Keynote IV: Rt Hon. Baroness Hale of Richmond DBE

[@RahulPatel-wn8gv]

What was the hullaballoo abt the R Jackson v Attorney General judgement , Baroness Hale ? In a nutshell it was a decision by the England SC on the Qn of , whether the Parliament has unlimited sovereignty , to pass legislations , in this case , the Act challenged was the Hunting Act , 2005 which banned the hunting of Foxes . Hunting of Fox was sought to be banned by the House of Commons & the House of Lords ? House of Lords did not give its assent in time & after a delay of one year ( Act being passed twice by the House of Commons) was sent directly to the Queen for the Royal assent , as per the Parliaments Act ,1948 , which was challenged by R Jackson , as they claimed of the 1948 Act itself was an illegal Act derived from the 1911 Parliament Act , bypassing the House of Lords . Soooh it's a dispute , a litigation , amongst the 2 legislative Houses , the Executive & the England Judiciary , isn't it ? It is about , whether or not the Parliament has unlimited sovereignty , to legislate bills /laws... And what exactly does it mean : Sovereign ? Of Kings and Queens ... Independence , Supreme authority ... Or does it really mean : the elected Govt Council of Ministers in a Communist country ? That sounds absurd , Jacques ....how did u leap to that interpretation ? Simple. That's the dictionary meaning of the word : Soviet ...!!! But aren't we discussing abt Sovereign , Sovereignty of a Constitutional Monarchy .... How on earth can u mix it with a Communist council of ministers , that too an elected one ? Does it not sound preposterously crazy Jacques ? Does it , Baroness Hale ? Since u invoked the Constitutional Monarchy ;Democracy , whether a capital D or a small d , aren't we talking abt , interpretations from the perspective of the peoples ? That's precisely what democracy is all abt , of, by & for the peoples ... Now looking at the brouhaha if the supposed dispute amongst the three supreme branches of the government , what would the pplz think , how would they respond , Baroness Hale ? Before that , how many really would bother to go thru the entire judgment , including the Obiter dicta comments , & the precedents , case laws etc ...? Precisely , for that do they really hv the luxury of time & energy ? What with the top notch Corporate CEOz like E Musk , expecting n /or demanding the workers ie employees serve him for 70 or more hours per week, how would they really hv the luxury of time to devote attn to Judgements , most of which are utmost significant , affecting the hoi polloi directly n /or indirectly .... Alright , granted , they don't hv the luxury of sufficient time n energy , yet what'd they think of the Hunting Act judgement , Jacques ? The first thought would be abt the Aussie -American , Media Baron/Moghul , Rupert Murdoch media Empire &:his Fox news channel ... Is the England &. Wales govt enacting legislations to ban hunting of Fixed -the 4 legged beasts --or protecting Murdoch media Empire in the garb of prohibiting Fox-hunting ? Isn't that a far fetched leap of inference, surmise , ? Is it ...? How did American SC A Justice , A Scalia die ? That was an unfortunate , sad death in circumstances giving rise to speculative conspiracy theories , .... Texas ranch , - owner by one Poindexter whose case was listed in the US SC ... And the hunting expedition was organised by ? International order of St Hubertus , a 17th century secretive hunting society of aristocrats , with robes , titles &:all , like the illuminationnatiz.... Anyways how &why'd the common pplz drag Soviet & confuse it with Sovereign ...? City of London , glitz, glitter & glamour , the world of finance , banks , hedge funds , et al... Is that possible even remotely w/o active , aggressive assistance by the legal fraternity , Baroness Hale ? Yes it is true , British courts hv become a destination of last resort , the go to place for any & every dispute, esp commercial , financial , treatys , offering a stamp of authority , of legitimacy by settling financial disputes of a very high magnitude esp for litigants from the erstwhile Soviet union , Oligarchs , tycoons , football club , media industry owners , from Russia & Kazakhstan .... Isn't that how Gr Britain has acquired an international jurisdiction for any & every commercial , financial , global dispute , litigation ? What happens to the trumpeted , Sovereignty , nationalism , patriotism , drums banged shrill & loud , over past few decades esp by the overseas diaspora , preaching nationalism, patriotism to folks in their erstwhile home country which they've forsaken in search of greener (pun intended ) heavenly -pastures ....? The investigative agents appointed by the British law firms , to dig up evidence , euphemism for dirt , on the rival litigants , deploying any & every means , the British supreme bench choosing to look the other way , at the modus operandi of evidence gathering means ....? Very much unlike Perry Mason , Della Street & Paul Drake -Company hunting for evidence ...!!!!

