Dear Ministry of Justice,

Can you confirm that Article 61 of The Magna Carta Of 1297 is still in force and that as such it is still legal to enter into lawful rebellion against parliament.

Thank you.

Faithful to HM Queen Elizabeth II

Mr..[removed for privacy reasons]

Data Access & Compliance Unit, Ministry of Justice

This is an Auto Reply from the Data Access & Compliance Unit.

Thank you for your e-mail.

If your message was a request for information please be advised that your
request is being dealt with and you will receive a written acknowledgement
shortly.

Data Access & Compliance Unit

Information Directorate

Ministry of Justice
6th Floor, Zone B, Postal Point 6.23
102 Petty France
London
SW1H 9AJ

Fax: 0203 334 2245

E-mail: [email address]

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of
the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage or copying
is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all
copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message
could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in
mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message
by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be
monitored, recorded and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail
monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be
read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not
broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

show quoted sections

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or
recorded for legal purposes.

J Wilson left an annotation ()

You might also like to point out to the Ministry of Justice that the same concept was expressed in the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, where it stated in the preamble - "Whereas it is essential, if man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law".

Given that our rights have not been protected by 'the rule of law' since 1949 because our successive Governments have wilfully and deliberately shown disrespect for our rights and disregard for their own obligations under the UN Charter "to promote universal respect for, and observance of, human rights and freedoms" by failing to enact one single piece of legislation to protect them, there's been justification for such 'rebellion' since 1949.

However, how can this be achieved when, unlike Americans we have no right to 'bear arms against the State'? Who could persuade the people and the Armed Forces to rise up against the State to answer for their crimes against humanity?

Graeme MacLean left an annotation ()

I do not condone nor recommended violence against the state.

J Wilson left an annotation ()

Why bother asking the question then, if you wouldn't condone rebellion, even if it were legal?

The Universal Declaration sanctions it, only as a last resort against tyranny and oppression, however I expect we all have different concepts of these words. However even the Windows Dictionary includes "oppressive government" within their definition of tyranny and "dominate harshly" and "inflict stress on" within oppression itself.

Clearly then every Government since 1949, which has oppressed the rights of the people, by failing to make them legally binding on everyone, has inflicted stress on many whose rights they have denied, as have judges who've made orders against them in violation of their rights.

This cannot be tolerated in a moral and just society so if your not prepared to make any stand against the State why waste time asking them any questions at all?

Kaihsu Tai left an annotation ()

The provision referred to seems to be this: ‘Since, moreover, for God and the amendment of our kingdom and for the better allaying of the quarrel that has arisen between us and our barons, we have granted all these concessions, desirous that they should enjoy them in complete and firm endurance forever, we give and grant to them the underwritten security, namely, that the barons choose five and twenty barons of the kingdom, whomsoever they will, who shall be bound with all their might, to observe and hold, and cause to be observed, the peace and liberties we have granted and confirmed to them by this our present Charter, so that if we, or our justiciar, or our bailiffs or any one of our officers, shall in anything be at fault towards anyone, or shall have broken any one of the articles of this peace or of this security, and the offense be notified to four barons of the foresaid five and twenty, the said four barons shall repair to us (or our justiciar, if we are out of the realm) and, laying the transgression before us, petition to have that transgression redressed without delay. And if we shall not have corrected the transgression (or, in the event of our being out of the realm, if our justiciar shall not have corrected it) within forty days, reckoning from the time it has been intimated to us (or to our justiciar, if we should be out of the realm), the four barons aforesaid shall refer that matter to the rest of the five and twenty barons, and those five and twenty barons shall, together with the community of the whole realm, distrain and distress us in all possible ways, namely, by seizing our castles, lands, possessions, and in any other way they can, until redress has been obtained as they deem fit, saving harmless our own person, and the persons of our queen and children; and when redress has been obtained, they shall resume their old relations towards us. And let whoever in the country desires it, swear to obey the orders of the said five and twenty barons for the execution of all the aforesaid matters, and along with them, to molest us to the utmost of his power; and we publicly and freely grant leave to everyone who wishes to swear, and we shall never forbid anyone to swear. All those, moveover, in the land who of themselves and of their own accord are unwilling to swear to the twenty five to help them in constraining and molesting us, we shall by our command compel the same to swear to the effect foresaid. And if any one of the five and twenty barons shall have died or departed from the land, or be incapacitated in any other manner which would prevent the foresaid provisions being carried out, those of the said twenty five barons who are left shall choose another in his place according to their own judgment, and he shall be sworn in the same way as the others. Further, in all matters, the execution of which is entrusted, to these twenty five barons, if perchance these twenty five are present and disagree about anything, or if some of them, after being summoned, are unwilling or unable to be present, that which the majority of those present ordain or command shall be held as fixed and established, exactly as if the whole twenty five had concurred in this; and the said twenty five shall swear that they will faithfully observe all that is aforesaid, and cause it to be observed with all their might. And we shall procure nothing from anyone, directly or indirectly, whereby any part of these concessions and liberties might be revoked or diminished; and if any such things has been procured, let it be void and null, and we shall never use it personally or by another.’ I am not sure if this provides for a general right ‘to enter into lawful rebellion against parliament’, whatever that may mean.

