FREEDOM OF INFORMATION REQUEST TO HOME OFFICE

   
Refusal of Ministry of Justice to answer questions on:-

1. The exclusion of a guaranteed equality before the law from English law

2. The exclusion of the Cornish from the Framework Convention for Minorities

3. The exclusion of Cornwall from the social benefits of the Crown Estate

Freedom of Information Request to The Rt.Hon.Theresa May MP.,

Secretary of State for Home Affairs and Minister for Women and Equality.


Dear Theresa May,

The Ministry of Justice has responded to a Freedom of Information request of 30th September 2009, following an intervention by the Information Commissioner, but has failed to provide information on the Framework Convention for National Minorities or the exclusion of equality before the law from English law or explain why the Crown Estate is excluded from Cornwall. (15th April 2010, Case No:- 61514). An example of the possible is to be found in the Constitution of the Monarchy of Sweden which guarantees at Article 1/9:- “Courts, public authorities and others performing functions within the public administration shall observe in their work the equality of all persons before the law and shall maintain objectivity and impartiality”.

(1). Is it possible for Parliament to guarantee equality before the law for one and all in Britain by incorporating the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights 1948 into British law?

The Duchy of Cornwall has the constitutional power to administer Cornish land separately from England. The Crown Estate confirms:- “The Crown Estate has no holdings within the boundaries of Cornwall. The analogous landowner in Cornwall is the Duchy of Cornwall”. (Crown Estate response to a Freedom of Information Request, 7th January 2005). The Crown Estate Act 1961 creates a public body to provide: “grants for public or charitable purposes”, such as affordable housing and community projects, throughout the UK except Cornwall a British nation. The Act also requires the Crown Estate to; “exclude any element of monopoly value”. These provisions do not appear in the Duchy of Cornwall Management Act of 1982, by which, the interests of the Duke of Cornwall are given priority by HM Treasury. The separation of Cornwall from the Crown Estate provides an example of Cornwall being subject to the disadvantages of separation from the rest of the UK without having the compensating recognition due to a British nation of Celtic origins.

(2). What interdepartmental action is proposed since, this situation must long since have been known to the Government’s South West of England Rural Development Agency and the Government Office for the South West who refuse to accept responsibility for investigating this self-evidently possible case of official racial discrimination against the Cornish national minority, as must have come to light in their dealings with the Crown Estate and the Duchy of Cornwall?

(3). Will the government please explain the reason for the separation of Cornwall from
the Crown Estate?

There is no justifiable constitutional reason for the Duchy of Cornwall to be exempt from the registration of its land. (Land Registration Act 2002, section 84, note 135). As if the ruler of another country, the Duke exercises the title of Lord Paramount in Cornwall (Lord of the Soil on account of claiming ownership of the pre-Roman Stannaries which cover the whole of Cornwall), a corresponding title is held by the HM The Queen in respect of land, intestate estates and bona vacantia elsewhere in the UK.

(4). Please explain why the secretive Duchy of Cornwall administration of Cornish land and cultural assets is supported by such government assistance as exemptions from the Competition Act 1998, section 73, the Companies Act 2006, sections 1025 & 1032, and the Planning Act 2008 with “the Duke of Cornwall as the appropriate authority” under section 227?
(5). Does the following opinion of ‘The Law Officers of the Crown’ as stated in 1913, still apply:- “We are of the opinion that the same principles which render the provisions of an Act of Parliament inapplicable to the Crown, unless the Crown is expressly named, apply also to the Prince of Wales in his capacity as Duke of Cornwall. This result arises from the peculiar title of the Prince of Wales to the Duchy of Cornwall…..The Duke of Cornwall is not liable to taxation…”. (National Archives ref:- LO3/467).

The Dark Ages of British history is revealed in: ‘The Story of English’ by BBC Books, Faber and Faber, London, 1992, observes on page 65: “The Gaelic language was spoken in Cornwall until the eighteenth century”, and: “The Anglo-Saxon race war against the Celts, which preserved virtually no trace of the Celtic languages in English”. This may explain why ‘pre-England’ does not appear in everyday English dictionaries. In 2002 the government recognised the Cornish Celtic language. Officially, the Cornish Celtic language exists but the Cornish people, as a national minority, do not, and are denied access to an education in their own language, history, traditions and cultural heritage.

(6). Is it possible for Parliament to be asked to include the Cornish within the provisions of the Council of Europe’s human rights provision of ‘The Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities’ after being excluded since 1998?

