Police take an Oath of Allegiance when joining the force and, that allegiance is that they sincerely serve the Queen in the office of constable, with fairness, honesty, conscientiousness and impartiality, maintaining basic human rights and, give equivalent due regard to all people to the best of their ability, making sure that peace be kept and protected, to stop all offences against people and property and, that while they hold that office they will to the best of their expertise and understanding, discharge all obligations in a loyal manner as stated by law.
Nevertheless, thousands of police officers are being ordered to obey illegal legislation, which endangers life, and property and, this is in conflict to their oath of office.
Each member of the Police Force and Armed Forces in the United Kingdom has an obligation to go against criminal law and, Senior Officers who have been informed of the details continue in issuing felonious directives, which shadow prohibited laws and, are bound by detention for exacerbating the serious unlawful offence of magnifying the British social code.
Higher-ranking Officers, with their fellow Constables have the ability and, allegiance to apprehend Ministers of Parliament who continue to act out and try to impose criminal laws.
A press release that was announced nearly 1 year ago in assisting the police resist criminality more effectively; the government disclosed that an oath had been planned to produce a policy for Police and Crime commissioners.
The oath is a sworn pledge of impartiality, in a promise to represent each section of the public without fear or favour. It is set out in an attempt to publicly be dedicated to being of service to every member of the public impartially, although at the same time identifying the significance of the running independence of the police service.
We take pleasure in some features of an elective government, but our social code is extremely undemocratic and, in fact, it’s not worth the paper it’s not written on.
The British social code is unwritten or, to be more exact, uncodified. This means that, unlike in most contemporary elective governments, there is no single official paper which describes how we are controlled.
Instead legal wizards point to a number of agreements, regulations and practices, another word for habits, which jointly make up the constitution.
• Acts of Parliament
• EU Law
• Common Law
• Royal Prerogative
• Works of Authority
This means you need a sizeable amount of learning and in all likelihood a degree in politics or law to fully comprehend how Britain is controlled because it is one of the least comprehensible, least democratic and least explicable constitutions in the democratic world.
Compare this with say, Ireland, which has a straightforward and easy to read written social code, clearly setting out who has what control, how they got it and, how they can be dismissed from office.
In any constitution, power has to come from somewhere and, must be inherent with someone. In Britain, it comes from the Crown and exists with the government and parliament.
The people hardly get a look in, being given only the infrequent opportunity to take part in the formal political process.
One crucial characteristic of the social code is the continuance of doctoral, inexhaustible and explicable control, all of which stem from the Crown, although most of these are exercised by the government, some remain to be exercised by the Queen.
The Queen herself maintains four essential constituted dominance. Exclusively the Queen herself may utilise these powers and, no member of government or advisor may practice these powers on her behalf.
Legally, the Queen has the authority to nominate whoever she desire to be the Prime Minister. Equally, if she so decided, she could commission no one to the office and could keep it empty.
There is no lawful prerequisite that the person named as Prime Minister be a Member of Parliament, but conventionally, the Prime Minister is the front runner of the group with an all-inclusive number of seats in the House of Commons and, as long as there is such a majority and, as long as the party interested in it has a clear front runner, the Queen will have no actual choice, but these things are not always so obvious.
In 1957, when the Conservative party was in office, it was not clear who should succeed Eden as a leader of the party and Prime Minister.
The Queen effectively selected Macmillan above Butler and, in 1963, when Macmillan was too sick to carry on, the Queen, in the words of her biographer, permitted herself to be deceived by Macmillan into once again making sure that Butler did not become Prime Minister, inviting Sir Alec Douglas Home to construct a government.
The Queen’s biographer illustrates this as the biggest political misjudgment of her reign and, eventually, in 1974 when there was a Hung Parliament no one party controlled a large number of seats in the Commons.
This time the party leaders took action wisely effectively keeping the Queen out up until it had become evident that Harold Wilson should be asked to form a minority government.
No Bill can become a legally binding Act of Parliament unless and up until it is given the royal approval. This means that the Queen has a veto on all laws passed in Parliament.
She has the power to refuse her approval to any law for any reason or for none and, were she to utilise this power no court of law could hold it illegal; she has remarkable power.
Even if these powers have not been used in the United Kingdom in numerous years, don’t be fooled. Legally, they still survive.
Not one of these powers has at any time been bestowed upon the Government by our chosen delegates in Parliament. They’re not elected powers, but have been bequeathed by the Government of the day directly from the Crown, avoiding the people altogether.
The Government’s powers of entitlement comprise the following:
• the ability to make agreements
• the ability to declare war and to position Her Majesty’s Armed Forces overseas
• the ability to take on civil servants and to alter the terms and conditions of their employment
• the conduct of diplomacy
• the control of Britain’s overseas territories
• the commissioning and dismissal of ministers
• the appointment of peers
• the grant of honours
• the assertion of public interest immunity
• the granting and revoking of passports
Furthermore, in recent years the exercise of several of these powers has shown to be intensely debatable.
So, it becomes visible that the public has no claim over what goes on in the United Kingdom because it’s all done and dusted by the time we hear about it. In that case why should we vote if we don’t get to express what we would like, or not like and, if that is the case we are no more than farm ants doing all the labour for the Queen Ant and all her institution.
I’m certain that there are a large amount of people out there that would sooner sit back and be instructed what to do, but I for one am not one of those people and contrary to popular belief, I do have a brain and, it’s not sitting on the side in a laboratory being pickled in formaldehyde.