This is in no way similar to the provision of Article 20(4) of the German Grundgesetz (Basic Law): ‘All Germans shall have the right to resist any person seeking to abolish this constitutional order, if no other remedy is available.’

It appears from the Statute Law Database that the provision has been repealed. http://www.statutelaw.gov.uk/content.asp...

Graeme MacLean left an annotation ()

Yes, however such repelling is declared as an illegal action by the Magna Carta.

Dear Data Access & Compliance Unit.

Please be advised that the ministry of justice has now failed to provide the information I have request within the legal timeline required by law. Please supply this information within the next three days otherwise I will be obliged to take the case forward to the Information commissioner for his enforcement.

Thank you.

Mr..[removed for privacy reasons]

Data Access & Compliance Unit, Ministry of Justice

This is an Auto Reply from the Data Access & Compliance Unit.

Thank you for your e-mail.

If your message was a request for information please be advised that your
request is being dealt with and you will receive a written acknowledgement
shortly.

Data Access & Compliance Unit

Information Directorate

Ministry of Justice
6th Floor, Zone B, Postal Point 6.23
102 Petty France
London
SW1H 9AJ

Fax: 0203 334 2245

E-mail: [email address]

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of
the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage or copying
is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all
copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message
could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in
mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message
by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be
monitored, recorded and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail
monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be
read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not
broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

show quoted sections

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or
recorded for legal purposes.

L : Turnbull left an annotation ()

The reality is that law is a substutute for justice. The courts were a substitute for the dueling field, and if the government and its agents refuse access to the courts and the law, then there is no recourse but to rebellion. When a government declares war on the people, as this and previous ones have done, then we are in a mixed war.
The servant has usurped the rights of the master.
Without equality before the law there must be rebelion.

Data Access & Compliance Unit, Ministry of Justice

Dear Mr..[removed for privacy reasons],

Please can you provide the reference number and your original request so
we can pass your email to the relevant case worker.

Regards
Darren

show quoted sections

L : Turnbull left an annotation ()

Maxim:
Arma in armatos sumere jura sinunt - the laws permit the taking up of arms against the armed.

Graeme MacLean

Dear Data Access & Compliance Unit,

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/ri...

abouve is a link to my original request.

Yours sincerely,

Mr..[removed for privacy reasons]

Data Access & Compliance Unit, Ministry of Justice

This is an Auto Reply from the Data Access & Compliance Unit.

Thank you for your e-mail.

If your message was a request for information please be advised that your
request is being dealt with and you will receive a written acknowledgement
shortly.

Data Access & Compliance Unit

Information Directorate

Ministry of Justice
6th Floor, Zone B, Postal Point 6.23
102 Petty France
London
SW1H 9AJ

Fax: 0203 334 2245

E-mail: [email address]

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of
the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage or copying
is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all
copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message
could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in
mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message
by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be
monitored, recorded and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail
monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be
read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not
broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

show quoted sections

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or
recorded for legal purposes.

Data Access & Compliance Unit, Ministry of Justice

Dear Mr..[removed for privacy reasons],

As mentioned in my emails please can you supply the reference number and
your request.

Regards

show quoted sections

Graeme MacLean

Dear Data Access & Compliance Unit.

There is no ref number as I was not given one and I have madethe request via whattheyknow.com

My request is below.

