Understanding the true illegality, of the way, in which the British are governed today.

What I have always pondered, and, as yet, have never received any answers in verification to, is
why less than 400,000 Members of all the political parties in the land; should so dominate the
lives of nearly 60 Million adults. Where is it written? Where is the 'legal instrument'? That permits these less than 400,000 political party Members, dominating, every aspect of the lives, of all?

This is not Democracy.

DEMOCRACY, a true, DEMOCRACY, is government of, "The People"; by, "The People"; and,
for, "The People". Where, "The People", govern themselves.

Government by the domination of the political parties is not democratic at all.

Furthermore, in reality, and, in LAW; such Governing has no legality at all. It flouts and breaches the 'precedent' of LAW, (By which Parliament claims its "Supremacy"), by 'prejudicing' "The People"; and, this is wholly outlawed and illegal, as determined by the,

"Statute in Force/Bill of Rights 1689/The Said Rights Claimed".

This 'Statute' makes it abundantly clear, by ‘precedent’ in British Law, that in Parliaments 'enactment' of "Article 9", and, any of the other 'Premises' of that, “Bill of Rights”; that,

"NOTHING SHOULD PREJUDICE THE PEOPLE".

The political party domination of "The People" by both Government and Parliament maintained thru the Offices Procedures and Practices of the WHIPS in Parliament; 'prejudices' "The People" because, their political party 'diktat' and instructions issued to Members of Parliament, each week, overrules and supplants, all, 'rightful influence', of the 'Constituent'. And, this travesty, is specifically, declared unlawful, as determined by the, "Statute in Force/Bill of Rights 1689/The Said Rights Claimed".

The British are not governed by LEGALITY at all. They are governed, by mere, MYTH.

Today, there is a "Reigning Monarch" sitting on the British throne, that has not honoured the terms of the "Original Contract' from the first day she sat upon that throne.

 In 1688, King James Ii was removed from the throne by the CONVENTION Parliament) because he was accused of "Breaking the Original Contract betwixt King and People". The, CONVENTION determined, that, in doing this, he had abdicated the throne. They declared the ‘throne was vacant’ and Prince William of Orange became the next King. The CONVENTION further declared, in respect to the ‘Original Contract’ and, the "Lineal Descent", by ruling that,

 "The contract is as binding on the Successor as well as it was on the deposed, and, if the Successor broke the contract as well, he also can be deposed".

ELIZABETH THE SECOND has not honoured that 'contract' since the very first day she became the "Reigning Monarch". She has never 'acted' as "Head of Government", Monitoring Parliament;
in the interests of the ‘protection’ of Subjects of the British Crown.

 She has recently presided over an illegal and an unlawful creation of a, 'coalition government', that was not chosen or elected by the People at all; but, that, was foisted upon the Nation, by corrupt political party leaders assuming they could create a new government, entirely on their own. In doing this, these political party leaders wholly 'ignored' "The Peoples Vote" of the General Election of 2010, and, in this, they 'prejudiced' "The People".

 Yet, ELIZABETH THE SECOND did not lift a finger, in this travesty, to protect, Her Subjects, from this abuse. "The Peoples Vote" of the General Election of 2010 determined that there should be a 'Conservative' led 'Minority Government'. David Cameron was the leader of the Conservative Party at that time, and, he should have governed as a 'Minority Government'; or, he should have informed, Her Majesty, that he could not govern. Whereby, there would have been a fresh General Election; to elect a new legal Government.

 Her Majesty, the Queen, in spite of the terms of "Constitutional Monarchy" still has the right, and, duty, to intervene. She, has, the 'rightful power', to protect Her Subjects from any abuse. She miserably failed in that responsibility.

 

The true purpose of a British Monarchy is not to open new establishments, host garden parties, and travel the World promoting British products and prestige. The sole true purpose of the British

Monarchy is to 'protect' the Crown's Subjects. There is no other purpose, at all:
 

"Allegiance is given to the Liege Lord, for the protection of the Liege Lord"

 The, very criterion, of the "Original Contract".

 There can be no legal dispute or argument in respect to the true role of the ‘Reigning Monarch of England’’, as determined by LAW. That role, as a priority, is to provide the protection of, “Subjects of the Crown”. And, in order to assist the ‘Reigning Monarch’, in carrying out that responsibility, the Monarch is provided with two ‘legal instruments’: “The Royal Assent” and “The Royal Prerogative”. Both, solely designed, for the ‘protection’ of the, “Subject”.

 The Royal Assent provides the ‘Reigning Monarch’ with the right to grant or refuse to grant ‘assent’ to the Laws created and passed by Parliament. (The ‘Reigning Monarch’ is required to ‘Act’ as ‘Head of Government’, monitoring Parliament, in the interests of the protection of Subjects); in this regard.

 The Royal Prerogative provides the ‘Reigning Monarch’ with the right to:

1. Encourage Her Ministers of Government.
2. Warn Her Ministers of Government.
3. Whenever, the wishes of the People conflict with the actions of the legislators (Parliament); to order, the dissolution of Parliament.

In the aftermath of the General Election of 2010 when the political party leaders decided that they could ‘ignore’ the Peoples vote and create a ‘coalition administration’ entirely on their own. This, was the clear and direct evidence, that, the ‘wishes of the people conflicted with the actions of the legislators’. ELIZABETH THE SECOND, then, had the responsibility and duty, to intervene. She should have used the “Royal Prerogative” to order the immediate dissolution of Parliament. But, she did nothing. She failed to protect Her People; and, in consequence, the country today has a wholly illegal government.

CONCLUSIONS:

ELIZABETH THE SECOND has ‘Broken the Original Contract betwixt King and People”; thereby, The British throne is as vacant today as it was in 1688. When, King James II was removed from the throne.

The Offices, Procedures and Practices of the WHIPS in Parliament; ‘prejudice the people’ and, thereby, has no legality at all.

The creation of the present ‘coalition administration’ masquerading as government, ‘prejudice’ the People; and thereby, has no true legality at all.

The British, denied the right, of a ‘Written Constitution”, a proper ‘Bill of Rights’, and, a “Supreme Court of Law” whereby they can challenge the ‘executive’; and, being, denied the protection of the ‘Reigning Monarch’; end up, having no protection of LAW, at all.