This is a sworn affidavit by a solicitor and it was dismissed as HEARSAY along with all the evidence on this page. We now have to wait 4 years for an appeal to the supreme court in Ireland. This is not a joke and if you would not mind posting this page to anyone such as media, politicians etc that might be able to help it would be much appreciated.
- Chief Charumbira accused of bullying Masvingo villagers (zimbabweelection.com)
- Affidavit of Loss (lawathand.wordpress.com)
- Supreme court asks J&K chief secretary to file affidavit on Kishtwar clashes (thehindu.com)
- Man allegedly raped 12-year-old relative in Athens eight years ago (onlineathens.com)
- Baby killer’s confession rejected (iol.co.za)
Select Committee on Constitution Minutes of Evidence
Memorandum by Mr A Dakers
International Treaties and the Royal Prerogative
Ministers of the Crown have, from time to time entered into treaties on behalf of the UK. It should be noted that the Ministers concerned must seek authority from the Crown by the Royal Prerogative before signing. Because the Monarch is constitutionally bound to respect the provisions of the common law, which were recognised in Magna Carta and declared in the Bill of Rights, such Royal Prerogative has the following restrictions. (The term “prerogative” means a right or privilege exclusive to an individual or class).
(a) Prerogative cannot be used in an innovatory way. If this were not so, the executive could dispense with Parliament and Judiciary and become an unlimited tyranny. Any future Attorney General could claim that an edict was part of a treaty and it would become unquestionable.
(b) The use of Prerogative power may not be subversive of the rights and liberties of the subject. (The case of Nichols v. Nichols stated “Prerogative is created for the benefit of the people and cannot be exercised to their prejudice”.)
Royal Prerogative may not be used to suspend or offend against Statutes in Force. This comes from the Bill of Rights and the Coronation Oath Act which specifies the following form of words; “Archbishop: Will you solemnly promise and swear to govern the peoples of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland . . . according to their respective laws and usages.” Prospective Monarch: “I solemnly promise so to do.” Note the similarity to the Judicial Oath. This is because the Courts dispense justice on behalf of the Crown.
The Limitations of Royal Prerogative are clear:
“No prerogative may be recognised that is contrary to Magna Carta or any other statute, or that interferes with the liberties of the subject. The courts have jurisdiction therefore, to enquire into the existence of any prerogative, it being a maxim of the common law that the King ought to be under no man, but under God and the law, because the law makes the King. If any prerogative is disputed, the Courts must decide the question of whether or not it exists in the same way as they decide any other question of law. If a prerogative is clearly established, they must take the same judicial notice of it as they take of any other rule of law.”
Bowles v Bank of England (1913) confirmed that, “the Bill of Rights still remains unrepealed, and practice of custom, however prolonged, or however acquiesced in on the part of the subject can not be relied on by the Crown as justifying any infringement of its provisions”.
The Bill of Rights 1688 is a declaration of the common law. It is also an operative Statute. It contains the Oath of Allegiance, which is required by Magna Carta to be taken by all Crown servants including members of the Armed Forces, MP’s, and the Judiciary. They are required not to “take into consequence or example anything to the detriment of the subjects liberties”.
The Oath required of Crown servants includes “I will be faithful and bear true Allegiance . . . “The qualification “true” confirms that allegiance is not required to a Monarch whose actions are unlawful.
It can be shown that we have recently had a coup-d’etat in this country. This was accomplished when the Government took control over the armed forces to use them for political purposes.
The Bill of Rights allows the Crown a standing army in peace time and who’s members swear allegiance to defend Her “in person Crown and dignity against all enemies”. No one else (except the Duke of Argyll), is allowed an army.
The Armed Forces Act 1996 purports to allow the Crown to set aside the requirement for annual army acts. It states that the Crown may authorise the armed forces by “Order in Council“. This provision would permit the Government to use the Armed Forces even if Parliament was suspended, and is contrary to the intent of the Bill of Rights.
Various defence reviews have resulted in the Government issuing mission statements that claims that the forces role in future is to defend the Realm and “to implement Government policy, in particular foreign policy”. This is from documents published by the MOD and available from them and on the Web. It means that the Government is now claiming that it can use the Army for its own purposes where the safety of the Realm is not threatened. Serving members of the Forces have been invited to sign new contracts agreeing to this new arrangement. Recent recruiting adverts for the Forces reflect this. A recent cinema advert for the RAF depicts a foreign “peace keeping” operation and has the slogan “Their country needs you”.