Dear Ministry of Justice,

Can you confirm that Article 61 of The Magna Carta Of 1297 is still
in force and that as such it is still legal to enter into lawful
rebellion against parliament.

Thank you.

Faithful to HM Queen Elizabeth II

Mr..[removed for privacy reasons]

Data Access & Compliance Unit, Ministry of Justice

This is an Auto Reply from the Data Access & Compliance Unit.

Thank you for your e-mail.

If your message was a request for information please be advised that your
request is being dealt with and you will receive a written acknowledgement
shortly.

Data Access & Compliance Unit

Information Directorate

Ministry of Justice
6th Floor, Zone B, Postal Point 6.23
102 Petty France
London
SW1H 9AJ

Fax: 0203 334 2245

E-mail: [email address]

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of
the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage or copying
is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all
copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message
could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in
mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message
by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be
monitored, recorded and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail
monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be
read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not
broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

show quoted sections

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or
recorded for legal purposes.

Data Access & Compliance Unit, Ministry of Justice

Dear Mr , Thank you for your email.

On occasion, Data Access and Compliance Unit receives requests for
information that do not ask for a copy of information that is known to
exist, but ask more general questions about, for example, a policy or a
decision. In these instances the Ministerial Correspondence Unit would
handle the enquiry. I have assessed your correspondence and since it is
of that nature, I have passed it to the Ministerial Correspondence Unit
who will ensure that you receive a response. You can contact them at:
[email address]

Your original request was sent to them to respond to. Please contact
them if you require further information.

We apologise for any inconvenience caused. If you have any questions
regarding Freedom of information please do not hesitate to contact us.

Regards

Data Access and Compliance Unit
6TH floor 102 Petty France.
Post point 6.25
London
SW1H 9AJ

show quoted sections

Johnson, Ian, Ministry of Justice

My apologies for the delay in responding to your email.

The text of the Magna Carta Act 1297 may be found at
www.statutelaw.gov.uk

Regards

Ian Johnson
Ministerial Correspondence Unit
Ministry of Justice
102 Petty France
London SW1H 9AHJ

Tel 020 3334 3622
email [email address]
www.justice.gov.uk

show quoted sections

Graeme MacLean

Dear Johnson, Ian,

Thank you for directing me to the act I was referring too.

I apologise if my question was not clear in the first instance.

In regards to the Magna Carta Act 1297

Can you confirm that Article 61 of this act is still
in force and that as such it is still legal to enter into lawful rebellion against parliament.

Yours sincerely,

Mr..[removed for privacy reasons]

Gary left an annotation ()

Looks suspiciously like they dont want to answer your question Graeme .
I wonder why that could be ? lol
You could consider asking again but this time by mentioning and enforcing the aquiescence rule of law .
For anyone wondering, this means that by not answering your question within your specified time limits , they actually agree Lawfully THAT YOUR INFORMATION IS CORRECT, so if you ask again simply YOU believe this document has not been repealed so therefore is still in force and you WILL follow its Maxims , is this lawful ? You should get an answer one way or another

Cheers Gary Maxwell

Graeme MacLean left an annotation ()

Thank you gary for your kind information.

I will keep you up to date.

MR D CAMPBELL left an annotation ()

in 2001, 65 peers backed and 28 signed a petition to the Queen using Clause 61 of the Magna Carta. According to the Telegraph:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1...

and

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1...

I'm here because I was wondering who to ask about this story and what actually happened and what are the legal ramifications.

Johnson, Ian, Ministry of Justice

Dear Mr [removed for privacy reasons]

You may wish to look at the text of the Act, which shows those articles
still in force. I cannot see an article 61 nor mention of lawful
rebellion against Parliament.

Regards.

Ian Johnson
Ministerial Correspondence Unit
Ministry of Justice
102 Petty France
London SW1H 9AHJ

Tel 020 3334 3622
email [email address]
www.justice.gov.uk

show quoted sections

Walsh-Atkins, Eirian, Ministry of Justice

Dear Mr [removed for privacy reasons],

Thank you for your email. Before I respond, I should like to explain
that your email does not constitute an FOI request, but is being dealt
with as normal correspondence. An FOI request should ask for specific
information, for example 'I would like to see all information relating
to the Magna Carta' or even 'I would like to see all papers relating to
lawful rebellion against parliament'.

