“You are odious to the nation” – We the undersigned accuse you of Misconduct in Public Office!
We give below our Letter regarding accusations of Misconduct in Public Office, if you agree please leave your name at the bottom, by scrolling right down and entering your name in the box, then click the box ‘post comment’ on the right.
We, the undersigned, do accuse the persons listed below of “Misconduct in Public Office” with regards to recent behaviour and actions in Parliament. Those signatures below agree that any ‘deal’ currently offered by Parliament goes against, and is contrary to, the wishes of the Electorate and the majority of whom voted Leave.
The Prime Minister’s conduct is now serious enough to amount to an abuse of the public’s trust to affront to the standing of the public office held. (In R v Dytham, Lord Widgery said that the element of culpability: “… must be of such a degree that the misconduct impugned is calculated to injure the public interest so as to call for condemnation and punishment.”).
There is a breach of duty owed to the public as Prime Minister. (In R v Dytham (1979) 1 QB 723 Lord Widgery CJ talked of ‘a public officer who has an obligation to perform a duty’. ) The Right Hon. Mrs. May, The Prime Minister has been negligent, dishonest and culpable in her actions. At the time of the Referendum, the Prime Minister advocated to Remain in the E.U. She has failed in her duty to deliver on the Referendum result and instead tries to implement a plan which goes against the wishes of the People.
In her wilful neglect and breach of a duty owed to the public, the Electorate now hold her culpable for not delivering on the wishes of the People, as we have now not left the European Union on 29th March, 2019 as legally implied in the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018, and the misconduct is such that the Electorate have now lost all faith and trust not only in the office of Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, but also in Parliament as a whole.
- She recently had a meeting with her Cabinet wherein it was alleged that 14 members of the Cabinet voted to leave the European Union without a deal. This was the majority of her Cabinet yet The Prime Minister would not agree to collective responsibility and has since agreed to discuss details with the Leader of the Opposition. Yet at Chequers, when the Prime Minister produced a new plan to that which was originally set out, she imposed collective responsibility amongst her Cabinet.
- A policy White Paper was released discussing the future relationship between the United Kingdom and European Union. However, a different plan was then drawn up at Chequers by Civil Servants via Oliver Robbins and his team, without the knowledge of the Exiting the EU Secretary and other Cabinet Members which led to several resignations.
The majority of the Electorate also accuse, Civil Servants, Mr. Oliver Robbins and his team, of misconduct in public office. Part 1 of the Constitutional Reform & Governance Act 2010 ” ‘integrity’ is putting the obligations of public service above your own personal interests.” Under ‘Political Impartiality’ “serve the government, whatever its political persuasion, to the best of your ability in a way which maintains political impartiality and is in line with the requirements of this code, no matter what your own political beliefs are.” It is well documented that Mr. Robbins and his team are fervent believers of staying in the European Union.
- Since that time, Mrs May has continued to state that ‘No Deal was better than a Bad Deal”, “Brexit means Brexit”. Brexit would be delivered as set out in the Conservative Manifesto of the 2017 snap General Election.
- The Prime Minister pledged to uphold that result (Lancaster House Speech, Florence Speech, Parliament Speeches, Conservative Manifesto refer) and the wishes of the majority of the Electorate by leaving the European Union and regaining our full Sovereignty and Powers. However, her Withdrawal Agreement in no way achieves this and is, in fact, quite to the contrary. This ‘Withdrawal Agreement’ has been rejected by Parliament three times. In December 2018 the Government was found to be in contempt of Parliament, following a Commons vote, over its handling of Brexit legal advice.
- The Prime Minister again refuses to listen to the majority of the Electorate and has now taken the step to discuss options with the Leader of the Opposition. It has been said that the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition may not only agree to remain in the E.U. Customs Union but would insert wording into the legal document that would enable any future government from changing the contents. This again is unlawful and undemocratic as it would bind any future government. Mrs. May has threatened the electorate by releasing a video statement from No 10 wherein she said ‘The choice that lies ahead of us is either leaving the European Union with a deal, or not leaving at all’.
