In recent months, inflammatory rhetoric and unverified accusations have circulated online on one woman’s poorly written substack against Glenn Bogue (Spirit Warrior), an unconquered indigenous man from Northern Turtle Island (Kanata/Canada) and long-time advocate of legal and lawful autonomy and indigenous restorative justice. The most recent publication—released
anonymously under the guise of a “legal public notice”—is riddled with character attacks, contradictions, and unproven claims, against Glenn Bogue, that merit a critical and informed response.
This article sets the record straight with verifiable facts, constitutional grounding, and the international legal and lawful principles* underpinning Bogue’s work with the Alliance of Indigenous Nations (A.I.N.) International Tribunal. Legal is British Common Law converted into statute law, whereas Lawful is Indigenous Common Law protected by S. 35 of the Canada Act of 1982 and R v Desautel 2021 SCC 17 at [86].
⚖️ The Right to Create a Tribunal: Why Bogue’s Work Is Lawful and Protected
Contrary to the smear narrative, Glenn Bogue has every legal and lawful right to establish and participate in a private tribunal-see UNDRIP Art 3, ICCPR Art. 1 and the Vienna Convention on Treaties Art 31. In fact, the Court of King’s Bench of Alberta and all other Canadian courts actively securitize judgments, converting
them into Securities and issuing A Committee on Uniform Security Identification Procedures (CUSIP) number – tracked financial instruments and selling them globally on the international bond market (IBM). This process, known as judgment securitization, is not judicial impartiality—it is commerce/business done in secrecy (w/o the parties prior informed consent). This is why the Court of
Appeal for ONTARIO (ONCA) and the Supreme Court of CANADA (SCC) are registered on Dun and Bradstreet as A corporation doing business.
See Dun registration at Appendix A here to
If Canada’s colonial courts are engaging in commercial activity under the guise of justice, then the people and communities have the constitutionally and internationally protected right to create alternative, ethical Tribunals/courts for resolving disputes. A Council of self-determined Indigenous People was convened and deliberated over the drafting of a Treaty for over a year.
The AIN Tribunal emerged from those deliberations, buttressed by The United Nations Declaration On The Rights of Indigenous People (UNDRIP) Articles 27, 34 and 40, and by R v Desautel 2021 SCC 27 at [68] and [86]. An Invitation went from the A.I.N. Treaty Council for Bogue to become the Attorney General. Bogue’s involvement in the A.I.N. Tribunal is not fringe—it’s a legally and lawfully supported response to a Canada Inc.’s corrupt colonial court monopoly operating in violation of anti-trust laws. For example, if you want a hamburger you can go to Burger King, Mc Donald’s or Wendys, but if you want justice you could only go to corrupt colonial courts – until now!
A.I.N. Tribunal: Legally Recognized and Constitutionally Protected
On December 13, 2024, a letter from Gary Anandasangaree of Crown- Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada (CIRNAC) officially acknowledged the legitimacy of the Alliance of Indigenous Nations and its International Tribunal. Canada acknowledged the relationship as “Nation to
Nation”—affirming that A.I.N. is not rogue, but is legally and lawfully grounded in Indigenous sovereignty and international law. On March 23, 2025, Gary Anandasangaree was appointed Canada’s Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada, thereby, further cementing Canada’s acknowledgement
of the A.I.N. Tribunal. Under international comity, as confirmed in Pro Swing v Elta Golf (2006 SCC52), Canada must honor decisions from recognized international tribunals. Furthermore, in R v White, Montour (2023 QCCS 4154), the Superior Court of Justice-Quebec confirmed that The UNDRIP is now constitutionally entrenched into Section 35 of The CANADA Act, on consent, which consent limits Canada’s Sovereignty, pursuant to R v Hape 2007 SCC 52 at [43]. Therefore, The UNDRIP now entrenched into S. 35 is the Supreme Law of the Land, pursuant to S. 52 of the Constitution.
Conversely, the Supreme Court of Canada, registered on Dun & Bradstreet as a business, and being only a Statutory Court under Parliament (that is on Un-ceded Anishinabek Land), is NOT entrenched in the Canada Act, pursuant to the late Professor Emeritus of Constitutional Law, Peter Hogg, who observed the SCC is NOT in the list of entrenched bodies in S. 52 (2) of the Canada Act.
