Lance from the Peacekeepers: notes
How should Parliament function? : UK-Column – A Dissidents Guide to the Constitution:
https://www.ukcolumn.org/article/dissidents-guide-constitution-episode-1
https://www.ukcolumn.org/a-dissidents-guide-to-the-constitution-episode-2-common-law
https://www.ukcolumn.org/a-dissidents-guide-to-the-constitution-episode-3-rights
https://www.ukcolumn.org/a-dissidents-guide-to-the-constitution-episode-4-democracy-the-books
https://www.ukcolumn.org/a-dissidents-guide-to-the-constitution-episode-5-part-ii-a-lawless-lawmaker
https://www.ukcolumn.org/a-dissidents-guide-to-the-constitution-episode-6-rule-of-whose-law
Are you obligated to do something? Means a duty of obligation of mind and a duty of right and obligation, whether verbal, written or other means.
The Peacekeepers want to get the lawful concept into the Supreme Court. Our ancestors resolved these issues a long time ago but we have moved away from our constitutional documents.
We are all equal under the law, no one is above the law.
We cannot discriminate between each other; all are equal – what you can do, what I can do.
Miller V Cherry 2019 Case in the Supreme Court: https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/docs/uksc-2019-0192-judgment.pdf
The Supreme Court said in simple terms:
- The Government and Parliament- the Parliament is the boss of the Government;
- The Court is boss over the Government and Parliament;
- The People (you and me) are boss of everyone.
A simple video summarising the case: https://youtu.be/uPfRjMM64ag
To understand all equal under the law: no one can prorogue (send on holiday) Parliament, not the prime minister or anyone.
What is Lawful?
Anything can be legal but not lawful. Something legal must be tested to be lawful; it must be legitimate, reasonable and proportionate. Therefore, whatever Parliament does must go to judicial review otherwise it is just a regulation; it needs to be tested. We do have a structurally firm system but it is not used properly.
The Glorious Revolution
The Glorious Revolution, also called “The Revolution of 1688” and “The Bloodless Revolution,” took place from 1688 to 1689 in England. It involved the overthrow of the Catholic King James II, who was replaced by his Protestant daughter Mary and her Dutch husband, William of Orange. Motives for the revolution were complex and included both political and religious concerns. The event ultimately changed how England was governed, giving Parliament more power over the monarchy and planting seeds for the beginnings of a political democracy. The two new rulers accepted more restrictions from Parliament than any previous monarchs, causing an unprecedented shift in the distribution of power throughout the British realm. The king and queen both signed the Declaration of Rights, which became known as the Bill of Rights. This document acknowledged several constitutional principles, including the right for regular Parliaments, free elections and freedom of speech in Parliament.
Further reading: https://www.history.com/topics/british-history/glorious-revolution
The Bill of Rights says no parliament is sovereign! A limit was put on royal power. And this still stands that “nothing to be prejudice of the people.” There is no claim to authority except which you allow through contract (agreement).
Further reading: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/aep/WillandMarSess2/1/2/introduction
The System we find ourselves in.
Parliament has taken control;
The judiciary are not doing their job correctly;
Legislation is not put to the test (in court);
Men and women should be able to walk into a court and stop unlawful procedure, but are stopped.
All judged based law will be written down with a remedy and this is what is needed; this is then law; court-based determinations equal to common law, with a remedy to resolve an issue. Common law is part of the law of the country. Real law of the land is equity.
Earl of Oxford Case: Conflict between Common Law and Equity
The Earl of Oxford’s case of 1615 occupies a rather unique position in the development of the English legal system and is frequently referred to as the corner stone of equity in the modern English legal system. Which was concerned with a parcel of land in London which Henry VIII had gifted to Thomas, Lord Audley, as a reward for procuring the trial and eventual execution of Anne Boleyn By his will Lord Audley left the land to Magdalene College, Cambridge, who subsequently sold it and which were indirectly acquired by the Earl of Oxford.