[@RahulPatel-wn8gv]

What or who really is the Supreme Court of England & Wales / UK , Baroness Brenda Hale ? U mean , is it really a separate & distinct 3rd branch of UK -Judiciary , distinct from the Executive , the Legislature , is that so , Jacques ? Until a decade ago did u , the Law lords , not sit in the Parliament chambers ie the House of Lords ? Yes, when we moved out to a new building not far away from the parliament , I understand the confusion , Jacques ... Yes. Are u really the UK -SC or the Jury ie 12 SC Justices acting as Jurists / Jury members , deliberating upon , adjudicating upon disputes between the , Govt, the UK citizens , & the Royal Monarch ? To clear the confusion , Jacques one needs to dig a little deeper into the England &Wales, Scotland, Ireland , history ,atleast 4 centuries ago , if not 10 centuries ago. The recent R Gina Millers case , which ruled the then PM Boris Johnson's act of suspending ie proroguing the British parliament as illegal , as a legal precedent as old as 4 centuries ago , the Kings Proclamation case in 1610 , decided upon by the then Jurist , Sir Edward Coke , in the matter of King James 1 prohibiting the construction of new buildings in London , as a result of his decree to raise customs duties , to finance his war expeditions , was challenged by the then Tudors ... Sir Ed Coke & his colleagues ruled against the King James 1 ie the Monarch's powers to legislate , to make laws bypassing the England parliament. Which is what precisely , the Boris Johnson led govt was attempting to do , by suspending the parliament , totally bypassing the House of Commons members , in a frenetic hurry to meet the deadline of October 31 of leaving the EU... But , was it not already voted upon , decided by a majority of the Britons to **Leave the EU , in a referendum vote ? And what is the House of commons , anything but , parliamentarians , (ostensibly ) representing , elected by the pplz ? The referendum was reduced merely to a Qn of whether to , stay in or leave the EU ie "In or Out" ? The complex nitty gritties , the legal ,administrative , after effects rigmaroles of a soft border / hard borders could only be decided upon the domain expert parliamentarians ie the law makers , &:hence bypassing them , by BoJo was an illegal act. Wasn't this complex exercise, plan , contrived into a deceptive simple referendum , Qn, -"In or Out" itself a great mockery , by the Govt of UK , led by then PM David Cameron ? True. It was indeed reduced to a farce , by asking common pplz to vote upon something , a matter grave & utmost consequential the implications of which they'd barely be able to figure out , if at all for anything but for the lack of adequate & appropriate necessary information being denied /deprived. As for your lecture /speech to the Malaysian law students , was it a mere random coincidence ? of u being invited to Malaysia to deliver a lecture , in which u expound at length the pros &:cons of the proroguing case which would come up before ur Court in the immediate future? Why Malaysia / Kuala Lumpur ,vBariness B Hale ? What exactly are u hunting at Jacques ? The financial scandal described by the AG -US, Loretta Lynch , as a "kleptocracy case of the century" the 1 MDB case involving the then Malaysian PM ,vNajib Rajak , the investment pension fund , ostensibly set up to alleviate the common Malaysian pplz misery , was being usurped by the then PM Najib Rajak & his cronies , as a personal pvt Bank account to buy swish luxury properties in Manhattan , luxury jets, yachts , funding a Hollywood film , -Wilves of the Wall Street , --showcasing the decadent degenerative Wall St capital markets , a gargantuan scandal , which in fact was one of the key reasons , among a number of other key matters , which triggered a slew of the proverbial Judiciary activism , in the UK, the US, besides few other countries ? Yes indeed it is true & a well known fact of the legislative & executive branches of the parliamentary democracy hv only gone downhill , from bad to worse over past many decades... & would itvreally be remotely possible , Baroness B Hale w/o the indifference , to put it mildly , politely, on the part of the 3rd branch ie the Judiciary ? Most certainly &:emphatically , not & was it not high time that the Judiciary stepped in &:crack the whip , so to speak , to stem &reverse the rot , the deep rooted malaise in the legislature & the executive branches ? yet , how does the US &/or the UK acquire jurisdiction to investigate & even prosecute a gargantuan scandal , occurring in a remote , SE Asian sovereign Islamic republic / nation -state ? The financial scandal tentacles spread & reached far & wide ,across continents , the US, the UK /EU... And it involved bonds raised by Goldman Sachs , among other giant financial investor players .... And the city of London , happens to be the global hub , for money-matters , the financialisation of economies , Baroness Brenda Hale ? Why do u think I was sporting the spider brooch , on that very day , my bench delivered the sensational judgement in the proroguing case ?