- The EU Referendum in 2016 leading to the implementation of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2108 stipulated ‘ Do you want to Remain or Leave the European Union’. At no time did the ballot paper state that the choice incorporated the agreement of a trade deal or withdrawal agreement. A trade arrangement and Leaving the European Union are two different issues, and should be treated as such and any trade/deal must not compact on the vote for leaving the European Union.
- The Conservative General Election Manifesto of 2015 promised a referendum on membership of the EU in the following terms: “We believe in letting the people decide: so we will hold an in-out referendum on our membership of the EU before the end of 2017.” The Conservative Party won that election in May, 2015. The British people were given a politically and constitutionally binding promise in the election manifesto that they would be given the final and deciding say in a referendum in which the majority would prevail.
- During the debate (Hansard) on the Referendum Bill on 9 June 2015, the Foreign Secretary said “This is a simple, but vital, piece of legislation. It has one clear purpose: to deliver on our promise to give the British people the final say on our EU membership in an in/out referendum by the end of 2017.” He went on to say “Few subjects ignite as much passion in the House or indeed in the country as our membership of the European Union. The debate in the run-up to the referendum will be hard fought on both sides of the argument. But whether we favour Britain being in or out, we surely should all be able to agree on the simple principle that the decision about our membership should be taken by the British people, not by Whitehall bureaucrats, certainly not by Brussels Eurocrats; not even by Government Ministers or parliamentarians in this Chamber. The decision must be for the common sense of the British people. That is what we pledged, and that is what we have a mandate to deliver. For too long, the people of Britain have been denied their say. For too long, powers have been handed to Brussels over their heads. For too long, their voice on Europe has not been heard. This Bill puts that right. It delivers the simple in/out referendum that we promised, and I commend it to the House.”
- In June, 2015, MPs voted 544-53 overwhelmingly for a Referendum on the U.K.’s membership of the European Union. The European Union Referendum Act came into legal force in June 2016. The European Union Referendum Act 2015 does not contain any provision saying that its result is subject to a minimum turnout threshold or a minimum percentage vote in favour of either remain or leave.
- On 23rd June, 2016, a Referendum took place. 17,410,742 of the electorate voted to Leave. The highest number ever to have voted in the history of the United Kingdom; with the highest national turnout for 24 years. This meant to leave the European Union entirely and regain full Sovereignty and Powers back to the United Kingdom.
- In 2017, MPs voted by 498 votes to 114 to enact Article 50 of The Lisbon Treaty; the beginning of the process of leaving the European Union. According to Article 50, the principle stands that if no agreement is forthcoming, the ‘member state’ leaves!
- The Conservative Manifesto in 2017 stipulated that it would uphold the result of the 2016 Referendum. They made a promise to ‘deliver Brexit’ and were elected on that basis.
- The European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 was passed and given Royal Assent on 26th June, 2018. The Act specifies an exact date of exit “Section 20(1) of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 (EU(W)A) defines ‘exit day’ as a specific date – 29 March 2019 at 11:00pm.
- The U.K. is one of the 61 members who not only helped to form the code, but adopted the Declaration on the Code of Good Practice on Referendums in 2008. By Resolution 1592 (2007), the Assembly decided to forward the Code of good practice to national delegations and parliaments so that it could be applied in Council of Europe Member States without delay.Venice Commission – Council of Europe – Referendum Code
Article 7, Section 54 “Where a legally binding referendum concerns a question of principle or a generally-worded proposal, it is up to Parliament to implement the people’s decision. Having invoked Article 50, the Referendum is legally binding.
1 “Respect for fundamental rights”
“The Universal Declaration of Human Rights “Article 21 (3) the will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government…”
Section 111 Point 26. The principle of the rule of law, which is one of the three pillars of the Council of Europe along with democracy and human rights applies to referendums just as it does to every other area. The principle of the Sovereignty of the people allows the latter to take decisions only in accordance with the law.
9. In March 2018, over 1.2 million people signed a Petition arranged by The List to the
Prime Minister which was delivered direct to No 10. It stated :
By voting Leave, we understood it, and also believe that, leaving the EU means.
