A couple of days late due to me being away.
Christopher Booker’s Notebook, essential reading for a clear persepctive on the true nature of the EU, related the following tale in the Sunday Telegrah at the weekend. In 2003, when he was 19, Joe Mendy was on holiday with two friends in the Canaries. One evening, several Spanish policemen arrived, asking to be taken to their room. After a search the three young black Englishmen were taken to a police station and charged with counterfeiting four 50 Euro notes.
Two fake notes had allegedly been passed off in the town, one was found in the possession of one of the friends and a fourth was found in the room. The three men were held in custody for two days, subjected to racial abuse and given hardly anything to eat. When a court then told them to report back next morning, they returned to their room to find most of their belongings had been stolen.
Next day the court allowed them to return to England but told them they would be hearing from the Spanish authorities again. No more was heard until March this year. Officers of the Serious Organised Crime Agency arrived at Mr Mendy’s family home in Camden. His mother told them he was living in Liverpool, waiting to go to university. The officers gave her a number for him to call, which he did. When they didn’t call back, he rang them again and was told he would be hearing from Liverpool police.
The Liverpool police served him with a European Arrest Warrant. He was held in the cells overnight and driven to London. When he said he wished to appeal against the warrant, he was released on bail but in July his appeal was refused (he had been told such appeals are hardly ever upheld). He went to Heathrow, where he was arrested by Spanish police. On arriving in Madrid he learned that the Spanish courts were on holiday and was kept in jail for two months.
In September his Spanish lawyer told him that if he pleaded guilty he would only be given a small fine and a suspended sentence. But if he chose to maintain his innocence (there was not a shred of evidence against him), he could expect to remain in prison for a year until his case was heard. Reluctantly he paid 600 Euros and returned to England, having had to postpone for a year his entry to university.
To an almost empty House of Commons, when confonted with the case, a junior Home Office minister, Meg Hillier, said she could not discuss the case in detail. But she insisted the EU’s warrant was necessary to fight serious cross-border crime, and said "we must have faith in our European partners" that the system would work fairly.
Here is a classic example of the Queen and her government entirely ignoring constitutional constraint. Clearly the Queen and her government do not recognise the absolute supremacy of our Constitution. If they did, a Briton would not be treated in such a dreadful and arbitrary manner on the orders of foreign state agents while in his own country. The Serious Organised Crime Agency was created by the Blair government and, uniquely for any British police force, is not required to swear the Oath of Allegiance to the Crown. We can see now why its staff are not required to do so; plainly, its allegiance is to foreign law and foreign powers.
So if that supremacy of the British Constitution no longer exists, then the supremacy of the Crown no longer exists, and if this be so, then Parliament, which draws its legitimacy from the Crown is now an unlawful assembly, and our courts are acting out a charade. The English Law they exercise now being in the nature of local by-law, subordinate to foreign law as agreed upon by Elizabeth the Useless, the woman who swore to govern the British people "in accordance with their laws and traditions" and who then betrayed us.