This is a equivalent to a coup.
13 August 2005
- RemovingTheShackles – The Beginning Of The Lie…Oh My! – 3 August 2013 (lucas2012infos.wordpress.com)
- A royal prerogative (powerlineblog.com)
- Three Letters which spell out TREASON (ironiestoo.blogspot.com)
- Does Ignoring The Constitution Invalidate Obama’s Oath And Thus His Right To Hold Office? (bluegrassbulletin.com)
- Monarch decision on war (paulflynnmp.typepad.com)
Repatriate Michael Campbell Campaign
Helpful addresses to support Michael.
Upper Merrion Street
94 St. Stephen’s Green
The Irish Embassy in Lithunia:
Irish Embassy in Vilnius,
Gedimino pr. 1
Telephone (+370) 5 2699460
Telefax (+370) 5 2699462
Lithuanian Embassy Dublin
LIETUVOS RESPUBLIKOS A
47 Ailesbury Road,
Ballsbridge, Dublin 4
Tel. +353 1 2035757
Pvavieniskiu # 1x
Rinktinés str. 5a
- Bring Him Home – Repatriate Michael Campbell (seachranaidhe1.wordpress.com)
- Repatration Campaign welcomes Council move (seachranaidhe1.wordpress.com)
- Free Michael Campbell – Send a Letter to Show Your Support Tal32 (seachranaidhe1.wordpress.com)
- Repatriate Michael Campbell (seachranaidhe1.wordpress.com)
- Please Take a Moment Out and Sign the Petition for the Reputation of Michael Campbell (seachranaidhe1.wordpress.com)
A young mother was travelling with her partner and her 10 year old son when stopped by the RUC/PSNI who followed them before deciding to stop and search them as they passed through a Loyalist area. She was told that they intended to carry out a search under the illegal section 44 and proceeded to conduct a search. They stated then that they intended to conduct a search on her 10 year old son who in fear clung to his mother and while searching him they pulled down the trousers of the youngster.
The young mother and child were absolutely distraught and this shows that the supposed new face of policing have no qualms about abusing young children to enforce their will upon parents.
RUC/PSNI target infants and family at Toy Store
Derry 32 County Sovereignty Movement would like to bring to the attention of the General public the ongoing targeting and abuse of Children by the Sectarian force who run amok under the banner of ”Police Service of Northern Ireland.”
The devolution of Policing and renaming of the Royal Ulster constabulary is merely what a lot of people had guessed it would be… A simple cosmetic exercise designed to try and lend a veneer of respectability around a Corrupt British Sectarian force.
- Harry Duffy – Murdered by the Ruc May 22 1981 – During Rioting After the Death of Pats (seachranaidhe1.wordpress.com)
- RUC memorial move sparks concern (newsletter.co.uk)
- Case Judge Lashes Out at Police !! (seachranaidhe1.wordpress.com)
- Psni/mi5 Tracking and Listening Devices Discovered on Local 32csm Activist’s Car (seachranaidhe1.wordpress.com)
- ON 15th JULY I WAS ARRESTED BY THE PSNI/RUC DURING AN EARLY MORNING RAID ON MY HOME (seachranaidhe1.wordpress.com)
” We are surprised and disappointed by the decision of the Supreme Court but nevertheless bound by its ruling ” - Peter Murphy.
LURGAN Republican Martin Corey has been refused permission to appeal to the Supreme Court challenging the refusal to allow his defence team access to ‘closed intelligence’ used to keep him behind bars for the past three years.
The 63-year-old has been held in Maghaberry Prison since 2010 after his life licence was revoked by the then Secretary of State, Shaun Woodward, on the basis of “closed material”. His defence team, led by solicitor Peter Murphy, have argued that they are prevented from defending against allegations that he is a danger to public safety because three successive secretaries of state have refused to disclose “confidential intelligence”. The lawyer says they will consider taking a human rights case to the European court at Strasbourg. Corey, who served a life sentence for the joint-enterprise murder of two members of the RUC in 1973, was released from prison on licence in 1992. In April 2010, when he was working as a grave digger, he was arrested and his licence was revoked. In 2011 he was refused parole.
