Updated: May 1, 2021
It is called Constitutional Law. Every aspect of the processes and decisions of every single member of the State as well as every single institution from social services to law enforcement must be adjudicated as to its validity to check that it is consistent with the arbiter decides of what the Constitution states and this eventually takes place in the Supreme Court without the attachment of the Privy Council to the processes of the Supreme Court. The Speaker of the House of Commons may be regulated by the Monarch as the figure head or substantive democratic ruler, but the Monarch’s rulings are themselves subject to the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court on the grounds that in a democracy no one is above the law. The composition of the Supreme Court itself has to be on the basis of meritocracy through a process of evaluating which Judge going through the ranks of the Judicial processes of the State in Criminal or Civil law has maintained a record of the least numbers of Appeals successfully mounted against his or her judgments and on that meritocracy the Justices of the Supreme Court are then selected to pass unanimous decisions of 15 Justices serving at this Court on any particular issue. If unanimous judgements are not delivered, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court must have the final decision on the Judgement passed. The tenure of the Chief Justice must be limited to 5 years. This process is needed because the Rule of Law has to be above the State and not part of the State so that it is totally independent of the State. This is the only means by which the public can have confidence in the Constitution of a State whether it is a written constitution or an unwritten one such as we have in the United Kingdom. The Judges in lower courts can use if they so wish legal precedents in the arrival of their judgments and do not need to provide Full Written Reasons for their judgments if there is a substantive Appeal process in place which is adhered to from Her Majesty’s Court and Tribunal System’s regulatory process with the facility of Permission to Appeal decision of a particular Judge in place.
In light of this I await the judgement of the Supreme Court to the following petition:
Continuing State-organised harassment
AOL Service Update <email@example.com>
Sat, 5 Sep at 22:40
I am not clear whether the Master at the Court of Appeal has read my attached complaint on this Saturday against his deliberate deceitful misinterpretation of my Appeal in Case Number 2018/PI/11721 that I sought an explanation for in terms of Full Written Reasons for the progress of this Appeal as attached: ToCourtofAppealccSupremeCourt5Sep2020 but it would appear from the two additional bullying, intimidatory and harassing emails designed to pervert the course of justice that I have just received as attached Frindeed5Sep2020c.docx and FrExtinctionRebellion5Sep2020b.docx, that the Master concerned remains unapologetic for having misled me and the wider legal community.
Please identify the name of the Master responsible for this crime against humanity immediately, unless Her Majesty the Queen has voluntarily abdicated to avoid being summoned to the Court to explain her conduct over the past 20 years of monarchy that saw me being persecuted by the State and its overseas allied States for daring to retaliate at the monsters of the University of Greenwich, Shell UK, Sainsburys, Royal Mail, and the Mental Health authorities by publishing my discoveries on this unravelling of the British State in my Blog https://shantanup.wordpress.com.
Dr Shantanu Panigrahi
3 Hoath Lane
Kent ME8 0SL