No Single Market
No Customs Union
No European Courts of Justice
No EU Army (PESCO)
Control of our Borders
Regain Fishing Waters
Rebate to Farmers
Free Trade Deal (failing which, we trade under WTO rules)
No Money to EU
Share of EU profits for which the UK handsomely contributed over the years
British Citizens living in the EU and EU Citizens in the UK to be treated equally
If we fail to secure any of the above, then we LEAVE on 29th March, 2019 – No Deal!
10. In their reply to our Petition, the Government said :
“We have listened to EU leaders and we understand and respect the position that the four freedoms of the Single Market are indivisible and there can be no cherry-picking. Therefore, we do not seek membership of the Single Market after we leave the EU, but a bold and ambitious Free Trade Agreement as part of a new, deep and special partnership.
Being out of the EU but remaining a member of the Single Market would mean accepting a role for the Court of Justice of the EU. It would mean still not having control over immigration. It would to all intents and purposes mean not leaving the EU at all.
By leaving the Customs Union and establishing a new and ambitious customs arrangement with the EU, we will be able to forge new trade relationships with our partners around the world, and maintain as frictionless trade as possible in goods between the UK and EU, providing a positive and powerful voice for free trade.
We want our new customs arrangements to meet three objectives: to keep trade with the EU as frictionless as possible, to avoid a ‘hard border’ between Ireland and Northern Ireland and to establish an independent international trade policy. We are not seeking to extend the
Article 50 process: an implementation period does not mean postponing our exit from the EU. We will leave the EU in March 2019 and will no longer be a Member State.”
The recent bill by Yvette Cooper, MP, was rushed through in one day purely because it goes against the wishes of the people and helps promote the views of certain MPs. This action has caused the Electorate to lose all faith in the democratic institution which is Parliament and there no longer is any trust or even respect in Members of Parliament.
- Paragraph 14 of Schedule 7 to the EU(W)A provides that this definition of ‘exit day’ can be amended by an SI subject to the affirmative procedure. The affirmative procedure normally takes six to eight weeks to complete their parliamentary passage, from the day they are laid before Parliament to the point at which they are approved by both Houses.
- The Cooper Bill was rushed through within one day to make amendments. This Bill will require Royal Consent. This Parliament seeks to involve Her Majesty The Queen by seeking Royal Consent and therefore the Electorate believe asking The Queen to be a party to an amendment that goes against the Sovereign People is totally wrong, unconstitutional and undemocratic. If the European Union (Withdrawal) Act affects the exercise of any royal prerogative, ministers must prevent the passage of the Cooper Bill through Parliament by indicating that Royal Consent to the Bill would not be sought.
- Private Bills – Any group or individual directly affected by a Bill’s proposals can object to it through petitions, examined and considered by committees of MPs and of Lords. We were therefore given no time to be allowed to Petition this Bill and it was against our Human Rights. (Human Rights Act 1998).
- Parliament delegated the decision as to whether to Leave or to Remain in the EU to the Electorate. The decision was made to Leave and this was recognised by the House of Commons when it voted by a significant majority to approve the invoking of Article 50.
- Members of Parliament are representatives of their constituents and should take into account their concerns when making decisions on their behalf and should not promote the MPs personal views. MPs do not negotiate international agreements; this is the function of Government. MPs do not make decisions about the future of the country without having regard for the concerns of their electorate.
- Parliament is now trying to take charge of the legislative process and take control of Brexit which is unconstitutional and undemocratic. They are usurping the function of the Executive and in doing so, not holding the Government to account, but attempting to prevent the function of the Executive to implement the decision of the Electorate.
- Fiona Onasanya, a convicted criminal, was allowed to enter Parliament, complete with electronic ankle tag, in order to vote in the Cooper Bill against the Electorate.
The group behind the bill, which includes Sir Oliver Letwin, former Tory chair Dame Caroline Spelman, Labour MP and Commons Brexit Committee chair Hilary Benn, former attorney general Dominic Grieve and Liberal Democrat Norman Lamb, aimed to pass the bill through the Commons in a single day on Wednesday.