Your e-mail has been passed to my team to consider as we have
responsibility for policy on constitutional matters.

Magna Carta was first issued in 1215. The Charter was reissued three
times in the reign of King Henry III (in 1216, 1217 and 1225, each
superseding the previous version). It was latterly confirmed by King
Edward I in his Charter of 1297. It is elements of this later version
which remain part of the law of England and Wales.

A copy of the 1297 Charter as it remains in law (along with details of
the Acts by which various clauses were repealed) can be found on the UK
Statute Law Database maintained by the Office of Public Sector
Information (www.opsi.gov.uk).

Many Thanks

Eirian Walsh Atkins

show quoted sections

Steve left an annotation ()

they have responded to the act of 1297, however the right was granted in 1215 prior to the existence of parliament - subsequent versions do not contain the clause, therefore the monarch failed on these occasions to grant that right, however once a right is granted it cannot be un-granted without the express permission of both parties, so, if it can not be shown that for subsequent versions the right has been agreed to not be warranted by the barons then it is still in effect

the role of parliament is not to create nor to repeal the rights of the people, the role is to define only within the framework of the original grant of rights

for example - we have the right to traverse the land, this does not mean we have the right to drive a car without tax, insurance, licence, or MOT certificate, but we do have the right to walk, ride a cycle, or a horse. The right has been defined by the road traffic act etc to ensure the preservation of the rights of those who could be injured or suffer loss from an unlicensed driver

so, unless they can show evidence that all who had a right have agreed to the loss of that right they are on a sticky wicket.

They could argue that parliament as representative of the people had the authority and surrendered the right, but I don't think that could pass a jury unless there was a referendum.

Also to put them on an even stickier wicket this right was asserted in 1688 successfully so was NOT repealed by the subsequent versions of the Magna Carta

Hope this helps

L : Turnbull left an annotation ()

Magna Carta is a treaty - not an act of parliament,
Statutes are ordinances issued by the crown. The Statute of Magna Carta 1297 is an ordinance of the crown and cannot be repealed by any parliament. If a parliament could repeal a crown ordinance then parliament would be above the monarch.
Sounds like treason by the fascists again.
Lance

L : Turnbull left an annotation ()

After entering the HUMAN RIGHTS ACT into British jurisdiction, the abominable Jack Straw admitted that Magna Carta (original) was still valid.
I repeat - MC is an ordinance of the crown and cannot be repealed, amended, or in any way altered by an parliament.
L. Turnbull

Jeb61 left an annotation ()

The Magna Carta of 1215 is a covenant signed by King John on the Isle of Runnymede in 1215. Article 61 of the Magna Carta is included in this the original Magna Carta.
In 1297 the Model Parliament confirmed Magna Carta in statute law. Much of this statute has since been repealed. Yet while Parliament can repeal or amend any Act of Parliament (statute), Parliament was not a party to the original Common Law contract of 1215, and cannot, therefore, amend or repeal it lawfully, and thus its original provisions remain intact, including article 61.

Mac P left an annotation ()

We have the right under the Royal Law to Lawful Rebellion. The EU has no lawful right to govern us. Treason has been committed, from what I understand, and charges have been brought through the correct organs of the people. If the Government fails to proceed against the traitors then we have the Lawful right to do so. The Law is clear on this.

Gavin of the family Briggs left an annotation ()

We are in a state of lawful rebellion and have been since 2001 as stated in an earlier post.
"MR D CAMPBELL left an annotation (18 May 2010)
in 2001, 65 peers backed and 28 signed a petition to the Queen using Clause 61 of the Magna Carta. According to the Telegraph:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1...
and
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1...
I'm here because I was wondering who to ask about this story and what actually happened and what are the legal ramifications. "

For a good starting point regarding the invocation of Article 61 of The Magna Carta 1215 and the present day lawful rebellion. I urge you all to visit
http://lawfulrebellion.info/
And the facebook group
https://www.facebook.com/groups/practica...

Peter:Brewster left an annotation ()

Try MAgna Carta 1215, the other is the Act the Gov passed so they think they can bugger with it the magna carta is not an act (although they made one) it is a Treaty and as such acts in perpetuity :)

Looking for an EU Authority?

You can request documents directly from EU Institutions at our sister site AskTheEU.org . Find out more .

AskTheEU.org