Under article 144 A, B, C and D of the Código de Niñez y Adolescencia, the first thing the judge must do is IDENTIFY the parties, that they are under contract (registered) and have 'board tokens' or legal personas identified by cedula (23 of this code). This cedula is the highest form of evidence that a contract exists stating that we have re-lieged and waived the rights enumerated in the preamble of the constitution. This is, of course, why the FIRST thing on Judge Carlos Manuel Sanchez Miranda's agenda when he invaded our house was to ensure our 'abandoned and neglected' children were to be registered. The registration turns the codes into enforceable law. In that way, articles 5a), 10) and 11) of this code explain that those of this status are SUBJECTS to the obligations and duties of the Código de Niñez y Adolescencia.
These terms, obligations and duties can be defined and are commercial in nature and found in the law of obligations which is an element of contract law. Prior to the existence of that contract (which is titled with a similar appellation as the child using capitis diminutio maxima to disclose the status and a number to facilitate the system's need for automated referencing. With this document in hand, the judge can identify the player as a minor persona and he can then apply the codes within his judicial discretion. Until that point, 144a), the judge cannot sit and determine ANYTHING because there is neither a crime, nor a breached contract. Obviously his goal was not to follow administrative due process, but instead operate on behalf of the United Nations and PANI. (Admittedly, they offer far better ladders to climb for cooperative judges and bigger threats to those who do not play than I do.)
However, I am curious Judge Carlos Manuel Sanchez Miranda, how could my wife mock you when you refused to see or hear her? You hid from her and she was not permitted your name or the case file. As well, PANI attorney, Patricia Mesen Arroyo, told Birgitte there were no charges and refused to answer or rebut any of Birgitte's quires, constructive notices or affidavits. Obviously, if Birgitte was the one Dr. Juan Miguel Chaccon Cerdas wanted, then Birgitte would receive the case file, simply because it is illegal and unlawful to refuse discovery to the individual charged. The only thing that was mocked on September 6, 2011 in Puriscal, Costa Rica was the preamble to the constitution, article 194 and my wife's honor. That mockery was conducted by you,Judge Carlos Manuel Sanchez Miranda, the trustee of those sacred principles.
Part B of article 144 of the Código de Niñez y Adolescencia explains that once OUR children have been identified as Their minor personas under the principles of Parens patriae the minors will be explained the importance and meaning of the code and that they may have to be separated from their parents, if the judge deems it necessary (144b, cue to code 46). Imagine the utter density of this private tribunal reading my children their 'rights' when these codes are not rights, but contractual duties and that they must pay homage to the state (11a of the Código de Niñez y Adolescencia). Reading children their 'rights' is a completely moot point because, quite simply, the registered minor persons HAVE NO CHOICE. They cannot waive their 'rights' because these are not rights. The code explains a series of OBLIGATIONS that prohibits the child from saying no to its new guardian, the state. So what would the point be in ensuring MY children know state codes that they cannot understand or articulate, after all you declared that you would have your way with my children, regardless of our desires. That is exactly how the code reads. However, due to the registration (13.3) issue and preambular exclusions in (8), its applicability on them is determined by me, their father, not Judge Carlos Manuel Sanchez Miranda, lest we re-liege that fundamental right in the preamble. That right is entrusted by Judge Carlos Manuel Sanchez Miranda's oath in 194. These psychopsematic state social workers are possibly the sickest, most mentally defective people on the planet. The irony is that many of these 'child experts' have no children of their own and are licensed by an entity that cannot reproduce (the state). What does this indicate to you?
Even if registered children say no to the vaccines, they WILL receive them (43 of the Código de Niñez y Adolescencia) and they cannot annul the obligation. How can a right be forced? Simple, these entitlements enumerated here in the Código de Niñez y Adolescencia are not rights, they are obligations for the obligor (debtor) for the obligee (creditor). Civil law is all commerce. The problem these ambitious bureaucrats faced is that my children were never registered with the State of Costa Rica. You cannot be obliged to any man or group of men, be it government or any other civil artifice without consent. Anything else is tantamount to involuntary servitude which is unlawful as well as illegal.