PM Theresa May - RESIGN
0 have signed. Let’s get to 5,000!
Notice to Theresa May, Prime Minister
Theresa May as a privy councillor and prime minister you have a duty to the realm of England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland and the subjects of the same under our constitution to fulfil the wishes of the people.
You have failed in that duty and are without honour, you have perjured your oath of office and ill advised our Queen and committed Treason by continuing to uphold the laws of a foreign nation: Namely The European Union. You have one of two choices to make, 1. Uphold your duty as Prime Minister and declare the United Kingdom membership as null and void by VOIDING the European Communities Act 1972, Or 2. Resign from office as Prime minister for reasons of malfeasance and treason to the people of United Kingdom.
The 23rd June 2016 we the people voted to LEAVE the EU. If the government have not executed OUR full and final exit by the 29th March 2019 then the people are going to do it for them by taking back control of our government and Judicial system restructuring it and adhering to our written and sworn Constitution.
Her Majesties Coronation and Accession Oath are valid throughout her reign and/or her life and cannot be rescinded. The Cabinet or Privy Councillors cannot advise the Queen to breach her oath. As per stated by the Conservative “Cabinet” reply to John Bigley in 2015 via John Penrose.
The Coronation Oath Act 1689 is clear in it’s wording that her majesty will uphold ancient customs, rights and laws. This means the Magna Carta of 1215 which is outside the jurisdiction of Parliament is in full effect as an ancient treaty between the People and The Crown and The Declaration of Rights 1688 (a contract) and The Bill of Rights 1689 (Constitutional Statute) are a reaffirmation of the Magna Carta 1215 and OUR rights as subjects.
The House of Commons is a court in its own right. Her Majesty the Queen made a “declaration” in law on the 20th July 1988 as follows: In appendix A
Betty Boothroyd the speaker of the House of Commons made a “declaration” of Law on 21 July 1993 as follows: In Appendix B
What is it that binds our constitution? OUR oaths!
This confirms that our Constitution stands as valid today as it has at any time before us. The Wording is clear and as follows:
I A B doe sweare That I doe from my Heart Abhorr, Detest and Abjure as Impious and Hereticall this damnable Doctrine and Position That Princes Excommunicated or Deprived by the Pope or any Authority of the See of Rome may be deposed or murdered by their Subjects or any other whatsoever. And I doe declare That noe Forreigne Prince Person Prelate, State or Potentate hath or ought to have any Jurisdiction Power Superiority Preeminence or Authoritie Ecclesiasticall or Spirituall within this Realme Soe helpe me God.
You must now declare the ECA act 1972 as a treasonous Statute and declare that Her Majesty was ill advised to sign it by Patent. That the Lord Chief Justice Laws stated that a referendum had elevated it to Constitutional Status and by the same logic and ruling and the second referendum of 23 06 2016 it was made an ordinary Statute that must now be referred to the courts or Parliament (a court in its own right) and made void with immediate effect. It is within the power of the Courts and/or Parliament to “void” this statute as if it had no effect. The ECA 1972 to be made void, not repealed, to repeal it would give it legitimacy. It is an unlawful act. Unconstitutional in its entirety.
The subjects of this realm demand that the FCO 30/1048 be declared treasonous and put before the courts as a Fraud upon the realm.
The People demand as follows:
1. The ECA 1972 to be made void, not repealed, to repeal it would give it legitimacy. It is an unlawful act.
2. That PESCO be made void and any attempts to place OUR military under the control of a foreign state is Treason.
3. That all and any MP that has conspired against Her Majesty or Her Subjects is tried for treason including those to be “posthumously” tried for Treason.
4. A heinous breach of trust has occurred and is currently destroying this realm. It must stop now by way of your resignation and the replacement MUST be an English Constitutionalist.
HANSARD 1803–2005 → 1980s → 1988 → July 1988 →20 July 1988 → Lords Sitting
Her Majesty's Reply
HL Deb 20 July 1988 vol 499 cc1301-31301
§Her Majesty's gracious Speech in reply to the Addresses, delivered to the Members of both Houses, was as follows:
§"My Lords and Members of the House of Commons,
§"I thank you for the loyal and dutiful Addresses which on your behalf the Lord Chancellor and Mr. Speaker have presented to me on this Tercentenary of the Glorious Revolution.
§"In celebrating the Glorious Revolution with you, I too give thanks to Almighty God and pray that we may here rededicate ourselves to the principle of freedom under the law which animated the authors of that constitutional settlement 300 years ago.
§"My Lords and Members of the House of Commons,
§"It is fitting that the whole Parliament should assemble in this place to celebrate the events of 1688 to 1689. It was here, as the Lord Chancellor reminded us, that we met to commemorate the 700th anniversary of Simon de Montfort's Parliament of 1265. The four centuries which separated that Parliament and the Glorious Revolution saw some turbulent and violent episodes, but it was the momentous events of the 17th century that brought the fundamental constitutional issues to a head. The successive swings between the arbitrary rule of The King and arbitrary rule of Parliament became intolerable and it was by their acceptance of the Declaration of Rights and assent to the Claim of Right in 1302Scotland, that King William and Queen Mary ended almost a century of constitutional turmoil and uncertainty in the two Kingdoms.
