Department of constitutional affairs

  • 0 Replies

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.


Offline the leveller

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • 4128
  • +75/-0
Department of constitutional affairs
« on: February 17, 2017, 09:03:02 PM »
Department of constitutional affairs
Your book Inside Britain A Guide to the UK Constitution, starts out wrong from the cover. There is no UK or British Constitution. There are two constitutions in Great Britain The most important is the English Constitution , by the grace of King Edward III the Scots King David who had been captured in battle by King Edward was allowed to return to Scotland to rule Scotland as a vassal King to King Edward. King Edward allowed King David to keep Scottish law.
On page 7
You state it was never formally stated that the King or Queen must agree to any proposal of new law passed by both Houses of Parliament. This is simply untrue, Parliament is a tripartite agreement the Commons originate law, the Lords vet the law and dependent only upon their conscience they send it back for amendment, reject it or give it their assent, the bill them goes to the King or Queen who according to their conscience will reject the bill or give it the assent. If the King or Queen refuses the assent the bill is dead and there is no power on earth that can change that. Sir Mathew Hale Chief Justice in his Prerogatives of the King 1713 deals with this subject.
Joseph Chitty in his book A Treatise on the Law of the Prerogatives of the Crown and the Relative Duties and Rights of the Subject 1820 Describes the prerogative to grant the assent or reject a bill as a high and incommunicable prerogative. This must by definition outlaw the automatic assent. OH DEAR Parliament are making it up as they go along. Along with ministers use of the prerogative which is given by the people to the sovereign for their exclusive use and only ever in our best interests.
It has become accepted practice for the King or Queen to ask the leader of the party with the most seats to form a government. Accepted practice is not law, the King or Queen can if they so choose appoint an unelected Cockney orange seller to form a government.
On page 8
You state Magna Carta 1215 is one of the oldest written documents that has shaped the UK Constitution. Magna Carta 1215 was a reissue of the Charter of Liberties 1100, which was itself a reissue of the laws of William I, which was a reissue of the laws of Edward the Confessor, which were themselves a reissue of the first book of English Constitutional Law the Dome promulgated by King Alfred the Great in 886. Magna Carta 1215 was not a law as such it was a contract between King John I and his subjects as a contract between the King and the subject it is beyond the reach of Parliament. So cannot be amended or repealed legally.
We are a Monarchy we do not have citizens only subjects.
You state the UK Parliament is supreme. this is not true, Queen Elizabeth II is by law, the Common Law of Kingship as given by Sir John Fortescue Chief Justice in 1420 in his book On the Laws and Governance of England as well as the 1559 Act of Supremacy, and by Parliamentary vote on the 8th March 1784 when a vote was taken on where ultimate Sovereignty lay, with the Lawfully anointed King George III or with the House of Commons as the elected House. The King won the vote and by Parliamentary vote absolute supremacy lays with Queen Elizabeth II as our lawfully anointed Queen.
The Common and Constitutional law are higher law with the ability to strike down any bill which has passed through Parliament which is against common right and reason, which is repugnant or impossible to perform. Chief Justice Sir Edward Coke 1628. Far from having no special significance they are the most important laws we have and all are beyond the legal reach of Parliament.
On page 9
You state the separation of powers is not as clear cut as in countries with a written constitution. Firstly that is just not true, the executive Parliament make law, but have no say over how the police or courts implement that law. The police and courts are not answerable to parliament but to the law and only to the law. Using always as their guide the Common and Constitutional higher law.
Our rights and responsibilities are very well taken care of by our Common and Constitutional law. Far from needing the Human Rights Act  we gave it to mainland Europe whose record on human rights was appalling, the French Revolution and Nazi Germany being cases in point. Once again we are subjects not citizens.
All of our rights are absolute King Alfred the Great Hanged 40 Judges who conducted unfair trials. Our right to a fair trial, freedom of expression and assembly cannot be withdrawn. Kings who have tried this have been killed, William II (Rufus) Shot with an arrow through the heart. Edward II Killed with a red hot poker up his back passage Charles I his head was removed,  and James II was forced to flee the Kingdom.
On page 10
You state Magna Carta was an agreement drawn up between King John and the Barons. This is not true Magna Carta 1215 was drawn up by Archbishop Stephen Langton based on the Charter of liberties 1100 and placed before a meeting of the estates of England then presented to King John to sign. The estates of England are the most authoritive law giving body in the Kingdom they comprise the Lords Spiritual, the Lords Temporal and the Commonality of England who were at Runnymede in their thousands. The estates of England can and have fired and hired our Kings the last time was in Jan/Feb 1689 when they effectively fired King James II and hired William III and Mary II. The only time we have Crowned a King and Queen as our lawfully anointed Sovereigns.
