Hi HVYMTL I thought I'd put my opinion on your comments. I will break it down so I don't forget anything.
"I agree with you that the system itself is not corrupt, but if the picture painted by Dean Clifford is right, then the problem is that the vast majority of the police and courts are ignorantly mis-applying the law and stepping outside of their powers (ULTRA VIRES), without even realising they are doing it."
I had not heard of Dean Clifford so put him into google and came across a public speaker with a lot of videos on your tube. I haven't watched much of what he has down (there seemed to be a lot of it) but what I did see (part of Q&A clarifying the facts) he appears to be a very gifted speaker. However what he was saying (in that clip) was not correct although I have to say he is very good at putting stuff across as the truth. The problem is there are a lot of people (including comedians) who are very good at giving stories that appear to make sense to those who want it to. I make a living out of convincing juries to let people off with crimes they are clearly guilty of on the facts(and I make a good living out of it.) The bottom line as I see it that no one has jurisdiction over your mind/soul unless you decide to let them. As for the rest of it the state/courts have jurisdiction over everyone in this country through both common law and statute law and there is no way a court will find against what legislation says like is described in so many of these videos. HOWEVER if your definition of "legislation is not applicable to me" is that you know the courts will punish you but you don't care then ok.
"To clarify, if it is true that the legislative rules of parliament truly apply only to agents / employees of the government when they are on duty and acting in that capacity, then every single conviction of a private individual under those legislations is ultimately fraudulent and achieved through the ignorance of both the person who gets convicted and through the ignorance of the police and courts."
IF it is true. It isn't true unless like in the scenario above you are know you will be punished by the courts anyway.
"I know the magistrates are basically ordinary people so they probably don't have a clue about it and I guess the police have been applying the presumption that legislation applies to absolutely everyone for so long (hundreds of years) that it is not even questioned anymore."
It does apply to everyone, you are of course entitled to ignore it.
"My feeling is that since ignorance of the law is no defence, and that since legislations are written in language which you need a law degree to understand properly, then it cannot stand to reason that everyone must act as it says in the legislations on pain of loss of their property and freedom, therefore the legislation can't really have ever been intended to be used the way they are using it these days."
Now I know that I have got a law degree but the basic core of the legislation is able to be understood by most people. Far easier then using a document like the magna carta anyway. I have covered several times the difference between "ignorance of the law" and "believing something is lawful." This is something that a lot of people cling onto (in my opinion) when much of what they actually talk about (speeding, no seatbelt, non payment of taxes) is understood at a fairly good level by most of the population.
"Furthermore, in just the last few years alone thousands of new legislations have been poured into the system by our joining the EU, and there is just no way that it can be reasonable to expect private individuals to have reviewed that legislation in order to observe it and remain on the right side of the law, so how can it be reasonable to believe that legislation applies to ordinary citizens?"
You are right about that, makes my life a nightmare!
but most of the legislation that comes from europe is a restriction on what the government can do. It comes in the form of directives which are instructions to countries to do something, NOT ordinary people. And most of the legislation created is to sort out existing legislation which changes parts of the existing legislation but not often the main part the public need to be aware of.
"if it actually does apply, then the system has to be corrupt and evil.
If we are to say that the system is good and proper then we must conclude that ignorance of the law and it's proper usage is systemic throughout our police and courts and that wall of ignorance is the only problem.
Personally I believe the latter to be the case rather than the former, because if the former is the case then the system is in fact a tyrannical dictatorship which is stealing money and freedom from the public with impunity, and therefore if it is right that Saddam Hussein should be hung for running a tyranny on the backs of his people then it is also right that most of our politicians should face the noose as well.
Ignorance of the law is no defence."
The last part I have grouped together as I broadly agree with your theory that if we had a tyrannical dictatorship (I don't think we have) then those responsible should be bought to task.
I will however say that many of the opinions expressed by people like Dean Clifford and indeed the media are (in my opinion) part of the reason there is such fear about the courts system, which is a shame as many people could find a lot of help within the court system, like for instance many of the people on this site who ask "how do I stop bailiffs taking my things and those of my families, as I haven't got the money to pay my debt." The short answer is seek assistance from the courts who will put into place an order detailing what you can and can't pay. This is just as binding on the bailiff as a court order to remove you possessions is on you.