Friday, June 24, 2016

BREXIT and the Scots - what could we possibly do on merit

My blog appears to be hacked by someone in Afghanistan - could you get lost.

I was going to upload my thoughts on Brexit as follows: we deserved the outcome as we are not a democratic country in the UK and Europe - we know why - you cannot get Justice or Access to Justice but instead compromise of our rights. Plus Labour needs to deal with Tony Blair ex-PM - unjust war = misconduct in public office - noticeably there has been a consultation paper out on this offence at the moment - why? I put in a substantive Late response.

Anyway, my thoughts on the Scots outcome of Brexit -

Firstly, our history shows that we could utilise "implication". The Union of the Parliaments in 1707 "implied" a bill of rights on the English, ie that you would not meddle in Scots religion, education or laws. This argument could be used concerning the current debacle as a consequence of brexit and the Scots position. We are already in Europe and have voted to remain therefore ... by implication we are European as we have never left the EU. Could this assist us to get an "express/implied amendment to article 50" rather than an "express out and referendum on independence" would it be quicker than another referendum. Even although they are trying to use the "express" terms and conditions of article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty, does this afford any merit if we use "implied" terms and conditions, especially where there is mutual trust and confidence in Europe by the Scots.

Secondly, an argument could be that article 6 of the Treaty of Rome (or is it Amsterdam) is prima facia known as the "loyalty clause" and this clause trumps article 50 of the Treaty of Lisbon - is there merit in this argument. Thirdly, could we use an article 177 preliminary reference which became article 234 preliminary reference and mayhave changed further to send a question via the domestic courts of Scotland to the EU on the above two points, which would then be sent back by way an answer (or any other relevant question) to be interpreted into Scots law. Thinking out loud - keep your own Counsel and do your own research.

Oh well - perhaps the Police can now look into my claims made over many many years that I am being subjected to organised crime and corruption at the top of the English judiciary and academia - "believed" to be Professor Richard Susskind OBE as he is clever but not intelligent and as IT Adviser to the Lord Chief Justice: is sophisticated enough to do the hacking, surveillance, intrusion, with others including trespass, assault, poisoning etc - you can throw the criminal legal book at him including treason along with his side kick Woolf/Lairg/McKay/Blair/Genn, perverting the course of justice or perjury Molyneux/Cross/James/Biggs and others. Dr Farmer and Dr Ford appear up to no good either with others - anyway someone is hacking so in order to prevent intellectual espionage I upload to my blog.

Would welcome feedback"