Partygate, Misleading Parliament and British Politics
17 April at 13:27 ·
PRISON. LOSS OF PRIVILEGE, POWER & POSITION. PUBLIC HUMILIATION AND REVENGE.
That's why they won't resign.
Why dhould anyone ever havr to be asked to resign. It is their duty to stay the course as long as possible.
Shantanu Panigrahi No, it is their duty to not break the law. It is their duty to lead with honour and provide an example to the whole population. It is their duty to understand the difference between right and wrong and not to act wrongly at any time. Those are the minimum requirements for being a leader.
Nigel MacGeorge in a democracy only the electorate must express what the duties of the leader is.
What even if they are corrupt?
The only type of democracy that can be incorrupt is Libertarian Democracy: as soon as you have a life-time Monarch as Head of State, that power corrupts all in the State in their frenzy to earn their incomes as set out by the Monarchy in the Queens Speech and the Royal Assent to Bills passed in Parliament. Within that constitution it is the Prime Minister's duty to remain in office until the Monarch puts in place the mechanisms that she sees fit to remove the Prime Minister from Power. As things stand the Prime Minister has sole control of the Parliamentary Code of conduct and is subject to the existing democratic processes through Party politics. Only the Prime Minister's Party can decide whether the degree of corruption in his actions and general conduct in Parliament and at No 10 Downing Street were so intolerable that on the balance of what would be best for the Party at the next general election he should be removed from Leadership of the Party before then. In a libertarian democracy that is not a three-party system funded by the taxpayer there are free votes in Parliament to remove a Prime Minister with a vote of no confidence. So under the present regime, the Parliamentary Privileges Committee would be wasting their time and resources in investigating the Prime Minister. He would be able to get through whatever decision they take just as he will get though whatever decision the Metropolitan Police take on Fixed Penalty Notices and whatever is contained in Sue Gray’s Report on Partygate. Both Rishi Sunak and Boris Johnson are getting on with their jobs and are not deterred by Party politics from Keir Starmer and Shantanu Panigrahi
Ed Davey and Ian Blackford in the House of Commons as simply playing games with the electorate for the coming elections.
Nigel MacGeorge, The Metropolitan Police has acted as the prosecutor, the jury and the judge in its internal court of law by handing out fixed penalty notices. I was one caught speeding in 30 mph zone and the Police handed me such a notice or attend a speed awareness course to escape the fine. When I started probing the legality and circumstances and this caused a minor delay Kent Police issued summons for me to appear before a Magistrates Court that I challenged by issuing a counter prosecution against the Police for wrongful summons as I had been prepared to attend the Speed awareness course and pay the fixed penalty for speeding but the Police did not reply to my email The Magistrate Liaison officer decided to ignore my counter prosecution of Kent Police and fined me more than the amount I was having to pay originally with points on my driving licence. This was 2017 Spring time. I appealed against the Magistrate Courts sentencing and decision not to let me counter prosecute Kent Police and am still waiting to know what Maidstone Crown Court will decide.
Steve Bray, only the exposition of truth is justice. Once the Metropolitan Police has finished its investigation and justified its decisions to each and every Fixed Penalty Notice it issues the defendants can challenge and file an Appeal in in a proper High Court against the judgment of the Police. The fact that some have paid their immediate fines does not mean that they have a criminal record. It is a civil matter at this stage. That is why the Metropolitan Police issued the fixed penalty notices drip by drip. So, the law has a very long way to run potentially. If Boris Johnson uses up his evidence now, he will suffer long term damage to his reputation including the Prime Ministership. No one can read another person’s mind as to the basis of their behaviour so Metropolitan Police has to be careful.
Well the Royal Assemt means nothing. It’s just protocol. I think you need to read up a bit, what you write is not true about the termination of a PM.
Jacqui Bachman I have explored the entire British Constitution from first hand experience of the unwritten inter-relationships between the Monarchy, Parliament, the Judiciary and the Law Enforcement. My view is that the correct guidelines have been followed by Boris Johnson. He has apologised for failing to understand the Covid-19 lockdown regulations. He is a human being. The Metropolitan Police has interpreted the laws and set a precedence that establishes the constitution. Now we should put it behind us and move on. Only a Court of law can punish Johnson further to give and others a criminal record. That would be the only mechanism barring Mr Johnson from Prime Ministership.