Recently the Men’s Fire and the Haudenosaunee Development Institute (HDI) have become engaged in a legal battle concerning clarification of the liabilities and limitation of HDI’s overgrowing sphere of Influence.
As I have written before in recent editions of this newspaper, I spoke about representation as a legal contract. And in any contract the intent of both parties need to be well represented and understood.
In a contract there can be no ambiguity or misunderstanding of the limits and responsibilities of all parties. Most representatives have a limited power of attorney that states what the person representing someone can and cannot do.
If one party believes that an ambiguity or defect has been observed then all representation must cease until that ambiguity has been cleared.
If someone has, by their own doing, unilaterally claimed to represent you, me or our clan and nations, without a verifiable proof of that claim, they have become a fiduciary De Son Tort, which may be regarded as owing fiduciary duties by a course of conduct that amounts to a wrong, or a tort, or someone who without a valid contract starts to meddle in your personal and interpersonal affairs.
In the pursuit of certain truths, the Men’s Fire, have launched a class action process that may crack the surface of the HDI phenomenon. I propose that if we are all entered into a legal battle over the reach of HDIs authority a mass tort could be used as a tool to further the cause of truth and justice for our right to fair and proper representation. If HDI bases its authority on the fact that 50 entities consented to its designations then it would suggest that 50 Groups have been affected and each of the 50 entities make up the mass tort groups, so that each family or so called shareholders can decide what is to be done.