§"Their peaceful joint accession symbolises the friendship which has so long flourished between the British and Dutch people. The warm and generous reception we received on our recent visit to the Netherlands was ample evidence that the three hundred years since William and Mary have only deepened that friendship, which we in Britain greatly treasure. It is therefore with especial pleasure that I welcome His Royal Highness the Prince of Orange, the Presidents of the two Houses of the Dutch Parliament and our other Dutch guests.
§"It is an irony of history that James 11, by uniting the major political interests in opposition to him, unwittingly produced a balanced Government not of King nor of Parliament but of the Crown in Parliament. Thus King William reported to the Convention which was to become Parliament, `there is no sure Foundation of a good Agreement between a King and his people, but by a mutual Trust. When that is once broken, a Government is half dissolved.'
§"That mutual trust formed the basis of the constitutional monarchy, and may well have spared this country a more violent revolution. The Revolution Settlement put into practice the cardinal principles of the sovereignty of the Crown in Parliament and the separation of powers, ushering in an epoch of freedom under the law in which, happily, we still live. Experience has taught that peoples can enjoy the full fruits of liberty, security and justice only when they are represented in a sovereign legislature whose laws are interpreted by an [independent judiciary].
§"The Bill of Rights and the Scottish Claim of Right of 1689, still part of statute law, are the sure foundation on which the whole edifice of Parliamentary democracy rests, and had great influence abroad, especially in the United States of America and in the Commonwealth. I am particularly pleased, therefore, to join in the welcome to the Chancellor and a delegation from William and Mary College, Virginia, with their wives, who attend by a Resolution of Congress, approved by the President.
§"I also welcome most warmly the Speakers and Presiding Officers of the Commonwealth and their wives, and the officers of their Parliaments, and offer my best wishes for the Ninth Conference of Commonwealth Speakers and Presiding Officers. May the principles of freedom and tolerance inspire your conference.
§"The Glorious Revolution won its title because it was initially achieved without loss of life, and with wide popular support. It was the beginning of a political process which has continued to the present day. More people were admitted to the active political life of the Kingdom, a trend which culminated in the introduction of universal franchise. It also marked the beginnings of a new era of religious tolerance. No one could claim even today that that state has been perfected. In multi- 1303cultural Britain, there is still a long way to go. But after 1688 there were signposts to point the way.
§"At the ceremony on 13th February 1689 in the Banqueting House, at which William and Mary accepted the Crown and the Declaration of Rights, the constitutional monarchy was set on the course which it has followed for 300 years. I look forward to visiting the Banqueting House with The Prince of Orange to see the exhibition which illustrates those events. Earlier this year, whilst in Canberra. I was delighted to open the new Parliament Buildings, which enshrine, in a handsome modern edifice. the same principles of the Crown in Parliament. However, this Hall, as the first and enduring symbol of our constitutional development, is of all places the most appropriate in which to celebrate the Glorious Revolution and to remind ourselves of the responsibility which rests on all of us to uphold the Parliamentary democracy which it put in place."
§The House was adjourned during pleasure.
§The House resumed at half-past two clock: The Lord Chancellor on the Woolsack.
Back to Tercentenary of the Revolutions of 1688–89 and of the Bill of Rights and the Claim of Right
As no doubt members will be aware, on 21 July 1993, the Speaker of The House of Commons issued a reminder to the courts.
Betty Boothroyd said: "There has of course been no amendment to The Bill of Rights . . . the House is entitled to expect that The Bill of Rights will be fully respected by all those appearing before the courts."
There is a provision in the Bill of Rights Act 1689 which states:
"Right to petition.
That it is the Right of the Subjects to petition the King and all Commitments and Prosecutions for such Petitioning are Illegall."
62. "We should recognise a hierarchy of Acts of Parliament: as it were "ordinary" statutes and "constitutional statutes." The special status of constitutional statutes follows the special status of constitutional rights. Examples are the . . . Bill of Rights 1689 . . .”
As you will be aware, the Bill of Rights is a "constitutional statue" and may not be repealed impliedly. This was stated in the case Thoburn v City of Sunderland, the decision commonly referred to as the "Metric Martyrs" Judgment. This was handed down in the Divisional Court (18 February 2002) by Lord Justice Laws and Mr Justice Crane (I will paraphrase, but have included a copy of the judgment's relevant sections 62 and 63).
63. "Ordinary statutes may be impliedly repealed. Constitutional statutes may not . . ."
This was upheld by Lords Bingham, Scott and Steyn in an appeal which went to the House of Lords on Monday 15 July 2002.
‘The undersigned do hereby agree with and support the ‘Notice to Theresa May, Prime Minister 13th February 2018.
Complete your signature
0 have signed. Let’s get to 5,000!