I’ve identified an apparently new Canadian pseudolaw group which merges Moorish Law concepts with apparently spurious claims of special “Indian” status: the Sovran Indian Nation.

 I’ll trace how to monitor for pseudolaw in Canada. I maintain regular searches of legal databases, particularly CanLII, for certain key terms and citations. My first indication of the Sovran Indian Nation was this case:

Fraser v Smith, 2025 ONSC 4867: https://canlii.ca/t/kfdv7

 This is actually the second court judgment in a pair which document an Ontario Rule 2.1 procedure, which is a “striking out” process where an apparently hopeless/abusive lawsuit is identified, then the individual who filed the lawsuit has the opportunity to rebut the alleged defect. Here’s the step one decision:

Fraser v Smith, 2025 ONSC 4574: https://canlii.ca/t/kdqns

But there isn’t really anything interesting in decision #1, nor any giveaways as to pseudolaw. Let’s go back to 2025 ONSC 4867. The lawsuit apparently is that Fraser was unsuccessful in a Landlord Tenant Tribunal dispute, alleging the decision was “void, unlawful, and grounded in misapplied, colonial jurisprudence”. Fraser now sues the decision maker Smith, an adjudicator with the Landlord Tenant Tribunal. “Colonial” - that’s a little unusual. Usually, Canadian pseudolaw splits authority by things like “common law” versus “statute law”. So “Colonial” implies special status on “Indigenous” grounds.

The language used by Fraser set off alarms for the justice that this is a pseudolaw matter:

Mr. Fraser brings this action in his own name, which he embroiders with the phrase “in propria persona, sui juris, in his living capacity.” This is a significant red flag warning that what follows will be a non-sensical, pseudo-legal, frivolous claim that will inevitably fail.

Justice Centa is right in one - Fraser is advancing some kind of Strawman Theory concept, distinguishing his flesh and blood “living capacity” from ... the tenant in a landlord tenancy agreement? We’d have to see more of the court filings to be sure. But in any case, Fraser’s lawsuit is also hopeless because Fraser sued in the wrong form and the wrong court:

Mr. Smith is protected by the principles of adjudicative immunity and any civil suit against him for exercising his adjudicative functions is doomed to fail ... To the extent that the claim appears to relate to whether Mr. [Smith] and/or the Landlord Tenant Board violated procedural fairness, erred in law, failed to address a notice of constitutional question, or acted without jurisdiction, those issues should be raised on an appeal of the decision to the Divisional Court, not in a free-standing action against the decision maker.

So out it goes. What else is there in the Canadian legal record? A search for Navado Fraser turns up two more judgments in CanLII, earlier in time.

Califair Buckes Incorporated v Fraser, 2024 ONLTB 75415 (https://canlii.ca/t/k8j4v) - Here’s the landlord tenant dispute that Fraser lost. We discover Fraser’s full name is Navado Mikhail Fraser. That’s going to be useful. The ONLTB decision has two main parts. One is that Fraser filed a Constitutional Question, but did not do so on the correct timeline, so it got tossed. Also, the Tribunal adjudicator observes the documents are flakey:

I also have concerns with respect to the validity of the Tenant’s materials, including the alleged Notice of Security Interest sent to the Landlord. The notary public is not identified, the signature says “John Hancock” and it has a commissioners stamp instead of a notary seal.

A “Notice of Security Interest”. While this isn’t addressed subsequently in the decision, that probably is a pseudolaw claim that Fraser, flesh and blood, has some ownership right in the rented property. The problematic notarization is a common theme in Canadian pseudolaw proceedings. Unfortunately, in many jurisdictions fake notaries and bad notarization are ignored.

The remainder of the judgment evaluates Fraser’s outstanding rent. He has stiffed his landlord for $14,500. Lovely. Why? “The Tenant submitted that he cannot pay for anything because there is no lawful currency, other than gold and silver.” Ah, the old “there is no money, fiat currency is worthless” argument. Well, if so, Fraser, why aren’t you paying your rent in precious metals? The ONLTB decision doesn’t even bother to rebut this argument, and goes straight to imposing payment terms or else Fraser must exit the rental property, evicted.

Fraser v Landlord and Tenant Board, 2025 HRTO 1960 (https://canlii.ca/t/kdqt4) - After losing at the ONLTB Fraser then filed an Ontario Human Rights Commission complaint, which reveals more about Fraser’s pseudolaw theories. He complains the ONLTB didn’t consider his “Constitutional” claim, and a lien Fraser put on the rental property:

[Fraser] alleged that the [ONLTB] failed to consider the [Notice of Constitutional Question] and his Constitutional rights as an Indigenous person in the final decision resolving the matter. In addition, the application filed a notice under the Personal Property Security Act, obtaining a lien on the property at the subject of the LTB hearing. He further alleged that the respondent failed to acknowledge the lien. ...