During a High Court appeal in July 2012 Mr Justice Treacy found that the Parole Commissioners had acted in breach of the Lurgan man’s human Rights and that insufficient detail about the allegations had been provided to him. The judge ruled that Corey should be released on bail immediately but this decision was overturned within hours by then secretaty of state, Owen Paterson. Yesterday Mr Murphy said : “We harbour the greatest concerns about the authenticity and strength of these allegations that have seen Mr Corey, deprived of his liberty for over three years. “In short, we see this as internment 2013 and if there is any real confidence on the part of the secretary of state [Theresa Villiers] that only one of these allegations is true, then we would challenge those responsible for having Mr Corey incarcersted to initiate a proper investigation and if needs be charge Mr Corey. “We are surprised and disappointed by the decision of the Supreme Court but are nevertheless bound by it’s ruling. “We will now however be seeking to have our client’s basic human rights and specifically the right to challenge the ongoing deprivation of his liberty, vindicated by the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg”. Jim Mcllmurry, who acts as a spokesman for Corey, said : “Martin has come to expect little, and often less, when it comes to the justice system in the North of Ireland. “Our attendence at the Supreme Court in London would have given us the opportunity to expose many aspects of this case which I feel would not be found acceptable in any English court. “He has served what amounts to a six-year sentence without ever being questioned, charged or sentenced.”
With many thanks to : Allison Morris, Irish News.
- Dissident Ex-prisoner Has Release License Revoked (seachranaidhe1.wordpress.com)
- Message From Martin Corey – Maghaberry Prison (seachranaidhe1.wordpress.com)
- Government refused Supreme Court challenge over Abu Qatada deportation (london24.com)
- Supreme Court holds secret hearing (bbc.co.uk)
- Supreme Court refuses to hear appeal over Jackpine oilsands expansion in Alberta (calgaryherald.com)
Below I have posted an update on Martin Corey which explains the events of yesterday. Martin has once more been denied basic human rights through a corrupt system led by the Sec of State, Teresa Villiers and the British Government. Everything his legal Representatives try, to reach some sort of conclusion on Martin’s Administrative Detention is being thwarted. He has served a 6 year sentence to date with no charges leveled against him. This news is “Soul destroying” for Marin and his family. Please read and share.
Latest update on Martin Corey from his friend Jim McIlmurray.
This devastating news came without warning. Martin’s legal team has spent months building his case with such strong conviction that I feel it would have ensured his immediate release under the European Convention on Human Rights.
In July 2012, a Belfast High Court judge ordered Martin’s immediate release, which was overturned within hours by the then unelected Secretary of State, Owen Patterson.
This decision was challenged in the High Court and the case concluded unsuccessfully in December 2012 with the three-man panel of judges upholding the directive of Owen Patterson. At that stage, an application was made to appeal the High Court’s decision in the highest court in the country, the Supreme Court in London.
I spoke with Martin this evening and informed him of the news. Martin has come to expect little, and often accept less, when it comes to the justice system in the North of Ireland.
Our attendance at the Supreme Court in London would have given us the opportunity to expose many aspects of this case which I feel would not be found acceptable in any English court. The fact that the Secretary of State could hand out directives, dismissing decisions by High Court judges, would have been highlighted in the Supreme Court in London, exposing the fact that politicians in the north of Ireland rule the judiciary. The biggest disappointment has to be the fact that had we not received justice in the Supreme Court in London, we would have had the opening to bring Martin’s case to the European Court of Human rights. This is an avenue we can still explore, but without having exhausted every domestic court in the country due to our denial to attend the Supreme Court, it will be somewhat harder to achieve a hearing within a realistic timescale.
Martin has now been in Maghaberry Prison for over three years. The course of the law states, as I understand it, if you have committed a crime, you are: questioned, charged, tried in court, sentenced, and then imprisoned. Within the past three years, Martin has NEVER been questioned, charged, or sentenced. He has served what amounts to a SIX YEAR sentence.
We are currently awaiting a confirmed date for a parole hearing. Martin is entitled to an annual Parole Board Review. In February of this year the European Court of Human Rights stated that 13 months was an unacceptable period of time for a prisoner to wait for a parole hearing. Martin has now waited 19 MONTHS WITHOUT A PAROLE REVIEW.
Today’s announcement of the High Court ruling has been a bitter blow to the campaign for his release, but it will not undermine my determination in seeking his release. If anything, it will harden my resolve for justice.
