Elizabeth Windsor-Citizen

She's not a monarch at all. She is just like you and I. 

A citizen.

I am fortunate to have constitutional experts who take the time to write to me, to help me to unravel the illusion (delusion?) that I find myself surrounded by.

The words that follow are from Bob over at the Magna Carta Society. I wanted to share them with you.

Look:

Dear Captain,

"Perhaps your readers might be interested in this.

This country is not about Parliament and the people it is about the people and their elected Monarch. Parliament is no more than an administration and a legislature. The government of the day does not make our laws, it only draws them up and presents them to the Monarch who can then accept them or reject them on the people's behalf, only then is law made.

Parliament is no more then a hired hand with a strictly constrained and limited life and has no powers of its own. Only the Monarch can mount and dissolve a Parliament on the people's behalf. 

The Monarch is the physical embodiment of the people's sovereignty as made clear in the coronation ceremony which is an election, the people have a right to reject the heir apparent and choose a sibling just as the heir to the Throne has the right to reject the office, again as demonstrated at the time of the coronation. The Monarch is the people and the people are the Monarch, it is a marriage, the Monarch is wedded to the people as demonstrated by the wearing of a ring presented on behalf of the people at the coronation ceremony. 

The Monarch is the official Governor of the nation according to the coronation oath. The Monarch is obliged to delegate the authority of governance to a political party of the people's choice but not the power of governance which remains with the Monarch as representing the power of the people. As a delegated authority all decisions put forward by HM government have ultimately to be approved by the Monarch who retains the power of veto on the people's behalf. 

When in 1972 Queen Elizabeth II agreed to surrender the supremacy of the Crown to a foreign power it was an act of abdication for the Crown is supreme or it is but nothing at all.

It follows that as Parliament draws its legitimacy from the Crown since 1972 Parliament has been an unlawful assembly and has acted in a like manner. All of this was confirmed with the signing of the Maastrich Treaty in 1992 when the Queen officially became a citizen of the EU as announced by the then Prime Minister John Major in the House of Commons. No one can be both Monarch and citizen at the same time."  (Emphasis is mine. CR)

The email naturally raises a couple of questions, so I wrote back and asked Bob the following:

Q1. If the Queen is reduced to citizen, then what is the point of Lawful Rebellion? Revoking my allegiance to her is rendered meaningless. I might as well revoke allegiance to my next door neighbour, or you, or any other citizen of the UK.

A1. The Queen herself revoked our allegiance when she betrayed her coronation oath and so broke the contract she had entered into with the people.

Q2. Is she aware that she is no longer the Monarch?

A2. This I cannot answer as she has refused on a number of occasions to tell us. We wrote to the Queen, two Prime Ministers, the Attorney General, the Lord Chancellor, the Office of Constitutional Affairs and the Arch Bishop of Canterbury with this simple question: is the Queen still Constitutional Sovereign Monarch as she was on the day of her coronation in 1953? We wrote several times and never receives as much as an acknowledgement. Perhaps she sees herself as a suzerain monarch such as they have in Europe, but in this country we have no provision for such a monarch, we have constitutional monarchs only.

Q3. Is there any evidence of John Major uttering these words? Hansard, maybe?

A3. As far as I am aware John Majors boast following the signing of the Maastricht Treaty in 1992 was in Hansard but by now it may have been removed, it was certainly well noted at the time. His announcement was treasonous as it 'imagined the death of the Monarch' (the job being for life). His statement was also perjury yet he has never been impeached for either, indeed, the Queen later honoured him.

Q4. How many people know that the Queen has no more power than they do themselves?

A4. Most of the nation are unaware, I should think.

Bob added this information when he answered my questions:

"When the Queen took the coronation oath she swore to uphold our laws and customs, not foreign laws dressed up and made out to be our laws. The Queen is an expert on our Constitution and its constraints, it is a major part of her job. When she commanded her Prime Minister and plenipotentiaries Home and Ripon to sign up to the Treaty of Rome she must have known it was in complete contravention of our Constitution especially as the issue had been widely and openly debated in both Houses during the 1960s. Concerns about the constitutional consequences had been openly expressed in both Houses, indeed Lord Kilmuir wrote an open letter to PM Heath pointing out the constitutional consequences of signing up to the Treaty, as Kilmuir was a Privy Councillor at the time it is inconceivable that he would not have advised the Queen also. The instant Heath put pen to paper he dismissed himself from office, yet he was never impeached, nor was he impeached when he lied in the House of Commons in order to get the signing ratified by the passing of the European Communities Act 1972, in fact he was later honoured by the Queen.  It was quite obvious to anyone who studied the issue that the ultimate intention of the European project was anything but a mere trading arrangement despite the spurious title of Common Market, it was about total political unity, the making of a country called Europe which necessitated the destruction of the sovereign independence of the nations involved and in this the Queen could have been in no doubt.  Sovereignty is indivisible, it means complete autonomy, yet the politicians were claiming at the time that it could be shared. Most people have been fooled into believing that the Monarch has no powers, those who are acquainted with the Coronation Oath Act 1688 and the Bill of Rights 1689 know that at the time of the coronation the Monarch is vested by the people with enormous powers to ensure that no such event as this could take place. It is for this reason that the monarch is made Commander in chief of the Armed Forces who swear allegiance to the Monarch and so to the people.

Should a Parliament become despotic the monarch has the power to close it down and an Army to back the decision."

Fascinating stuff, I think you'd agree. And all of it done to cheering crowds. A clueless population.

My thanks to Bob for educating us.

If you have questions, fire away, and I will struggle with the answers. 

CR.