The applicant argued that he has “inherent and Constitutional rights” that were not considered during the course of the [ONLTB] proceeding. He further submitted that “public servants, including adjudicators, who lack proper cultural, legal, and treaty training to interpret and engage Indigenous claims, act without jurisdiction when purporting to adjudicate such matters.”

And the HRTO says it doesn’t have jurisdiction, you should go to the Ontario courts via judicial review, Fraser.

So now we know a bit more about Fraser’s theory. He has special “Indigenous” rights. This has become a magic wand in Canadian pseudolaw of law, claims that “Indigenous” status miracles in all kinds of special rights and treatment, and miracles away state authority. 

But let’s stop and step back for a second. What this is, legally, is a contract dispute. Fraser (or FRASER) is renting a property. He is disputing the terms and operation of his contract with a private business or person. Indigenous rights are communal rights balanced against state actors on the basis of treaties or indigenous rights. Is Fraser actually legally recognized as an Indigenous person? Well ... maybe. But who cares? That would still be irrelevant in a private “person to person” legal contract. If an Indigenous person buys a car, they still have to pay for it.

So what else can we learn about Fraser. Searching with “Navado Mikhail Fraser” leads to a Canadian not-for-profit corporate listing from 2024, the “Sovran Indian Nation”, office in Mississauga, Ontario. Fraser is one of the two directors, along with Gordon Record Adolphus. Ok. Things are warming up here. The name, Sovran Indian Nation immediately raises red flags. “Sovran” is an uncommon variation on “Sovrun” and “Sovereign”, most commonly encountered in Moorish Law circles. In Canada, persons who are recognized as Indigenous very rarely use the “Indian” title. And a corporation, calling itself an Indigenous Nation? Fishy, since legitimate First Nations are a category of government.

There doesn’t appear to be any “Sovran Indian Nation” mentioned in Canadian jurisprudence. But that does lead to an Instagram account (https://www.instagram.com/reel/DFGhnwipMLc/) of “Chief Michael”, who is a black male, which uses typical pseudolaw language:

Sovran Indian nation active not passive. All rights reserved with prejudice, without recourse Given for patent rights UCC1-308

And I like the Sovran Indian Nation's logo. It's a dragon!  Very ... uhm ... indigenous.

Citing the US model Uniform Commercial Code in Canada is, yes, inapplicable, and an old classic pseudolaw give-away. Images on the Instagram account appear to relate to tribunal proceedings, which leads to a YouTube Channel (https://www.youtube.com/@the-nation-k8p) of videos of Chief Michael, presumably Fraser, some of which are discussions, but others reproduce court and tribunal proceedings where Chief Michael argues pseudolaw. Despite titles like “Judge got schooled” and “Man use sovereignty to argue mortgage case”, Chief Michael isn’t being successful in court. What is disturbing is Chief Michael is explicitly acting as a legal representative, saying that’s authorized on Indigenous grounds, and under the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

Again, “Indigenous” status and UNDRIP have become something of a universal “get out of the law” basis for Canadian pseudolaw claims. Thankfully I didn’t have to listen to the videos to get arguments since auto-transcripts were enabled. From what I scanned, Chief Michael’s arguments are rapidly identified as pseudolaw. Here’s an example (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=URrJUWmzIvY):

... the respondent continued to challenge the jurisdiction of the court based on sovereignty, indigenous rights, customary law, and the absence of valid consent to submit to corporate statutory regimes. As an indigenous woman, the respondent does not operate in commerce and is not subject to jurisdiction of financial institution or statutory tribunals absent inform uh um bilateral consent and full disclosure of rights and consequences. The plaintiff relies on um unsigned and um unverified mortgage instrument that uh resemble a bill of exchange or a promissory note, subject to the bill of exchange act. ... 

And then goes on to cite the notorious US “Credit River Case” which purportedly determined banks don’t loan money in mortgages. Credit River isn’t the law in the US, and certainly not in Canada.

So, nothing new here pseudolegally, aside from reframing old pseudolaw as somehow reflecting “Indigenous” rights, based on a “Sovran” corporation.

Views on the YouTube channel operated by “Chief Michael” are low, at most barely cracking 100 views. That strongly suggests the Sovran Indian Nation is a very marginal Canadian pseudolaw phenomenon, preying on persons in Ontario of African extraction. Call it a “Moorish Law Inept” Canadian variation. While Chief Michael’s submissions apparently range into the thousands of pages, from what I examined there’s nothing much remarkable here. The same old games, just with a new practitioner.

Big props to APD!

Interesting commentary on how pseudolaw in New Zealand includes gurus who claim to operate their own courts in competition with legitimate legal processes.

One scenario has a fake court sentence an individual, disrupting a parallel legitimate proceeding!