Our membership of the European Union is now and always was illegal under our Common and Constitution Law. As a result all EU Treaties are treasonable acts by the government ministers who signed them.
On page 57
Citizenship of the European Union. If you are a subject of Queen Elizabeth II YOUR only duty of loyalty is to Her Majesty and her Kingdom we cannot without seeking naturalisation in another country owe any other duty, If we do seek dual Nationality our first loyalty under international and English law is to England and its Queen. The Maastricht Treaty purports to make Queen Elizabeth II a citizen of Europe, this is a constitutional impossibility the only being above England's Kings or Queens is God. This was decided by a meeting of the Estates of England meeting in May 1366 Select Documents of English Constitutional History Macmillan 1921.
On page 64
You state the Queen cannot be prosecuted. Neither the Sovereign nor anyone else in England is above the law. Chief Justice Henry DeBracton 1250 ruled the King is beneath no man but he is beneath God and rules England as Gods Lt and according to Gods Laws, and he is beneath the law for it is by the law he becomes King. I would point out King Charles I was put on trial and executed for his crimes. Crown immunity is a myth put out by government. In England we generally work on the assumption the King is perfect and can do no wrong. So when wrong occurs we hang the Kings wicked and evil advisors. The King cannot by law grant a dispensation from a penalty for an offence unless the King is the only Victim, Queen Elizabeth I forgave the Earl of Essex a personnel treason against her but removed his head when his treason was against her subjects. Patterson J refers in Stockdale vs. Hansard 1837.
Our forefathers chose to elect our Kings and this is the case today, up until James II a Knight in full armour would ride into Westminster Abbey and throw a mailed gauntlet on the floor saying are there any foul and base traitors here who deny this Prince's right to be Crowned King? If there are I will meet you outside.
The law on Kingship is both common law and custom, custom being any law which has been in use with the approval of the people from before time of memory. Sir Edward Coke set this at 1190 some 400 years earlier so any law older than 400 years is the custom and practice of England and is immune from repeal. In the beginning our forefathers who were no slouches decided the King must stand above his subjects in land money and splendour and resources were made available to the King. It was decided the King could not dispose of any money or land because that would diminish him as King. As a result Queen Elizabeth II is not permitted by the common law of Kingship and the custom and practice of England to do anything to diminish the Crown. So she cannot give away the Crown Estates or the Crown Jewels nor can she give anyone else the right to use the Royal Prerogative because to do so would diminish the Crown and that she is refused permission to do by law. I would refer you to Sir John Fortescue CJ  By the same token she cannot allow herself to become a citizen of Europe or any where else because that would place some one or some thing over her and that would diminish her as Supreme Governor of England answerable only to her subjects and God.       
                                                         The Queen
                                               What exactly is her job
Queen Elizabeth II is supreme governor of England, all her other titles supremacies prerogatives and superiorities stem from the fact she is first and foremost the Queen of England.
Constitutionally the sovereign is head of state and has the final say on all laws passed by parliament, the sovereign has the absolute right to accept a bill passed by both houses or to reject or return the bill for amendment. The sovereign is the fount of all law in this Kingdom. There is no other Kingdom or person on the face of this planet to whom the Kings of England take 2nd place. Not now not ever.
Or at least that is the constitutional position, the facts as they are today are very different, since 1714 the House of Commons has been on a power grab, they claim as the elected house sovereignty lies with them and not the Crown.
THEY ARE WRONG. Sovereignty lies as it always had with the Crown. This was confirmed after a vote in the house after King George III had fought a 22 year running fight with the commons as to who was sovereign him as King or the commons as the elected house, the King won the vote on the 8th March 1784 and was confirmed as a fully sovereign King by the House of Commons who withdrew their claim to be sovereign. Indeed any other result would have hanged them all for high treason contrary to the 1351 Treason Act. By imagining the death of the King as a fully Sovereign King.
