The case of the missing conviction

Neil Herron joins Prisoner JW7874 in pointing out that demands for payment via fines without first achieving a conviction are not compatible with the Bill of Rights 1689 which states:

That all grants and promises of fines and forfeitures of particular persons before conviction are illegal and void.

Now, I don't seriously expect these objections to go very far but, frankly, I can't put my finger on why. As Mr. Herron points out:

As stated in the ‘Metric Martyrs’ Judgment in the Supreme Court of Judicature, Queen’s Bench Division (18th February 2002) by Lord Justice Laws and Justice Crane (I will paraphrase, but have included a full copy of the Judgment with the relevant sections 62 and 63 highlighted):

62 “We should recognise a hierarchy of Acts of Parliament: as it were ‘ordinary’ statutes and ‘constitutional’ statutes. The special status of constitutional statutes follows the special status of constitutional rights. Examples are Magna Carta, Bill of Rights 1689, The Act of Union, the Reform Acts etc.”

63. “Ordinary statutes may be impliedly repealed. Constitutional statutes may not…”

As you are no doubt aware, Sunderland City Council went to quite considerable lengths to achieve the Metric Martyrs Judgment and the precedent set by Lord Justice Laws is clear and unambiguous.

Mr. Herron should know, because he was there when the judgement was made.

Posted by John at December 16, 2004 09:49 AM | TrackBack