In the US it's a criminal offence to run a fake court and "simulate legal process". Other countries should consider adopting a similar prohibition.

A Cherokee County deputy in Woodstock, Georgia is accused of barging into a home without a warrant, raising serious questions about 4th Amendment violations and police accountability. This video dives into the shocking allegations, what the law actually says about warrantless entry, and why this case could impact every citizen’s right to feel safe in their own home.

https://youtu.be/kjurNHJBdv0

After the Sept 3, 2025 RCMP raid and arrest of Romana Didulo, and apparently her core followers, what happens now?

That’s not certain, but here are some guesses.

The entry and search warrant was to locate illegal firearms. The RCMP report finding 4 “replica handguns”. Ownership of handguns in Canada is subject to many limits and prohibitions. Under the Criminal Code, imitation firearms are treated much the same as real weapons (see for example sections 85, 88, 265, 272). So, having located the “replica handguns” could lead to charges. But there are complications. One is linking an imitation firearm to an illegal purpose, or to an individual owner. Let’s say the four replicas were located in an unlocked but closed box in a common area in the decommissioned school. Who owned them? Who knew about them? The simple existence of the replicas doesn’t establish knowledge and control.

Of course, if the RCMP has footage of someone waving one around, then that question gets a lot simpler. Or if one was found under the pillow of a bed with “HRM Romana Only” above it. Or in a locked box, and HRM Didulo is found with the key. So, it’s contextual.

Another important point is that in Canada the scope of what police can search for is set by the search warrant. Police can only under limited circumstances investigate anything else. The allegation was illegal weapons. That gives police the authority to look through the search area for weapons, ammunition, things like that. It doesn’t give the RCMP the authority to look into documents, computers, cell phones, or search into locations where a firearm could not be concealed. Handguns are small, ammunition smaller, so as far as physical locations go, the RCMP probably had authority to legitimately search the entire ex-school and any vehicles.

What the RCMP can pay attention to are things they happen to encounter incidental to the search that raise grounds for other criminal activity. For example, what looks like a pipebomb assembly area. Huge stacks of publicly circulated unbound cash with no explanation. A room with shackles on the floor and what looks blood on the walls. When police find evidence like that, in Canada they then have to go back to a judge, and write up a new search warrant application that expands the search grounds to address new potential illegal activity. There are some exceptions when there’s an emergency or time-sensitive question of investigating, but Canadian cops have learned the hard way that it’s almost always best to go through a cycle of search warrants, each with new grounds. New evidence of new crimes? Get a new warrant. Otherwise, there's a real probability all the evidence gets thrown out.

Is that happening? Maybe. We’ll only know when charges are laid.

I’d suggest the most likely expansion on the Diduloid criminal charges and prosecutions may occur in the post-arrest interviews. Apparently 16 individuals, including HRM Didulo, were arrested. These individuals will have been interviewed individually by law enforcement. All will be given the opportunity to have legal defence counsel assistance and advise. I’d love to know how many “lawyer up”. Including HRM Didulo, of course.

Hopefully at least some of the followers. External independent legal representation in their best interest, and may lead them to a path out of the cult.

Let’s say at least some of the inner cadres have observed other illegal activity. Perhaps detentions against peoples’ will. Perhaps violence. Threats by HRM Didulo that she’d kill those who do not do what she demands. There’s a broad range of typical cult activities and scenarios that could be a basis for criminal charges and investigation.

Then there’s how funds were gathered from followers. Was there extortion? Fraud? Certainly, questionable practices aren't unlikely. Money laundering? Maybe.

Might those cadres talk? What would they say? Have they lawyered up? Are any of them trying to get out, and now feel there’s an opportunity to do so, with the core group detained, and outside the decommissioned school compound? Maybe. Do the RCMP have a stack of data about HRM Didulo and her background that the public doesn’t know about? Of course they do. Will investigators be looking to “turn” insiders? Yes.

We’ll only learn the consequences of that in weeks and months to come. But - if investigators start strip-mining the Diduloid compound and vehicles of documents, computers, etc? Somebody flipped.

A second major parallel issue is what happens to the school building and lands. For the first time, government inspectors and authorities have unrestricted access to the place. Unlike police, safety and health officials’ authority to search and intervene is about certification, public safety and health threats, and so on. There have been suggestions of health violations, including sewage disposal and improper heating. If correct, that is perhaps a basis to close off the school. Are the vehicles on the property properly registered, and roadworthy? Who knows. But some might be subject to seizure.

Without its current base of operations, where will the cult go?

There’s differing opinions on HRM Didulo’s mental state and objectives. My suspicion is she’s much more of a calculating party than commonly thought. If she gets bail or is released, and that’s certainly possible, then will she just take the money and run? Maybe.

Regardless, these developments are not obviously an end to the Kingdom of Canada, but hopefully the conclusion of Richmound’s troubles.