Living by the ‘Rule-of-Law’ (part 2)


By Roger Hayes

Although Roger has written this article covering the situation with the British ‘legal’ system. These principles can be carried through within all Westernized societies. Our unjust laws today all unfortunately pertain to contract law, which is maritime/admiralty law (shipping/fleet laws) and not common law and anything to do with God’s/natural laws.



Courts, Judges & Juries


If Parliament made a statue and a man charged with an offence of breaking that regulation was found not guilty – that statute would be struck down. A jury is not beholden to the system. A judge is. A jury is thus more reliable than a judge in the handing down of justice.


Judges can be bought, blackmailed, intimidated (and have been). It is easier to corrupt a judge than a whole jury. Our jury system is protected by our constitution. It is our right to be tried by jury. The jury system protects us from arbitrary power and bent judges.


Statues must be in harmony with the common laws to be enforceable. If unfair statues are pursued by the authorities a defendant can nominate to be tried by jury – which in seeing the injustice of the statute (and the potential of themselves being its victim) would find the defendant not guilty and thus strike down the statue. This is the power of a jury. Power belongs to the people.


Common law trumps statues. Some in the legal profession have been heard to take a contrary view… but common sense tells us that common law is and must be superior. If a government passed legislation making itself permanent i.e. declaring itself a dictatorship – the people could act on their common law right to withdraw their consent to being governed – putting government back in its box – common law thus trumping a statue. (Common sense).


The jury is the highest authority in the land – but beneath the law.


A jury can stand in judgement of anybody… nobody is above the law.


If the government makes legislation and a jury thinks it is unjust, through finding a defendant not guilty they are able to demonstrate the authority of the jury over government.


A judge cannot direct a jury in its decisions – many try but in so doing they are in breach of the law. Judges must not lead a jury to a decision. A judge must only give direction in the interpretation of the law. The jury is entirely independent of the judge. The jury must make its own mind up and not be lead by a judge.


The people make the law through validation or the rejection of statutes. Juries re-validate or dispense with old established laws through their verdicts.


Juries are the people’s protection against the arbitrary power of the ruling class. Juries are a common law right and are protected by our constitution – they cannot be tampered with by government, although it is done so, their meddling is unlawful. The removal of jury trials is    unlawful and unconstitutional. The ‘powers that be’ * are desperately trying to dismantle our jury system – to secure more ‘power’ for themselves. What we are witnessing is a blatant power grab by the political established *… which we must challenge.


Magistrates Courts have become statute courts…mostly ignorant of and thus ignoring our common law rights. We must enter these courts and claim back our rights and push back the imposition of over-zealous regulations. We do this by claiming common law jurisdiction in these courts. Through this process we claw back our power from the government*. Government use the court system to enforce its control.


Magistrates and judges make rulings on their interpretations of statutes and laws – their decisions are not always fair. Juries give verdicts on the basis of their interpretation of justice and are mostly fair.


Magistrates are now trained to do the bidding of the legal advisor in court. It is questionable that they have any real value in the absence of autonomy and with limited discretion. Magistrate’s courts are being closed down in large numbers and so-called justice is being delivered by Royal Mail (British postal service) in the form of ‘Penalty Charge Notices’ [PCN’s] imposed upon us by statutes. These may be legal, but they are not lawful. PCN’s are enforced with our consent (unwittingly|) – WITHHOLD YOUR CONSENT AND THEY CANNOT BE ENFORCED.


Our law (specifically – the Petition and Declaration of Rights) forbids fines and forfeiture without justice in a court. The judge that ruled that a PCN is not a fine may have had ‘other things’ on his mind when he made that ruling. PCN’s are unlawful.


Magistrate’s autonomy and full discretion must be returned to them and legal advisers subjugated to the authority of magistrates once more. PCN’s must be abandoned as an unlawful instrument of oppression.


If a defendant claims his ‘common law’ (or inalienable) rights in a court – it becomes a common law court.


The courts belong to the people – they do not belong to the ushers, private security personnel, magistrates, legal advisers, district or circuit judges – most of whom have forgotten or probably never knew this.


Our Monarch represents the power of the people (not the government) in our courts. The courts do not get their authority from the government. Magistrates and judges give allegiance to Her Majesty – they are in effect submitting to the power and authority of the people – don’t forget that!


Neither judge nor legal advisor can tell us by whom we can be represented – (they certainly try). The ‘right of audience’ that is claimed by the legal professional in a court (but denied to you and I) – is a ‘statute’ imposed upon us, unwittingly and with our consent and not written by the legal fraternity. I would call this ‘a protection racket.’


The courts are there to serve the interest of justice… they are being used as tools to extract money from us. We need to get them working in the interest of justice for the majority, not as revenue collection agencies for the ruling elite *.


In each magistrate’s court there is an automatic right to appeal… without any reason given. This projects the case into a higher court where a jury trial will be available.


The withholding of a jury trial is unlawful. It is a deliberate power grab and an attempt to subvert common law to statutes – this is the thin end of a very thick (and dangerous) wedge.


In claiming common law jurisdiction in court – statutes cannot be imposed without the consent of the defendant. The defendant is often tricked into consent – thus converting the court back to a statute court (also called an admiralty court).


You do not need permission to claim common law rights – you declare them – it is your right to do so.  


If anybody tries to deny you your common law rights in court – they are in contempt of court… and that includes judges.



KNOW THE LAW – your freedom depends on it


Notes by Digger 

* which are the elite despotic Jews.

I aim to post Part 3, the final part in this “Living by the ‘Rule-of-Law’ “ article within a week or so.


Related essays

Part 1 – Statutes vs Law

FMOTL page










Previous Post
Leave a comment


  1. Postępować zgodnie z prawem (część II) « Stop Syjonizmowi
  2. Gazeta Polska - Postępować zgodnie z prawem (część II)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: