The ‘Judiciary of Germany’ is the system of courts that interprets and applies the law in Germany.
In Germany, the independence of the judiciary is historically older than democracy.
The organisation of courts is traditionally strong, and almost all federal and state actions
are subject to judicial review.”

How cultural our systems are.  When one stands back and, in simple terms, surveys the systems of law, both making and exercising, in different countries we can see differences that not only reflect history but how respective tribes think.

In the UK the exercising of our law is functional, it is a function of society.  The judiciary is subservient to Parliament which in turn is subservient to the will of the people.  If things go wrong democracy ensures that there is room for correction, whereas say in Germany the Grundgesetz forms their Constitution.

This was adopted in 1949 and was meant to be an interim arrangement.  It reflected their recent history and sought to ensure never again would power be hijacked by a dictator.

Within the Grundgesetz is a very pertinent Article 146 which states that:

“This Constitution, which is valid for the entire German people following the achievement of the unity and freedom of Germany, ceases to be in force on the day on which a constitution adopted by a free decision of the German people comes into force.”

An amended version of the Grundgesetz was finally adopted under the Unification Treaty 1990.  It cannot be ignored that the Basic Law was never open to popular vote either in 1949 or in 1990, thus neglecting the provisions of Article 146.  It could therefore be concluded that, however ‘fundamental’ and virtuous, the German Constitution may be, it is undemocratic and illegal by its own definition.

The preamble to the written Constitution states:-

“Moved by the purpose to serve world peace as an equal part in a unified Europe, the German People have adopted, by virtue of their constituent power, this Constitution.”

This neglect of democracy runs right the way through the EU like the words in seaside rock.

The ability of the German judiciary to question the German state so freely gives a rigidity and autocratic nature to their system.  This can be seen as a reflection of their cultural and tribal psyche.

The UK, on the other hand, has a relatively democratic and fluid system.  This allows for freedom to play a major part in the development of our society.  Freedom as we all know is food for innovation, ownership and identity, the life blood of being ourselves.

Do not be fooled by the relaxed ‘unwritten constitution’, there is a clear prescribed order.  The judiciary are subservient to Parliament and Parliament is subservient to the people.

When we discover that many of our Supreme Court judges have had close involvement in EU Law and its machinations it is not surprising that a question mark flags up.  Have they been radicalised into the ways of our masters across the English Channel?

We are humans and make mistakes.  Mistakes have been made all through history; are we any different?  A precedent is used to make a law, a ‘case’ for considering in the future.  If a mistake is made, that error is used to make more errors.

A lot of trouble has been taken to undermine Article 9 of the Bill of Rights 1689.

The extent of our imprisonment is still becoming apparent.   Not only are regulations designed to benefit corporations locking down our commerce, but imposed law designed to benefit authoritarianism is locking down our democracy.

As the simple eyes of a child can determine impatience and anger, the layman can detect deceit however bound up in complexity.  The subtle dripping of propaganda has fooled many into ignoring the slow mist of enslavement at our door, while we become confused about our allegiances and flex muscles of misunderstanding.

And is the Queen now guilty of being deceived?  Is the Master of the Rolls careless?  Are all the other learned and wise who thought Parliament was in charge of political decisions, also guilty?

Surely the battle lines are drawn?  In their lust for subjugation the supporters of the undemocratic EU are going to pull our house down.

As for Judicial Independence in Germany?  See page 19, para3 and page 26 conclusion:

Our Supreme Court makes little sense when it neither ‘supreme’ nor impartial, making decisions that have little basis in sound law and contradict the definitions laid out in centuries of convention.  Morphing to German style.

However complex or sophisticated their rulings may be, those same childish eyes can see through their tangled web of deceit.  They have built unsafe structures with words and misconceived principles.  The Law is sometimes unclear in terms of precedents but clear in terms of statute law.  Article 9 Bill of Rights 1689 states:

“That the freedom of speech and debates or proceedings in Parliament ought not to be impeached or questioned in any court or place out of Parliament”

How eloquent the argument is.  The question of justiciability, how the court was entitled to determine the extent of prerogative powers.  Of course, in their virtuosity the ruling has nothing to do with Brexit, who could think such a thing from those learned men and women?

Did Chamberlain shut down Parliament in 1938 when trying to negotiate peace with Hitler?  Was that not similar?  Or perhaps the judges are just rankled that a good reason was not given.  Clearly not a just cause to pull down our system of governance and challenge Parliament’s authority.

While the chatter continues we can shut our ears and stand back from the maddened crowd.  Is this not a cultural battle?  A battle of meaning, of identity.  Are we to march down the road to fascism or be democratic?

We must not make the same mistakes as Grundgesetz but know when our system is under attack and take action to defend and preserve.  The battle lines have been drawn.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email