Need to do this properly

Dear C, So if this is not done Tais is also an "illegitimate" Bishop of Sabah (Registered Trustee), especially Timmie Liew wrote that 6th Bishop of Sabah is appointed by the House of Bishop when APSEA is House of BishopS, and House of Bishop is also Bishop of Canterbury. Maybe APSEA has passed on to the BoC to appoint 6th Bishop when that is in the Provincial Constitution. What is what now? We must be sure what is what now and not another Legal Challenge of negligence. Joshua Dear Joshua, There was no filing. That is why it still read Archbishop of Canterbury. Kenneth Thien should have filed the change but was negligent. They should get this done first before they amend the trustee and install the new bishop. If not, anybody can challenge the legality of Bishop of Sabah as it is appointed by the Archbishop of APSEA instead of Archbishop of Canterbury as presently stated. C Dear Rev C , Who had actually file the Summon in High Court and when? APSEA was formed in 1996 and Albert was appointed in 2006. Whose fault then? The incorporated name is "The Bishop of Sabah (Registered Trustee). not Bishop of Sabah - which is illegal. I had a few words with Dtk Roderic about Albert at the ASC AGM 2014 as illegitimate Bishop and he said nothing wrong. So how? If the going goes tough, ADOS may lose all assets. Joshua Dear Joshua, I think you have a case on the Archbishop of Canterbury. The Chancellor before the present one failed to rectified this item in the trustee incorporation Terms and Conditions. They have to file a summon in the high court to amend it to read the Archbishop of APSEA instead of Archbishop of Canterbury. The transfer of authority and jurisdiction has been done legally and stated in the Constitution but they failed to "update" the Trustee Incorporation. Cfu going by all the agreements in both civil cases over and against avcf, AVCF was illegitimate bishop in all context. Dear Bishop Tais and Dean, This motion may not be necessary at the AGM of ASC if there is firm commitment and full transparency of all transactions in ADOS properties and that this mistake be rectified immediately before the AGM on 29 March, 2015 Joshua Motion 4 -- The Mother Church - All Saints’ Cathedral must make sure that the appointed new 6th Bishop of Sabah be done legally within the Constitutions of Diocese of Sabah and Provincial Constitution of Anglican Church in South East Asia for the protection of all assets of the . Anglican Diocese of Sabah. Rational:- 1. Going by the sort of undesirable arguments and developments by the learned Counsel and team of advisors acting for the Bishop of Sabah and Archbishop in two civil suits since 2012 and ended on 24 November, 2104, any thing could be possible including Res Judicata and "non-legal entity". We must put the legality of the 6th Bishop of Sabah -Registered Trustee in proper perspective. 2. Which House of Bishop, when Bishop is singular? Can it be House of Bishop of Canterbury? House of Bishops of SEA Province? or remotely possible "House of Bishop" of Sabah? According to the not updated Certificate of Incorporation of the Trustees (Incorporation) Ordinance Cap 148, the name as incorporated under the name of Bishop of Sabah (Registered Trustee), but according the Conditions attached thereof was in Condition 6 that Bishop of Sabah be appointed by the Archbishop of Canterbury and in the case of Albert CF Vun, he was appointed by the sort of once “non-legal” entity APSEA and that Archbishop of “non-legal” entity APSEA. We must make this beyond all doubts legally and avoid any challenge for the 6th Bishop of Sabah. 3. Several titles I had seen is owned by the Bishop of Sabah while a land transaction done by the Keningau lawyer was right to show the owner as Bishop of Sabah (Registered Trustee). The lawyer acting for Albert Vun did state this but had he informed the late exBishop of Sabah? 3. The full ramifications (legal, religious and spiritual) could arise if the proper House of Bishop is not defined and ASC be under an illegal Bishop of Sabah with grave consequences when the 6th Bishop is once again challenged to perform. He may declare himself an "illegal" Bishop and free to do as he likes with the prerogative power still in the ADOS constitution. 4. God is the God of order and so ADOS must put in order many disputed matters internally only if the vested parties want to listen and not to be dragged and prolonged to the Civil Courts by sort of learned lawyers for hidden agenda especially with last minute withdrawal at the Federal Court. Maybe we need to have a new Diocesan Chancellor and the ADOS land registrar to put all the records in proper order.