It is said that justice should be blind. The story in today’s Mail on Sunday (if it can be taken at face value) demonstrates it is also deaf and dumb.
The big story here is that the police stand accused of failing/refusing to investigate serious fraud allegations. Further, that the police have only provided information that has been submitted to them to Parliament on the condition that the information is not made public. Quite where the police get off telling our nominally elected representatives who make the law what they can and cannot do concerning the allegations that have been made, is jaw dropping.
But for a number of people, the claim that the police have deliberately refused their duty to investigate criminal activity, this is far from a new development.
For in the United Kingdom today we have a law enforcement and ‘justice’ system that selectively applies the law in the interests of their ‘friends’ – namely the establishment and the various branches of government and big business and – most importantly – their agents. It has been that way for many years and it is not being challenged or reported.
But the problem goes far beyond that and has much more important and far reaching consequences. What we are finding is that the police and the authorities are not only failing to uphold the law and failing to act within the law, they are taking upon themselves to make up law themselves irrespective of what has been decided in Parliament by our nominal representatives. This shadow ‘field law’ is designed solely with the interests of the establishment in mind and used to maintain the interpretation of what these unelected and unaccountable officers consider to be ‘good order’.
While the Mail rushes into print to splash Graham Freeman’s story, they are nowhere to be found when ordinary people flag up stories of their own backed up with evidence, which has resulted in the police and branches of local government turning a blind eye to crimes being committed by agents of the establishment, such as bailiffs. Complaints of criminal activity, especially fraud, against bailiffs result in the police twisting themselves into contortions to come up with unjustifiable excuses not to investigate, despite hard evidence of fraud and other offences. One such ongoing case is being currently documented on a superbly written blog by Peter North. There are 17 posts so far, but when you read it from the earliest post in June up to the most recent, the story that develops will stagger you. It lays bare how the various entities display a dogged determination to evade their duty to uphold the law when those who have broken it are considered to be on the same team. Bringing fraudulent bailiffs to account for their criminal behaviour would undermine the system’s ability to maintain their version of ‘good order’ by extracting money from ordinary people when the establishment deigns to levy it.
When people complaint to the local authorities, on whose behalf the bailiffs are acting, in every single case the authorities wash their hands like Pontius Pilate and say it’s nothing to do with them. But it goes further, because not only are the bailiffs acting beyond the law, local authorities themselves are behaving in a criminal manner too. The most common example of this is their fraudulent charges for liability orders.
The Council Tax (Administration and Enforcement) Regulations 1992 (as amended), permit councils to charge ‘costs reasonably incurred’ for liability orders to enforce council tax demands. The court fee cost of liability orders, according to the Magistrates’ Courts fee schedule, is £3.00. When factoring in administration and postage overheads the total charged to the resident should be no more than £10. Yet many councils are charging between £80 – £125 per order, making a profit after costs reasonably incurred. See here and here. This is blatantly against the law, yet not a single prosecution has been forthcoming. The establishment uses the law to ensure people who do not pay the council tax demand in full are threatened, bullied and harrassed until the money is prised from them. Yet the same establishment works in concert to ensure when it breaks the law, no legal action will follow. The rules are only for the little people.
Despite this happening hundreds of thousands of times each and every year, with the fraud – at a conservative estimate – running to around £1 billion per year in excessive charging, the media completely ignores the issue. Despite the reams of evidence that debt is being used by the establishment as a tool to engineer even more debt from which it can profit – turning people into debt slaves – the slavers are being shielded from the rule of law by the dogged refusal of their friends to apply the law.
The implications of this are so serious and far reaching many people struggle to process and accept the unjust reality, and choose to avert their gaze and bury their heads in the sand. The concept of our supposedly benevolent and munificent institutions abusing the law to extort monies to which they are not entitled from ordinary people, is just too terrible to accept, let alone challenge.
This issue again throws up a critical issue, namely the absence of a written and codified constitution. The deliberately vague and disturbingly flexible unwritten articles which the establishment relies upon to maintain its control of the people, when it is supposed to be the servant of the people, makes this injustice possible. Although we know broadly what our rights are supposed to be, the fact they are not enumerated makes it difficult to uphold them through the judicial system. Rights cannot be given to people, they are ours by default. But, like entitlements, they are all too often considered by the establishment as gifts to be distributed when it sees fit. As a result the status quo maintains this unjust state of affairs where regulatory and oversight bodies are supposed to be independent but see themselves as sharing a duty to hold the line against the great unwashed, thus enabling fraudulent and illegal actions to continue without challenge.
And they have the nerve to call this a democracy.
To cap it all, we see Eric Pickles happy chuntering on about the way things are supposed to be, stating in the ‘Guidance to local councils on good practice in the collection of Council Tax arrears’ that some of the tactics and actions carried out as standard practice by bailiffs, break the law:
But where is he when the enforcement of the law is not forthcoming because the police ignore the reports made to them despite the evidence provided, go on to claim that confirmed criminal acts are civil matters, and therefore refuse to fulfil their duty to investigate and bring the perpetrators before the courts? Where is our supposedly fearless media, fighting for truth and justice? All we see are the various elements of the establishment obscuscate, convolute, buck pass and ultimately put their financial interests before all else.
We are all familiar with the notion of justice being blind. But reality nothing could be further from the truth. People need to understand and come to terms with this shocking fact, justice for all, equal under the law, is a cynically perpetrated myth. Our response, which should rightly be loaded with contempt and opprobrium, has to be the withdrawal of our consent for these vomit inducing creatures to govern us, as they knowingly aid and abet fraudsters and thieves in the commission of their crimes. People need to learn how we can withdraw our consent peacefully in order to bring about change. The writings of Gene Sharp point the way, but they are not a template. He makes clear that how we challenge the establishment beast is down to us to figure out and execute. The question now is will we?
So while it is all well and good for the Mail on Sunday to splash today’s story about how members of the establishment are covering for each other while only the little people face the full force of the law, when will it focus on the much larger, wider and more insipid injustices we have detailed above, that go on day after day in this country?
I dedicate this post to Madame Justice, in honour of the holiday that she seems to have taken from these parts, and in recognition of the impostor that stands in her stead.