Finally, according to British Imperial Law, cited in Desautel [68], Acts passed only in England are NOT valid over the Indigenous People overseas who are Unconquered. Desautel at [30] confirmed the Indigenous People of Canada are Unconquered. We note that most Canadians are Indigenous,* meaning they are born here. *The term Indigenous is not exclusive to First Nations who are a culture, like the Irish, Italian, and French that must be protected. The UNDRIP has no definition of Indigenous
since we can all self-determine pursuant to UNDRIP Article 3 and the ICCPR Article 1, both of which international declarations have been ratified by Canada.
To be clear: The A.I.N. Tribunal has absolute legal (via S. 35) and lawful (pursuant to Desautel [86] ) footing, that its critics (Canada’s corrupt Judiciary and one unscrupulous woman) are not willing to admit, yet.
Discrediting the Smear: Unfounded Claims and Misinformation
The anonymous slanderous article claims Bogue isn’t indigenous, although the Law Society of Ontario (LSO) has always acknowledged his Indigeneity. Nonetheless, the LSO concocted a retaliatory suspension of Bogue after he had the courage to advise the mothers of 10 Metis children (who were taken by Canada although the children were found by the Court and Children’s Aid to be loving and bonded to their model parents), to file a charge pursuant to The War Crimes and Crimes against Humanity Act R.S.O. 2000 charge against Ontario Family Court Justice Mark Shelston, who aided and abetted the kidnapping of those 10 Metis children.
The defamatory article about Bogue fails to provide a single affidavit, investigation number, charge sheet, or court transcript with final disposition . The article further accuses Bogue of fraudulently charging clients—again, without offering receipts, client testimony, banking records or proof of any kind. The language used, by the substacks author is, emotional, speculative, and unprofessional evidence that it is a character assassination piece, against Bogue not a legal or lawful exposé.
Meanwhile, the A.I.N. Tribunal operates with transparency, and expedience as an alternative to corrupt colonial courts that intentionally protract litigation as a form of job security and profits for themselves. Glenn Bogue stands for alignment with the principles of the right to self-determination, freedom of association, conscience, and contract under Canadian law and international human rights treaties such as the Royal Proclamation of 1763 and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).
The Real Issue: Who Gets to Control Justice?
At the core of this controversy is a simple truth: Glenn Bogue and the A.I.N. Tribunal are breaking up the colonial court monopoly and offering a new paradigm that will make the old corrupt colonial system obsolete.
Restorative justice options
Arbitration outside of colonial structures
Recognition of Indigenous and private sovereignty
Lower costs and increased access to justice for underserved people
A.I.N. threatens a judicial monopoly that is a commercial entity pretending to be a Court.
When judges securitize debt and banks co-author legal doctrine (write the laws), those who offer independent solutions will be silenced, defamed, minimized or unlawfully imprisoned by the powers that be. That’s not conspiracy—it’s a well-documented pattern of legal exclusion (fraud, obstruction, breach of trust and retaliation).
Debunking the “Fraud” Allegation: Where’s the Evidence?
Let’s revisit a few important facts: Bogue was not disbarred, only suspended, on the grounds that he cited UFO’s in his Books of Isis series, which violated his Right to Freedom of Speech, and UFO’s were confirmed by the U.S. Congressional Inquiry into UFOs in July,
2022.
The complaints made by the Law Society of Ontario (LSO) are purely retaliatory for Bogue’s courage to hold a Canadian Judge, criminally accountable. The Law Society has a pattern of suspending, disbarring, and claiming lawyers are in need of a psychiatric evaluation if the defend the peoples rights and freedoms.
Claimants opt into AIN’s Tribunal voluntarily by their consent.
The A.I.N. tribunal has global judicial representation and has received acknowledgment from Canadian authorities.
If critics believe misconduct has occurred, the proper route is through formal lawful proceedings with evidence—not backdoor articles laced with ad hominem attacks. Until real proof (not hearsay) is presented in a court of law, these accusations
remain exactly that: baseless