READ NOTICE OF TREASON ALL
THE WAY THROUGH
By Philip Johnston, Home Affairs Editor
21 September 2000 - PROTESTERS will accuse Tony
Blair of treason today to highlight the perceived threat
to British sovereignty posed by the forthcoming European
Union summit in Nice.
A "notice of treason" - naming Mr Blair, Robin Cook,
the Foreign Secretary, Jack Straw, the Home Secretary,
and Lord Williams of Mostyn, the Attorney-General -
is to be handed in at courts across the country. Campaigners
say that by the end of the week they will have submitted
at least 500 notices laying information under Section
One of the Treason Act 1795 and Section 3 of the Treason
Felony Act 1848.
A group calling itself Sanity - Subjects Against the
Nice Treaty - says ministers are preparing to give up
national control over justice and home affairs matters.
While the Government is adamant that decisions over
foreign policy, defence, taxation and borders should
remain subject to the veto, they have been more equivocal
over these two areas.
In a recent letter to Christopher Gill, Tory MP for
Ludlow, Charles Clarke, Home Office Minister, said:
"The Government has not said it will accept qualified
majority voting for justice and home affairs issues.
We have said that we shall judge each case on its merits.
Where QMV is in Britain's interests, we will accept
it. Where not, we will not."
This falls short of the unambiguous pledges given by
ministers to retain the veto in other areas. Euro-sceptics
believe that a move to majority voting in justice and
home affairs will result in the adoption of a common
legal framework known as corpus juris and the extension
of the powers of the EU police body, Europol.
In his letter, Mr Clarke said that none of the corpus
juris recommendations had been formally proposed and
Britain believed that the legal changes they would involve
were outside the competence of the EU.
But a spokesman for Sanity said: "If justice and home
affairs pass into the EU's control, then the EU's corpus
juris project will ultimately be adopted by majority
voting. They will abolish the British right to trial
by jury and will make all British subjects and others
in the UK subject to arrest and incarceration by a European
public prosecutor and a so-called "judge of freedoms"
with no public hearing nor obligation on the prosecution
to exhibit any evidence for as long as they choose."
21 Sep 2000
NOTICE OF TREASON
I received the following this morning,
. Note - I could be one of the
reasons for the recent Fuel Demos, a CIVIL DISORDER SQUAD.
(plus - it appears that a harmonisation of European
Fuel Prices is being planned, what else?)
NOTE: Perhaps some of your friends (in the UK) would
like to join in this? [Source: M ]
LAYING INFORMATION OF TREASON BY TONY BLAIR AND OTHERS
Are you willing to give a little more time to our cause?
If so, please read on.
This proposition is new, and different. It is also
even more vital and pressing than the expenditure by
local authorities on the euro.
This is about treason. It is about the Nice Treaty
[due to signed in December]. It is about galvanising
the public into opposing the Nice Treaty. And it is
short and sweet. We are calling it SANITY - Subjects
Against the NIce TreatY.
We have prepared a document which accuses Blair, Straw,
Cook and Lord Williams of Mostyn (I ll explain his role
in a moment) of plotting treason.
The document follows (is enclosed if going by post).
Assuming you agree with the contents, and are willing
to help, this is what you need to do: 1. Look up your
nearest magistrates court in the phone book.
2. Call them, and ask for the name of the chairman
of the bench.
3. Complete all the blanks on the document.
4. Take it to the court on Thursday 21 September, or
as soon after as possible,and hand it in.
5. Get a receipt for its delivery.
6. Phone the CARP office (01 245 266466). Tell us how
many have been delivered, and where. You have no further
obligations or duties. You have no risks, financial
or otherwise. You may be interviewed for clarification
of the contents, but you are not personally pursuing
a private criminal prosecution. You are simply doing
your duty and laying information. Any subsequent action
is up to the police.
We hope to have at least 100 identical documents delivered
all over the country on the same day - Thursday 21 September
2000 - just before the Labour Party Conference.
We will announce what is happening to the media that
morning, when we also hope to stage a photo session
for the press in London, when Torquil hands his document
in at Horseferry Road at 11.00am.
If you have time, and the resources, we invite you
to make several copies of the document and ask your
friends and other supporters to complete and deliver
them as well. The more the better. Ideally, we would
like to have 500, 1000, perhaps thousands more delivered.
But involving others is not a must. If you can - fine.
If not - no problem.
As with CARP, we hope to keep announcing the running
total to the media.
Finally, Lord Williams. He is the Attorney General.
Technically, he can take over all criminal prosecutions
"in the public interest", and then abandon them "as
not being in the public interest"! (That's what happened
with Norris McWhirter's case against Douglas Hurd many
years ago.) Since he is a senior law officer he is being
named as a defendant, so that he cannot act in his own
cause. In any case, he is legitimately targetted because
law enforcement is part of his bailiwick, and that is
what is under threat from corpus juris.
Finally, a word of sincere thanks and admiration to
everyone who has worked so hard on the CARP polls project.
We have achieved a huge amount of publicity (admittedly
after a slow start), we have stirred up a hornet's nest
within the local authorities, and we now know what we
can achieve by acting informally together. And the results
are still to come.
(on behalf of Torquil Dick-Erikson, Tony Bennett, Rodney
Howlett, Richard Buttrey, Malcolm Wood, Idris Francis,
Maurice Mitford-Blackburn and Mark Croucher)
NOTICE OF TREASON
Presentation of Information
Names of Suspects:
1. Rt. Hon Tony Blair, Prime Minister of the United
Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
2. Rt. Hon Robin Cook, Foreign Secretary of the UK.
3. Rt. Hon Jack Straw, Home Secretary of the UK.
4. Lord Williams of Mostyn, Attorney-General of the
Address of Suspects: 10 Downing Street, LONDON SW1
To: The Chairman of the Bench,__________________________
Misprision of Treason
(The Signing Away of Britain and its Laws at the Treaty
I am a loyal subject of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth
II, and wish to remain so. I am aware of her solemn
Coronation Oath to the nation in 1953, to govern the
British people according to their laws and customs .
As a loyal British subject, it is my duty to bring
to your attention any actions or planned actions
which may amount to treason by any individual or
group of individuals, or which may do so in the future
if not prevented, so that the appropriate action can
It is AN OFFENCE at Common Law ("Misprision of Treason"
- see Halsbury s Statutes, 4th Edition, Vol. 11, p.
818) for any person who knows that treason is being
planned or committed, not to report the same as
soon as he can to a Justice of the Peace.
It is an offence under Section 1, Treason Act 1795
within the realm or without...to devise constraint of
the person of our sovereign, his heirs or successors
. It is also treason to take any action which would
overthrow (or tend to overthrow) the laws,
government and happy constitution of the United Kingdom.
Accordingly, I am supplying you with the following
information about the treason that I humbly believe
will undoubtedly be committed by the Prime Minister
and his colleagues if he signs the draft Treaty of
Nice in its present form:
1. CIVIL DISORDER SQUAD
It is now public knowledge that at Feira in Portugal
on 19 and 20 June this year a meeting of the Heads of
Government of the European Union was held to debate
and approve a document entitled: Strengthening the Common
European Security and Defence Policy , which will set
up a European Union gendarmerie , Police Riot Unit or
civil disorder squad , initially of 5,000 men, to be
run in parallel with the military rapid reaction force
[an incipient European Army] that is being developed
. As detailed below, this civil disorder squad may,
by Qualified Majority Vote of the countries of the European
Union, be granted powers to arrest and detain British
subjects. For that situation to be permitted by the
British Prime Minister, Foreign Secretary, Home Secretary
and the Attorney-General, who is responsible for legal
advice to them, would I believe be an act of treason.
2. AREA OF FREEDOM, SECURITY AND JUSTICE
On 12 April this year, the European Parliament approved
in its plenary session, with a large majority,
a resolution containing proposals for the Intergovernmental
Conference leading to the new Treaty due to be signed
i n Nice on 8 December this year, which will
further amend the existing Treaty of Rome.
Proposal n. 53.4 of the proposed Treaty seeks to abolish
the national right of veto by the introduction of
the co-decision procedure and Qualified Majority Voting
for all measures relating to the establishment of the
area of Freedom, Security and Justice (that is, a new
Single Judicial Area ) i.e. on all matters relating
to the British criminal justice system. Further, proposal
n. 53.2 demands the recognition that the [European]
Court of Justice has full jurisdiction over all measures
relating to the implementation of the area of Freedom,
Security and Justice .
3. EUROPEAN COURT OF JUSTICE AND THE QUEEN
It is public knowledge that the said European Court
of Justice in Luxembourg is not one of her Majesty
s Courts and is not subject to the jurisdiction of Her
Majesty s Courts, being located outside the realm.
Indeed, on the contrary, the European Court of Justice
appears convinced that Her Majesty's very person is
subject to its own jurisdiction under Article 8 of the
Treaty of European Union, signed at Maastricht,
by which every person holding the nationality of
a Member State shall be a Citizen of the [European]
Union . Indeed, Rt. Hon. John Major, the then
British Prime Minister, informed the House of Commons
at the time he signed the Maastricht Treaty that the
status of the Queen had been degraded to that of a Citizen
of the European Union .
4. ALIEN (FOREIGN) CONTROL OF BRITISH ARMED FORCES
AND BRITISH POLICE
Although the Government has claimed that there are
no plans to use the (aforementioned) civil disorder
squad for law enforcement or crowd control within
the European Union , it must be observed that
if the above mentioned proposals to remove all measures
concerning the area of Freedom, Security and Justice
from national control were to be incorporated into
the new Treaty, this proviso could readily be reversed
by Qualified Majority Voting, against which any opposition
by Her Majesty's representatives would thereby be rendered
null and powerless.
The intention to set up a single European Army and
a single European Police Force has many times been
publicly stated by leading politicians in the European
Union, not least the European Commission President,
Romano Prodi, who called for rapid progress to be made
towards establishing a single European Army, so that
the said civil disorder squad could then be deployed,
at the behest of one or more of the various organs of
the European Union, who are not her Majesty's Servants,
even within the realm. Her Majesty s Government has
already decided to place some of her armed forces under
European Union control by promising to contribute to
the EU s Rapid Reaction Force , initially consisting
of up to 60,000 men.
Similarly, an incipient European Police Force, EUROPOL,
already consisting of over 2,000 officers, has already
been established. Based in The Hague, Holland, its officers
have already been granted, by virtue of European Union
decisions and regulations passed by our Parliament,
lifetime immunity from prosecution whatever offences
they may commit in the course of their duties, contrary
to common law.
A civil disorder squad, such as proposed by Heads of
Government in Portugal, could be deployed at the request
of either the Rapid Reaction Force or EUROPOL or other
organs of the European Union.
5. AN ALIEN (FOREIGN) SYSTEM OF JUSTICE, AMOUNTING
TO THE OVERTHROW OF THE LAWS OF BRITAIN
It has been public knowledge for more than two years
that a plan has been drawn up by various organs of the
European Union, known as Corpus Juris (see 9th Report
by the House of Lords, Session 1998-9, House of Lords
Paper 62, HMSO, 1999), which seeks to introduce a single,
uniform system of criminal justice for all Member States
of the European Union, with supremacy over national
systems of criminal justice, which would gradually be
phased out and replaced.
This plan would unquestionably do away with the
right of British people, officially confirmed and
vouchsafed by Magna Carta in 1215 and maintained for
eight centuries since, to be tried by their peers (see
Article 26.1 of the said Corpus Juris , given on page
42 in Appendix 3 of the said House of Lords Report).
The Magna Carta provisions relating to jury trial remain
part of the constitution of the United Kingdom as all
expert commentators agree.
Moreover these rights and freedoms were reaffirmed
in the Declaration of Rights 1688, and entrenched in
Statute Law in the Bill of Rights 1689. Both also specifically
included the words "all officers and ministers whatsoever
shall serve their Majesties and their successors; for
all time to come". On 21 July 1993, the Speaker of the
House of Commons issued a reminder to the courts: "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
If Corpus Juris were to be voluntarily adopted by the
United Kingdom, or was imposed on the United Kingdom
by Qualified Majority Vote of other Member States, it
would tend to - and indeed encompass - the overthrow
of the laws, government and happy constitution of our
country, a breach of Section 1 of the Treason Act 1795,
which stands on the UK s Statute Book to this day. To
sign any Treaty which would in any way permit this to
happen would unquestionably appear to constitute the
offence of treason.
6. THE RIGHT TO BE BROUGHT BEFORE A MAGISTRATE SOON
The aforesaid Corpus Juris would also do away with
the right of Britons not to be detained in custody for
over 24 hours (up to 96 hours for terrorist offences
and in other special circumstances) without a public
hearing. At such a public hearing, the prosecution must
exhibit a prima facie case if required to do so.
Contrary to this most precious right of the British
people, universally acknowledged to be a key safeguard
against state power and tyranny, Article 20.3 (g) of
the said Corpus Juris , given on page 40 in Appendix
3 of the said House of Lords Report, provides for the
detention of suspects to crimes by a politically-appointed
European Union Prosecution Service, without charge for
periods of up to six months, renewable for three months
thereafter on an unspecified number of occasions. In
short, it amounts to a power to detain a suspect indefinitely
without either trial or hearing. To put it another way,
this would mean the end of the centuries-old British
tradition of Habeas Corpus .
7. THE MISLEADING REASSURANCE ON CORPUS JURIS GIVEN
TO MAGISTRATES BY LORDIRVINE OF LAIRG IN MAGISTRATES
JOURNAL , SEPTEMBER 2000
In the September 2000 issue of Magistrates Journal
, Lord Irvine of Lairg makes the following statement
in response to concerns expressed by Magistrates about
Corpus Juris :
"I should also make it clear that the Corpus Juris
recommendations have not [yet] been formally presented
to any meeting of the Council of the European Union.
Many of the recommendations, if adopted, would conflict
with the legal traditions of many Member States, including
the United Kingdom; however as matters stand they do
not even have the status of a formal proposal".
Lord Irvine concedes, then, that there are indeed recommendations
to implement Corpus Juris and that they may be considered
by a future meeting of the Council of the European Union.
Nowhere in his statement is there a cast-iron commitment
by the Government to repudiate all aspects of Corpus
Juris for the United Kingdom. As shown above in this
letter, Corpus Juris can be implemented by the European
Union by Qualified Majority Vote if the Prime Minister
signs the Treaty of Nice in its present form.
By claiming elsewhere in the Magistrates Journal article
that Corpus Juris is not an appropriate way forward
Lord Irvine fails to provide a categoric rejection of
it. His words are as potentially misleading as the claim
made by Edward Heath at the time he signed the United
Kingdom into the European Economic Community that this
was only a trading agreement and would lead to no loss
of essential national sovereignty .
8. REMOVAL OF BRITISH VETO OVER JUDICIAL MATTERS
Please note that Proposal 53 of the resolution passed
by the European Parliament s plenary session of 12 April
2000 will, if adopted in the Treaty of Nice, remove
the power of veto by the Member States, including the
United Kingdom, to stop the introduction by the European
Union of any measures relating to Freedom, Security
and Justice .
9. USE OF ARTICLE 280 TO INTRODUCE CORPUS JURIS
Proposal 25 of the aforesaid European Parliament resolution
will, if adopted, amend Article 280 of the existing
Treaty to allow the [European] Union to take legislative
action in criminal matters in respect of fraud , while
the intention of various organs of the European Union
to use precisely Article 280 of the existing Treaty
as a channel for the introduction of Corpus Juris ,
by Qualified Majority Voting, was explicitly manifested
by representatives of the European Parliament giving
evidence to the House of Lords (cited in the aforementioned
House of Lords report, pages 84 & 85 of Oral Evidence).
10. REFUSAL OF THE BRITISH GOVERNMENT TO DEMAND A VETO
OVER MATTERS OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE
Her Majesty s Government, led by Rt. Hon. Tony Blair,
has manifested the intention of approving the said proposal
to set up a European Union civil disorder squad,
and has not manifested any intention of vetoing the
removal of justice and home affairs measures from national
control, despite being publicly asked to do so (Letters
page, Daily Telegraph , 16 June 2000). However, it has,
by contrast, manifested the intention of vetoing the
removal of other types of measures from national control.
11. LETTER TO CHRISTOPHER GILL M.P.
The Secretary of State for the Home Office, Mr Charles
Clarke, wrote in a letter dated 6 September 2000 to
Mr Christopher Gill, M.P. for Ludlow, Shropshire, specifically
referring to the issue of Qualified Majority Voting
on justice and home affairs and said that the British
Government shall judge each issue on its merits. Where
Qualified Majority Voting is in British interests, we
will accept it. Where not, we will not. This holds for
justice and home affairs matters as for everything else
. In writing that letter, Charles Clarke fully conceded
that Corpus Juris could be imposed on the United Kingdom
by Qualified Majority Voting. He did not use this opportunity
to signal that under no circumstances would the British
Government prevent the gradual adoption of Corpus Juris
within the United Kingdom. * THE OATH OF ALLEGIANCE
UNDER THE 1689 BILL OF RIGHTS MUST BE RESPECTED The
Bill of Rights 1689, still an essential part of the
British constitution, included the Oath of Allegiance
to the Crown, which has been required to be sworn by
all Crown servants, including members of the Judiciary,
ever since Magna Carta.
Specifically, all Crown servants remain required not
to take into consequence or example anything to the
detriment of the subjects liberties , words which are
still used today as Crown servants swear (or affirm)
that they will be faithful and bear true allegiance
to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Second, her heirs
and successors, according to law , and that they will
well and truly serve our Sovereign Lady Queen Elizabeth
the Second...and will do right to all manner of people,
after the law and usages of this realm, without fear
or favour, affection, or ill will . Crown servants
will no longer be able to maintain that Oath if any
of the Corpus Juris proposals were to apply in the United
13. OUR CIVIL RIGHTS GUARANTEED BY ENGLISH (BRITISH)
Lord Wilberforce reminded the House of Lords in 1997
what were - and are - the essential civil rights of
the British people: "...our essential civil rights,
as guaranteed by common law, are the presumption of
innocence; the right to a fair hearing; no man to be
obliged to testify against himself; the rule against
double jeopardy; no retrospective legislation; no legislation
to be given effect contrary to international law - an
old principle that has been there for years; freedom
of expression, and freedom of association...firmly secured
already by the common law of this country, and not intended
to be superseded nor modified by new inter-state obligations..."
If any part of Corpus Juris were to be introduced in
the United Kingdom, the English, now British, common
law rights which Lord Wilberforce correctly described
as being our essential and constitutional rights,
would begin to be eroded and undermined. That, in
my humble submission, would be an act of treason
against the laws, government and happy constitution
of the United Kingdom (Section 1, Treason Act, 1795).
14. TREASON IS BEING PLANNED
Therefore there is a clear and present danger that
treason is being planned and will be committed shortly
by Rt. Hon Tony Blair, Rt. Hon Robin Cook, Rt. Hon Jack
Straw, and Lord Williams of Mostyn if and when they
or their subordinates FAIL TO VETO the removal of matters
of justice and home affairs from national control in
the Treaty or other binding agreements with other Member
States of the European Union.
Failing to veto the removal of justice and home affairs
from national control would allow our Sovereign Queen
Elizabeth II and her heirs, and all her subjects and
others under her protection within her realm, to become
subject to any constraints upon her and their persons
as may in the future be devised by Men-at-Arms of the
European Union Civil Disorder Squad acting on the orders
of organs of the European Union, over which her Majesty
s servants will have lost all control due to the system
of Qualified Majority Voting.
Representatives of the said European Union have already
manifested to the face of our very own House of Lords
(see above) their intention of imposing an alien or
foreign system of justice on our people, which ignores
and indeed tramples on our constitutional rights and
freedoms, and for which previous generations of Britons
have fought and died to preserve.
Our forefathers put these constitutional rights and
freedoms in place for all time precisely to safeguard
our individual and personal freedom from arbitrary imprisonment
and unjust convictions, and thus to prevent the overthrow
of the laws and happy constitution of our country.
THEREFORE, for the first time since 1066, foreign
[European Union] Men-at-Arms, not in any
way answerable to our sovereign monarch, will
be granted the legal right to tread the soil of Britain
and moreover detain subjects of this Kingdom indefinitely,
without trial or a preliminary hearing, all of
which will be in flagrant breach of our constitutional
I, the undersigned, do provide these facts to you and
other members of your bench so that you may take all
necessary and appropriate steps to arrest the danger
of treason being committed and to ensure that it shall
not come to pass, including any reference of these matters
to the Police or to the Crown Prosecution Service or
to the Lord Chancellor s Department. If any such treason
as we allege were actually to take place, I further
ask you to ensure that those against whom treason is
alleged are brought before the Courts according to the
full rigour of the law.
I should be grateful to know what action you have taken
or propose to take, and thank you for your considered
response in due course.
Signed ___________________________ Full Name
[Source: Notice of Treason came by email: for more
information go to:
Telegraph UK - ISSUE 1945 - Thursday 21 September 2000
Blair accused of treason over Europe
By Philip Johnston, Home Affairs Editor