It is recorded that Mr Grieve, when trying to implement his own amendment to the European Union (Withdrawal) Bill admitted visiting Mr Bercow, the Speaker of the House, in his Commons apartment on the eve of the vote in the Commons. The next day the Grieve Amendment was allowed.
The Chief Whip, Julian Smith confronted the Speaker telling him his behaviour ‘was totally out of order’. ‘You are overturning precedent, defying the advice of the Clerk of the house and trying to overturn the referendum result.’
It has been well documented the number of times the Speaker of the House has brought the position into disrepute and it is well documented that he too fervently advocates staying in the European Union. Therefore the majority of Electorate and those signing below do not believe he can remain impartial in any proceedings and should not be allowed to continue as Speaker of the House.
Rules of Conduct – Ministerial Code
11.Members shall base their conduct on a consideration of the public interest, avoid conflict between personal interest and the public interest and resolve any conflict between the two, at once, and in favour of the public interest.
Those mentioned below voted for Yvette Cooper’s amendment bill.
Misconduct in Public Office
Yvette Cooper MP
Mr. John Bercow, Speaker of the House
Abbott, Ms Diane
Allin-Khan, Dr Rosena
Bailey, Mr Adrian
Beckett, rh Margaret
Benn, rh Hilary
Berger, Luciana (Proxy vote cast by Mr Chris Leslie)
Betts, Mr Clive
Blackford, rh Ian
Blackman-Woods, Dr Roberta
Bradshaw, rh Mr Ben
Brake, rh Tom
Brown, rh Mr Nicholas
Buck, Ms Karen
Burt, rh Alistair
Byrne, rh Liam
Cable, rh Sir Vince
Cameron, Dr Lisa
Campbell, rh Sir Alan
Carmichael, rh Mr Alistair
Clarke, rh Mr Kenneth
Clwyd, rh Ann
Cooper, rh Yvette
Corbyn, rh Jeremy
Crausby, Sir David
Cunningham, Mr Jim
Davey, rh Sir Edward
De Cordova, Marsha
De Piero, Gloria
Dent Coad, Emma
Dhesi, Mr Tanmanjeet Singh
Djanogly, Mr Jonathan
Drew, Dr David
Eagle, Ms Angela
Ellman, Dame Louise
Gill, Preet Kaur
Godsiff, Mr Roger
Greening, rh Justine
Grieve, rh Mr Dominic
Gyimah, Mr Sam
Hanson, rh David
Harman, rh Ms Harriet
Healey, rh John
Hendrick, Sir Mark
Hodge, rh Dame Margaret
Hodgson, Mrs Sharon
Howarth, rh Mr George
Huq, Dr Rupa
Jones, Darren (Proxy vote cast by Kerry McCarthy)
Jones, Graham P.
Jones, rh Mr Kevan
Jones, Susan Elan
Lamb, rh Norman
Lammy, rh Mr David
Lee, Dr Phillip
Leslie, Mr Chris
Letwin, rh Sir Oliver
Lewell-Buck, Mrs Emma
Lewis, Mr Ivan
Long Bailey, Rebecca
Lucas, Ian C.
MacNeil, Angus Brendan
Mahmood, Mr Khalid
Mc Nally, John
McDonald, Stewart Malcolm
McDonald, Stuart C.
McDonnell, rh John
McFadden, rh Mr Pat
Miliband, rh Edward
Moon, Mrs Madeleine
Reed, Mr Steve
Rimmer, Ms Marie
Robinson, Mr Geoffrey
Ryan, rh Joan
Saville Roberts, rh Liz
Sharma, Mr Virendra
Sheerman, Mr Barry
Shuker, Mr Gavin
Siddiq, Tulip (Proxy vote cast by Vicky Foxcroft)
Soubry, rh Anna
Spellar, rh John
Spelman, rh Dame Caroline
Starmer, rh Keir
Sweeney, Mr Paul
Tami, rh Mark
Timms, rh Stephen
Vaizey, rh Mr Edward
Vaz, rh Keith
Whitehead, Dr Alan
Whitford, Dr Philippa
Williams, Dr Paul
Wollaston, Dr Sarah