Letter from HM The Queen
Many people have written to The Queen with the same concerns that I have. Britain's sovereignty and the liberty of the British people are being threatened. The Queen's constitutional duty is to defend them.
I think those thousands of letters may be having an effect.
I wrote to Your Majesty recently about the Lisbon treaty. Ms Bonici sent a reply. It didn't have my name on it as she has apparently been very busy dealing with many letters similar to mine.
So many of your subjects have written to Your Majesty precisely because Your Majesty is a constitutional monarch. Your Majesty's subjects expected that a constitutional monarch would uphold the constitution. A part of that constitution is the Coronation Oath, which Your Majesty swore before God and to the people.
Archbishop of Canterbury: Will you solemnly promise and swear to govern the Peoples of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and of your Possessions and the other Territories to any of them belonging or pertaining, according to their respective laws and customs?
Queen: I solemnly promise so to do.
Archbishop: Will you to your power cause Law and Justice, in Mercy, to be executed in all your judgements?
Queen: I will.
At the time Your Majesty swore the Oath we British were sovereign and made our own laws. Our traditional custom is to freely govern ourselves. With Royal Assent to the Lisbon Treaty Act and Your Majesty's subsequently signing the ratification document, Britain becomes a mere province of the European Union. Your Majesty's subjects will be governed by Brussels, and not by Your Majesty's government.
It is Your Majesty's right, nay, it is Your Majesty's duty and obligation, to refuse Royal Assent to Acts of Parliament that threaten the People's laws and customs or Your Majesty's constitutional position. . .
The September letter:
Your Majesty, It is the right of the British people to petition their monarch.
My first petition to Your Majesty was a letter of the 25th of June. It was answered by Mrs Sonia Bonici, who said, “I should explain to you that there is no question of Her Majesty, as constitutional sovereign, refusing Royal Assent to an Act which has been passed by both Houses of Parliament”.
I wrote to Your Majesty again on the 11th of August. I have not received a reply to my second letter although it makes a constitutional point of the gravest importance for Your Majesty and the British people and the continuation of the Monarchy itself.
In Canada, in 1964, Your Majesty made unequivocally clear what the people expect from their constitutional sovereign - “The role of a Constitutional Monarch is to personify the democratic state, to legitimate authority, to assure the legality of its measures and to guarantee the execution of its popular will.”
Parliament may try to persuade Your Majesty to obey it, but Your Majesty has pledged to defend the laws and customs of the people and Your Majesty’s constitutional writ extends to protecting your people from a tyrannical Parliament and from any unjust statute that Parliament may pass.
What would Your Majesty’s father, our dearly beloved George VI, have done if he had been told by Parliament to give away Britain’s freedom and sovereignty to Hitler? Would he, could he possibly have agreed to do Parliament’s bidding?
The answer, again, was made by Your Majesty - “I shall work as my father did throughout his reign to uphold Constitutional government and to uphold the happiness and prosperity of my peoples”.
In giving your Royal Assent to the Lisbon Treaty, Your Majesty has ignored the wishes of your people, which were also ignored by Parliament.
Tyrannical is a realistic description of Parliament, which promised the people a vote on the EU’s Lisbon Treaty and then broke its promise. Negligent is an honest description of many MPs who admitted that they had never read the Lisbon Treaty.
Foreign leaders are agreed that the Lisbon Treaty is the same as the EU constitution. Parliament is forcing the British people to accept this unwanted political settlement, which is sweeping away their long-treasured liberties, laws and customs, which have stood them in such good stead for hundreds of years.
Our Declaration of Right and Bill of Rights plainly state:“That no foreign prince, person, prelate, state, or potentate hath, or ought to have, any jurisdiction, power, superiority, pre-eminence, or authority, ecclesiastical or spiritual, within this realm”.Giving any foreign body authority over the British people is unconstitutional.
Britain’s Constitutional government includes a sovereign, a parliament and a judiciary. Are we to believe that Parliament’s overweening domination has reduced the champion of the people, Your Majesty, to a cipher, who cannot speak for us or defend our liberties and whose Royal Assent means nothing because it can never be denied?
Perish the thought.
It was and is still Your Majesty’s responsibility as our constitutional monarch to refuse Parliament your Royal Assent when Parliament passes unconstitutional statutes.
The second reply from Buckingham Palace shows a slight and perhaps significant change.
The Queen may be concerned that a grave threat and a great constitutional question face her:
I urge anyone who has not written to express their concerns to The Queen and everyone who has written to write again, and to write or meet with the Lord Chancellor.
For those who love liberty, the British Constitution is here.