What is the Law when those who are subject to it refuse of fail to obey it?
It is only on the occasions when the citizen finds that the authority has given cause for concern and the matter is so serious that it becomes necessary to complain. Many ordinary citizens fall at this first hurdle because although they realise it is wrong and should not have happened they lack the will (for too many reasons to mention) to even protest, let alone, ask why or complain. They may even believe that the authority was entitled to do the thing that was worrying or caused injury.
Then the citizen who does complain decides to go through the “complaints procedure” at this point the authorities close ranks. All the authorities realise that the longer the complaint remains stuck in the system, the more likely it is for the complainant to give up. They also realise that all the other authorities will close ranks and even if it went to court, they would hold the advantage and experience has shown that few citizens can afford the legal costs of taking the matter to court.
The authorities employ legal professionals who act in the interests of their employer and follow the authorities directions and make statements, that the authorities have decided will support the case. The Judges accept these statements because the solicitor is bound by his rules of conduct never to deceive the court. The Judge assumes that the litigant in person would be confused and not expected to know the legislation and CPR.
Knowing all this the authorities guard their insurance premiums and rather than admit the wrong and learn lessons put matters right, they make the work of the complainant hard by complicating the issue so that they can misunderstand and answer by providing prepared responses that have been created from previous complaints that avoid any possible responsibility.
The complaint then goes to the next hurdle where it is dealt with by the ombudsman who has too few staff to deal with the volume of complaints that have been referred, (and if the ombudsman refers the complaint back to the authority, he must be prepared to go over the matter again, so there is an attempt to close the matter at that point.
It should be remembered that the complaint may have originated through a solicitor’s theft, or other serious crime, and could involve a number of different authorities. Or it could have originated from the failure or refusal of a High Court Judge complying with international law. The abuse of law by Officers sworn to obey the Law have been described as tyranny.
The often quoted maxim; “There is no greater tyranny than that which is perpetrated under the shield of Law and in the name of justice” – Montesquieu. has been quoted by judges internationally giving a clear determination in Law that when any person acts in a cruel or oppressive way without the authority of law is a tyrant and has betrayed the law. It is an act that fraudulently misrepresents the administration of law by H.M. Queen Elizabeth II, and acts as a traitor to abuse the rights of all citizens. It is the duty of all citizens to protect our rights in law. “He who is silent and bows his head dies every time he does so. He who speaks aloud and walks with his head held high dies only once”. —Giovanni Falcone. The elected representatives MPs must do their duty and speak up. If they fail to do so they side with the tyrant and must be held responsible for any action or inaction that allows this tyranny to continue. The Law is there for all citizens, or it can serve no useful purpose.