We need to expose this continuing tyranny. British government officials are quick enough to state that the world’s worst human rights abusers are Burma, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Libya, North Korea, and Sudan. Over the past three years I have witnessed first hand everything these officials have done to Martin and I feel the British government is making a mockery of truth by not including its own name on the list above.
Inmate was on remand during death bid !
A PRISONER was granted bail as he fought for his life in a Belfast hospital after an attempted suicide in jail, we can reveal. But the bizarre circumstances mean the Northern Ireland Prison Service do not have to record Joseph Rainey‘s death as a ‘ death in custody ‘.
Once again, however, the Prisoner Ombuinye will be called in to investigate the tragic circumstances at the controversy-hit Hydebank Wood Prison in South Belfast. And it’s the first major headache for new Governor Paul Norbury who only took up he new post at Hydebank two weeks ago. The jail has been dogged with scandals and there have been a number of inmates who have died at the prison which caters for young offenders as well as women.
Last year the Governor Paul Alcock was suspended after inmates Frances McKeown and Samuel Carson took their own lives within hours of each other.The latest tragedy came as Joseph Patrick Thomas Rainey was in Hydebank Wood and Young Offenders ‘ Centre on remand awaiting trial for an attempted burglary charge. The 20-year-old, from Oldpark Avenue, North Belast, tried to hang himself in the prison’s Beech House but was cut down by prison officers. After 10 days on a life support machine, he passed away on April 19. The Sunday World has now learned that in an extraordinary twist, Rainey was granted bail in court – as he fought for his life in hospital a week after he tried to commit suicide. His case was listed for April 17 at Belfast Magistrates Court where he was officially remanded on bail and then last Wednesday, April 24, the charge was officially withdrawn – after he had died. On Saturday night the Prison Service said it ‘accepted’ that his death was not a ‘death in custody’ because he had been granted bail – even ‘though the event which led to his death occurred behind bars. And they confirmed the Prisoner Omdudsman, Pauline McCabe, would be investigating.
Part of that investigation will centre around the fact that Joseph Rainey was deemed to be a Supporting Prisoner At Risk (SPAR) by the Nortern Ireland Prison Service. But despite prison chiefs recognising he was a potential danger to himself they decided not to place him in a specially designed cell for such inmates. Prison sources have said the Prison Service could be let off the hook bencause of the technicality. “Incredibly they are not treating this as a ‘death in custody’ because Rainey got bail before he died,” says a source. “but it’s yet another embarrassing case for them to deal with. The new Governor had barely taken his coat off and he has now had this chucked on his lap. “It’s not a great start but the incident happened before he officially started in the job.” A spokesman from the Prison Service said on Saturday night : “As Mr Rainey was bailed prior to his death it is accepted that this is not a ‘death in custody’ but as the cause of death is directly attibutable to his time in custody, his death will be the subject of a Prisoner Ombudsman investigation in line with her terms of reference.” Paul Norbury was appointed governor of Hydebank Wood in February 10 months after his predecessor was suspended following allegations of misconduct.
It emerged rather surprisingly, that Mr Norbury was the only candidate who applied for the job which comes with a salary of £72,000. Mr Norbury has been a prison governer elsewhere since 1982, with his most recent role in Wymott Prison in Leyland, Lancashire. An interim governor has been running Hydebank Wood since Gary Alcok was suspended in May last year. He was suspended after a report into the circumstances surronding two young inmates who took their own lives within three hours of each other in May 2011. Both prisoners, Frances McKeown and Samuel Carson, had been subjected to bullying inside the jail. The suspension, after an interim report carried out by Ombudsman Ms. McCabe sent shockwaves through the Prison Service as it was the first time a jail Governor had been suspended from his post in over 140 years. In August Mr Alcock was charged with misconduct after a recommendation by an independant team from the Scottish Prison Service who were asked to carry out an investigation.
With many thanks to : Steven Moore, Sunday World.
- Cells prepared for G8 protest use (belfasttelegraph.co.uk)
- Prison cells readied ahead of G8 summit in Co Fermanagh this summer (belfasttelegraph.co.uk)
- Palestinian prisoners riot over fellow inmate’s death (timesofisrael.com)
- ‘Zygier distraught after wife visit on day of death’ – Jerusalem Post (jpost.com)