FCA immunity and the establishment of an independent supervisory council.

11. These findings corroborate the claims made in this affidavit regarding:

  1. The FCA’s lack of lawful jurisdiction, procedural misconduct, and abuse of authority. They further justify the demand for a full public inquiry and an immediate stay of proceedings in this matter.
  2. The inclusion of these parliamentary findings strengthens the evidentiary basis for the motions and highlights the broader public interest in ensuring justice, transparency, and accountability.

Demand for Remedy

  1. I demand an immediate stay of proceedings pending verification of jurisdiction, authority, and lawful process.
  2. I reserve all rights and remedies under common law, natural law, and equity.
  3. I affirm that the above is true to the best of my knowledge and belief.

JURAT

I Iain Clifford, holding the office of General Executor of the [IAIN CLIFFORD STAMP] estate, a divine (holy) living spirit, born again, incarnate with life as a man under God’s law, attest and affirm that the aforementioned is true and correct, attested to and submitted by a living, breathing, self-aware man, under God. I further acknowledge that this is an act of my free will and Deed.

I solemnly swear and affirm, under penalty of perjury, that the contents of this document are the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

By: Iain Clifford

Iain Clifford

25th Day June Twenty Twenty-Five.

Witnesses

The undersigned witnesses hereby affirm that they personally observed Iain Clifford execute this affidavit, and that, to the best of their knowledge, the facts stated herein are true and accurate.

Witness 1

Proper Name: Andrew Michael

Signature: Andrew Michael

Date: 25th June 2025

Witness 2

Proper Name: David Ayerst

Signature: David Ayerst

Date: 25th June 2025

Witness 3

Proper Name: Angela John

Signature: Angela John

Date: 25th June 2025

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I Iain Clifford, Certify the foregoing was provided by UK Special delivery mailed to:

Office of [KEIR STARMER] 

The Office of Prime Minister

10 Downing Street

London

SW1A 2AA

Office of [KING CHARLES III] 

The Office of the King

Buckingham Palace

London

SW1A 1AA

Office of [RICHARD HERMER] 

The Office of Attorney General

102 Petty France

London

SW1H 9EA

United Kingdom.

Office of [YVETTE COOPER]

The Office of Secretary of State

2 Marsham Street

London

SW1P 4DF

Office of [ANDREW BAILEY]

The Office Bank of England

Threadneedle Street

London

EC2R 8AH

Office of [NIKHIL RATHI]

The Office of Chief Executive of the Financial Conduct Authority

12 Endeavour Square

London

E20 1JN

Office of [DEREK ANTHONY SWEETING]

Royal Courts of Justice

Strand, London

WC2A 2LL

United Kingdom

Office of [ALISDAIR MACKENZIE]

The Office of Criminal Prosecutions Team Financial Conduct Authority

12 Endeavour Square

London

E20 1JN

Office of [MATTHEW STONE]

The Financial Conduct Authority

12 Endeavour Square

London

E20 1JN

Office of [PIETRO BOFFA]

The Financial Conduct Authority

12 Endeavour Square

London

E20 1JN

Office of [ANTHONY BAUMGARTEN]

The Office of Southwark Crown Court

1 English Grounds.

Southwark

London

SE1 2HU

Office of [DAME SUSAN ELIZABETH CARR]

The Office of Judicial Conduct Investigations Office (JCIO)

81-82 Queen’s Building

Royal Courts of Justice

Strand

London

WC2A 2LL

Office of [SHABANA MAHMOOD]

The Office of the Ministry of Justice

102 Petty France

London

SW1H 9AJ

Office

Office of [NICK GOODWIN]

The Office of HM Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS)

Post Point 1.10

102 Petty France

London

SW1H 9AJ

Office of [DAME VICTORIA SHARP]

The office of the Royal Courts of Justice

Strande

London

WC2A 2LL

Office of [DAME SARAH ELIZABETH COCKERILL]

The Office of the Royal Courts of Justice

Strand

London

WC2A 2LL

As per Section 196(4) of the Law of Property Act 1925 (LPA 1925) provides that: “Any notice shall also be sufficiently served if it is served by registered post or recorded delivery by virtue of section 1 of the Recorded Delivery Service Act 1962” Furthermore: Under section 127(4) of the Postal Services Act 2000 (PSA 2000) and PSA 2000, Sch 8 Pt II, paras 2–3.

Please fill out the form fields below to request an interview with Iain Clifford.