Magdalene College then challenged the Earl of Oxford’s title to the land on the basis of a statute which prohibited the sale of College lands but against this was the fact that, as part of the original sale, Magdalene College had made an immediate transfer to Queen Elizabeth with the deliberate intention of circumventing the statute. Magdalene College action acted as the catalyst for the dispute between common law and equity, the dispute set the two Leviathans’ of the English legal system on a confrontational path. Sir Edward Coke, Chief Justice of the King’s Bench, and Thomas Edgerton, Lord Ellesmere, Lord Chancellor. Coke’s agenda was the curtailment of the powers of the Lord Chancellor. Coke’s complaint was that the Chancellor’s practice of granting injunctions in Chancery to prevent the enforcement of common law judgments which was in breach of statutes designed to prevent appeals from the common law courts.
The Earl of Oxford’s case alleged that the judgment of Coke G.J had been obtained fraudulently. The Lord Chancellor through the Court of Chancery then issued a common injunction on the basis of an unconscionable advantage which had developed in favour of the Magdalene College which denied the Earl of Oxford’s rights to adequate compensation for loss of title, resulting from the enforcement of the common law order against the Earl of Oxford for breaching the statute.
The two jurisdictions then become estranged and a stalemate situation ensued, with no compromise on either side which eventually led to the impasse being referred to the Attorney-General, Sir Francis Bacon, who partitioned the King. The Attorney-General acting on the authority of James I, upheld the use of the common injunction issued by the Lord Chancellor and concluded that in the event of any conflict between the two jurisdictions of common law and equity, equity would prevail.
Further reading: https://www.lawteacher.net/free-law-essays/equity-law/conflict-between-common-law-and-equity-equity-law-essay.php
In summary of the case:
The king says equity wins; whatever is right – equity says common law principle can fail so another remedy must be brought out – whatever is fair, right or just = equity. Injustice in court could draw equity (something is not fair) into the court.
Peacekeepers and the NOCNOC campaign (Council Tax)
Knowledge is nothing without application. Council tax is a harm. It is non-contractual. Those asking and making demands believe they are right and that council tax needs to be paid. We need to put them right as it is the “Lords Spirituall and Temporall and Comons assembled at Westminster” (Bill of Rights 1688) who are responsible as they are “lawfully fully and freely representing all the Estates of the People of this Realme.”
It is important to understand the process to put it over to the council/magistrates.
A bill/demand is posted through your door. You say no which puts you into dispute, thus a lawful excuse not to pay. No agreement, no contract.
From the Court: Liability orders may still be used BUT a memorandum of entry is absolutely needed otherwise no case exists.
In the Court: a Mackenzie friend (knowledgeable buddy) can be taken into court with the plaintiff.
Court proceedings can be viewed by members of the public, so try to visit council tax cases.
Go to court with your own case to “teach” the magistrates lawful ways. One thing to ask is: thank you for evidencing the claim, but can you evidence the debt? (Without a contract, there is no claim of debt).
Another point is: what are the magistrates’ obligation? The obligation should be to get to the truth.
Also: if they can send a bill through my door, I can do it too and send them a bill!
Another tool: use the Equal Treatment Bench Book Document to show in court that following this should be their job! It is you who own the court!
https://www.judiciary.uk/about-the-judiciary/diversity/equal-treatment-bench-book/
To do the Peacekeepers Council Tax Challenge, or to look at it: www.peacekeepers.org
Colin sent this informative list to make us all think about the taxes we pay:
UK TAXES
- Income Tax
- Capital Gains Tax
- National Insurance
- VAT on goods & services
- VAT on Silver but not gold
- Corporation Tax
- Council Tax
- Water rates ‘Tax’
- Gas & Electric ‘Tax’
- Business Rates
- Bank payroll Tax
- Petroleum Revenue Tax
- Fuel Duties
- Oil & Gas extraction Taxes
- Road Tax
- Inheritance Tax
- Stamp Duty
- Tobacco Duties
- Spirits Duties
- Beer Duties
- Wines Duties
- Cider Duties
- Betting & Gaming Duties
- Air Passenger Duty
- Airport Tax
- Insurance Premium Tax
- Landfill Tax
- Climate Change Levy
- Aggregates Tax
- Driving Licence Fee ‘Tax’
- Passport Fee ‘Tax’
- Fishing License ‘Tax’
- Parking Fines ‘TAX’
- Speeding Fines ‘TAX’
- Driving Offences ‘TAX’
- Car parking fees ‘TAX’
- 1921 census info ‘TAX’
- Road & bridge Toll
- BIK Company car Tax