We are told by parliament that the last time a bill was rejected by the sovereign was in 1707 when Queen Anne rejected the Scottish Militia Act. This is far from the truth Queen Victoria refused a bill on homosexuality because it contained references to lesbians on the grounds she did not believe women could engage in such activity, the bill had to be rewritten with all reference to lesbianism removed before it received the assent. King Edward VII refused what became the 1911 Parliament Act because it was unconstitutional and removed a protection from his subjects.
Since 1960 the Royal Assent has been granted by a committee of 5 Barons appointed by the government of the day to give what has become known as the automatic assent.
How did we reach this sorry state?
It started a long time ago in 1609 when the House of Commons first tried it on when they wrote to the House of Lords claiming to be the Knights, Burgess's, and Barons of the High Court of Parliament. The House of Lords replied saying they would never accept the commons as Barons and without them they were no court.
Next in 1667 the House of Commons told the House of Lords they could not amend a money bill a ten year argument between both house ensued until in 1677 the House of Lords agreed not to amend any money bills, this was the start of the problems we have today.
In 1714 Queen Anne died and King George I came to the Crown he spoke no English and so unlike all previous Kings and Queens he did not attend parliament or cabinet meetings so the government of the day in the commons were left to do as they liked. King George II spent his entire reign complaining that his ministers were Kings in his Kingdom and he was discouraged from attending parliament or cabinet meetings, we know that King George III fought back and in part reversed that trend. On the 8th March 1784 a vote was taken in Parliament and the King won the vote, so Queen Elizabeth II is the fully sovereign Queen of England.
We have dealt with Queen Victoria and King Edward VII. When King George V came to the Throne he was told by a government minister that he kept all his prerogatives but could not use any of them unless he had the backing of a government minister, when the King accepted this it was the final nail in the coffin of England. At the same time Asquith put through the 1911 Parliament Act which purported to remove from the House of Lords their ability to reject a bill, so we now have a situation where Asquith a Fabian prime minister had usurped the Royal Prerogative a clear act of high treason contrary to the 1351 Treason Act and a clear act of the subversion of the constitutional arrangements of Parliament with the 1911 Parliament Act a clear case of high Treason against the Constitutional arrangements of Parliament at English Common Law. As was the 1999 House of Lords Act which removed the hereditary Peers from their rightful place in Parliament. Every Parliament since 1911 has been an unlawful assembly and all laws passed by it are void under English Common Law.
       Blackstone commentaries on the laws of England 1768 and Chitty 1820                              
                                        Naturalisation  Denisisation
When some one comes to England and applies for British nationality and it is granted, they place themselves in a difficult position because under the law their first loyalty is to the country of their birth. If this country went to war with the country of their birth they should in law return to that country if they remain here they commit an act of treason against the country of their birth. If they return home and support their original country they commit an act of treason against us.
If they have children here those children take the nationality of the father so if the father originally came from India the child is Indian. If an English man lives in Russia and marries a Russian woman any child they have is English. If an English woman goes to Russia and marries a Russian man any children they have are Russian.
If a person comes here and is naturalised British they receive most though not all the rights of a natural born subject they can buy and sell inherit or leave property, what they may not do is sit in either House of Parliament, sit on the Privy Council. receive any order of Nobility or hold any office of public trust. ( in short they are never to be trusted ) The Sovereign is forbidden by the common law of Kingship from ever changing that law.
The object of that law is to keep England under the safe governorship of an English King and the indigenous people of England.
The oaths from the Act of Supremacy 1559 and the Bill of Rights 1689 both major constitutional law state.
No foreign prince, person, state or potentate, hath or ought to have any power, superiority, supremacy or authority ecclesiastical or spiritual within this land.
With this oath in mind it makes no sense to allow any naturalised subject to hold any public office, and most assuredly we must at all costs remove all Denizens from every office of public trust and do it now. We can start by not voting for anyone but a natural born subject at the next election and all other elections. Write to the chief Officer of your police force and ask him to arrest those natural born subjects who have placed denizens in offices of public trust for treason, write to your MP if he is a natural born subject demand he upholds the law, if he is a denizen order him gone in the name of the law.  
Albert Burgess
[email protected]   

Share this topic...
In a forum
In a site/blog

SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk