Authority to advise the police

Dear Crown Prosecution Service,

Freedom of Information Act request to the CPS 4.July 2011

Preamble:

I recently made a FOI Act 200 request to Dyfed Powys Police Force,
(FOI Reference:
150/2011 in relation to the application of Magna Carta 1215.

As you are aware, or should; be, that the Magna Carta 1215 is a
charter which is beyond the reach of parliament and therefore of
statute law. The Magna Carta 1215 is beyond the reach of
parliament, as parliament can only undo what it has done. The first
English parliament was De Montfort's Parliament of 1265, {50 years
after Runnymede} instigated by Simon De Montfort, a baronial rebel
leader and was effectively an unconstitutional convened assemblage
as it did not have the approval of king Henry III.

The Magna Carta, 1215, gave sovereign recognition to already
long-standing Anglo-Saxon common law, rights and customs. Some 150
years earlier William the Conqueror had made the first attempts to
codify those rights and customs, which ultimately go back at least
to the time of King Alfred and beyond. The Magna Carta is variously
described as an unbreakable covenant, contract or treaty. It is not
an Act of Parliament and therefore Magna Carta cannot be repealed
by parliament. As a contract between sovereign and subjects, it can
be breached only by one party or the other, but even in the breach
it still stands. It is a mutual, binding agreement of indefinite
duration. Any breach merely has the effect of giving the offended
party rights of redress.

Magna Carta was the most significant early influence on the
extensive historical process that led to the rule of constitutional
law today. Magna Carta influenced many common law and other
documents, such as the United States Constitution and Bill of
Rights, and is considered one of the most important legal documents
in the history of democracy. Also, a large part of Magna Carta was
copied, nearly word for word, from the Charter of Liberties of
Henry I, issued when Henry I rose to the throne in 1100, which
bound the king to laws.

Sir Edward Coke, Judge and Parliamentarian considered that the
terms of Magna Carta were for the most part declaratory of the
principal grounds of the fundamental laws of England.
{Institutes—Second Part, vol. I (1642), Proeme}.

The Statute Law Revision Act, 1867, attempted to take common law
into statute and then repeal it. However, as I have reasoned
elsewhere this cannot happen, since common law is above statute law
and pre-dates it. In any case, both Magna Carta and the Declaration
of Rights specifically reject any such attempt to amend or abolish
them. Neither can I find no supporting evidence for Halsbury’s
claim that only clauses 1, 9, 29 and 37 of Magna Carta still stand
today. Blackstone and Dicey make no such claim.

As stated above the Magna Carta set out in legal form the binding
permanent contract in perpetuity between the king and people!
English/Welsh courts attach considerable importance to the
individual’s right of access to justice; and now speak of it as a
constitutional right. The modern case law is the case of Chester v
Bateson [1920] KB 829 which held that "common law is not immune
from development or improvement". It does not talk about
"limitations" or "destruction".

The Magna Carta 1215 is generally considered part of the uncodified
constitution. Lord Denning described it as, "the greatest
constitutional document of all times – the foundation of the
freedom of the individual against the arbitrary authority of the
despot". In a 2005 speech, Lord Woolf described it as "first of a
series of instruments that now are recognised as having a special
constitutional status", the others being the Habeas Corpus Act, the
Petition of Right, the Bill of Rights, and the Act of Settlement.

Lord McNally, Minister of State and Deputy Leader of the House of
Lords spoke on "Magna Carta and the Rule of Law". "the most
influential secular document in the history of the world" .

The Magna Carta has gained an iconic status far beyond its original
importance and has become a
symbol of the rights of the citizen against the use and misuse of
power by the State. In England, a
country largely without a written constitution, it stands beside
the Act of Settlement 1700, the
Human Rights Act 1998 and the Constitutional Reform Act 2005, but
it remains more significant in
public perception than any subsequent legislation. Baroness
Elizabeth Butler-Sloss at Lincoln Cathedral, Friday 20 June 2008.

To summarise my understanding of these principles and customs: the
Magna Carta is an affirmation of common law based on principles of
natural justice. These principles - and the document itself -
pre-date Parliament. Common law is the will and custom of the
people.

Statute law is the will of parliament. Statute can and does give
expression to common law, but that common law cannot be disregarded
by parliament, nor can it be repealed. It can only be extended -
"improved" is the word used, but it is open to misuse.

Parliament is made by the law, and is not above it.

There is more, of course a lot more, but with the above in mind I
made the following request:

Under the Freedom of Information Act(FOI), I would like to know if
Dyfed Powys Police is fully aware, and knowledgeable of Article 38.
MAGNA CARTA 1215?
Clarification:

The response was as follows:

The Administration of Justice Department (AoJ) has confirmed that
Dyfed Powys Police does not consider Article 38 Magna Carta 1215 in
day-to-day procedures; Dyfed Powys Police base their processes upon
legislation which has been passed through Parliament.
Dyfed Powys Police uses the Director of Public Prosecutions
guidance, which is the national guidance for all forces. Please
find detailed below a hyperlink to the Crown Prosecution Service
website which details the guidance used by Dyfed Powys Police:

http://www.cps.gov.uk/publications/direc...
Therefore under the Freedom of Information Act 2000, I would like
to know upon what legal authority does the CPS assumed to inform
the Dyfed Powys Police Force to disregard the Magna Carta in the
running of its day-to-day procedures.

With resect please don’t use the age old well worn reasoning that
most of the Magna Carta was
repealed in England and Wales by the Statute Law Revision Act 1863,
and in Ireland by the Statute Law (Ireland) Revision Act 1872 as
for reasons given above this reply would not be acceptable.
Furthermore, kindly consider that the doctrine of legality mandates
that government action cannot proceed arbitrarily and without
lawful authority. It represents the kernel of the rule of law. A
recent case Bancoult [2001] QB 1067 has vividly illustrated how
Magna Carta continues to underpin this doctrine in important
respects.

Yours sincerely

David Grothier.

Dear Freedom of Information Unit,D. Martindale
Information Management Unit

You must have the record for a quick response time.
Unfortunately someone is being evasive here. This is the reply I
had from Dyfed Powys Police was as follows

FOI Reference: 150/2011

Response:
The Administration of Justice Department (AoJ) has confirmed that
Dyfed Powys Police does not consider Article 38 Magna Carta 1215 in
day-to-day procedures; Dyfed Powys Police base their processes upon
legislation which has been passed through Parliament.

Dyfed Powys Police uses the Director of Public Prosecutions
guidance, which is the national guidance for all forces. Please
find detailed below a hyperlink to the Crown Prosecution Service
website which details the guidance used by Dyfed Powys Police:
http://www.cps.gov.uk/publications/direc...

However you state that …. The CPS has no power to instruct any
Police Force in relation to their day-to-day procedures. Therefore
and logically your reply is totally unacceptable, and I would ask
you to look at it again and reply being absolutely specific.

Yours sincerely,
David Grothier

Dear Freedom of Information Unit,

Again I find this an evasive answer. The FOI Act requires clarity .
Your answer is far from clear.

You state that: The CPS has no legal authority to inform any police
force to disregard any legislation. Yet they do so frequently and
are known for making selective applications of the law. An example
being is that CPS have found on times matters of perjury was not to
prosecuted as it was not in the public’s best interests, whatever
that may or may not mean!

Furthermore, you state that the police are obliged to follow the
Code for Crown Prosecutors when making charging decisions and are
encouraged to follow it in respect of other areas.

Yet often this code is misused. However, as you have made reference
to such a code, kindly inform me upon what authority such code is
based.

As to your final comment: to follow it in respect of other areas.
Kindly explain exactly what you mean by this statement.

It is may contention that both the police services and the CPS
have, in general used and abuse the law, from whatever source, as
they felt fit and that there is a pressing need for further clarity
and reform on many matters in this spectrum.

Both the police forces and the CPS are far form diligent in their
duties. Would you like copious examples of this, or for this
purpose would it be acceptable to yourselves for me to just to
refer to the Cardiff Lynnette White case. Of course if you wish I
could send you many hundreds of pages dealing specifically with
this topic.

Therefore your answer falls short of acceptability underder the FOI
Act 2000.

Yours sincerely,

David Grothier

Dear Baker Ian,

You have said absolutely nothing. I wish to request an interenal
review

Yours sincerely,

David Grothier

Dear Baker Ian,

You have said absolutely nothing. I wish to request an internal
review

Yours sincerely,

David Grothier