The first Duchy of Cornwall Royal Charter of 17th March 1337 was published by Her Majesty’s Stationery Office in 1978 as Constitutional Law, Statutes in Force. Three Duchy charters proclaimed ownership of the Stannaries (the legal and administrative organisation of the tin mining industry of Cornwall) and the historic Tintagel Site of Arthurian British legend etc. It is contended that Cornish rights are still being denied by two secret Duchy charters of 18th March 1337 and 3rd January 1338 which created unmistakably dictatorial powers with crown immunity applicable only for Cornwall a British nation. (Rowe v. Brenton, Trial at Bar, 1828, Concanen Ed. Appendix 9; 10 & 11).

(7). Will the government please investigate the current validity of the Duchy of Cornwall
Charters?

Absolute power prevailed even when an attempt to control royal power was intended by the Royal Mines Act 1688 which declared: “No mine of tin or copper shall hereafter be reputed or taken to be a royal mine”. However, this Act of Parliament has been disregarded and not applied in Cornwall.

(8). Please explain why the Duchy of Cornwall is the beneficiary of the Duke of Cornwall’s judicial function under the Supreme Court Act 1981 section 120 as the administrator of bankruptcies in Cornwall?

Consistent availability of the power of the state enables the Duchy to claim any land “reputed to be Duchy possessions”. (Duchy of Cornwall Management Act 1863 s. 37). The Duchy of Cornwall is, therefore, administering Cornish land to claim its cultural heritage as English and to suppress and eliminate the British Celtic identity of Cornwall. Proof of non-English identity for Cornwall a British nation is also found in the levying of a Duchy tax on tin production until 1828 at twice the rate for Cornwall as that applicable to Anglo-Saxon Devon. Subsequently, replaced with Duchy mineral rights in Cornwall. The Cornwall Submarine Mines Act 1858 claims the foreshore of Cornwall as “part of the territorial possessions of the Duchy of Cornwall”, this provision, as with the right to gold and silver in Cornwall, (Treasure Act 1996), is evidence of coveted symbols of power over a Celtic nation. Such concessions enable the maximisation of profits for the Duke of Cornwall from Cornish land, minerals and cultural assets.

(9). Will the government please discontinue the authorisation of such clear examples of
the abuses of power and the denial of the principle of ‘equality’ ?

(10). Please explain why Article 13 and Protocol 12 of the European Convention for Human Rights, intended to prevent the abuse of power by persons acting in an official capacity, is excluded from the UK Human Rights Act? These omissions appear intended to provide a legal vacuum to permit people in power to hide with impunity Duchy of Cornwall immunities in the decision making process for the exploitation of the indigenous Cornish people of pre-England British origins.

It is contended that the exclusion of international human rights law from English law is exposed as institutional bias by the unique Royal Charter of Pardon of 1508, (Rowe v. Brenton, Trial at Bar, 1828, Concanen Ed., Appendix 54) won by the Cornish nation to veto any abuse of power by or for the Duchy of Cornwall considered prejudicial to Cornwall.

(11). Will the government please investigate the current validity of the Charter of
Pardon 1508?

(12). Will the government please discontinue exemptions for politicians and officials from racial discrimination laws. (e.g., The Equality Act 2006, section 52[3a])? The government has declared the Duchy of Cornwall to be a ‘private estate’ and made it exempt from equality before the law in a vain attempt to place it beyond human investigation. This policy protects the Duchy and hides the fact that Cornwall is a British nation and is not culturally or historically part of England.

(13). Is a sovereign Parliament entitled to enact racially biased legislation?

(14). Will the government please clarify the position of the Duchy of Cornwall in Cornwall? It is contended that the Duchy of Cornwall remains an emanation of the state to provide, chiefly from Cornwall, an income for the heir to the throne to avoid imposing additional taxation on the English national majority. The Duchy of Lancaster Benevolent Fund (Reg.No.1026752) prescribes the areas of benefit from the income resulting from intestate estates as: “The counties of Lancaster, Greater Manchester and Merseyside” in agreement with the areas of collection. The Duke of Cornwall Benevolent Fund (Reg.No. 269183) prescribes the areas of benefit for income resulting from intestate estates as: “United Kingdom and elsewhere”. This benefit is not confined to the area of collection, namely, Cornwall. Consequently, it would appear to be the reverse of the position with the Crown Estate being excluded from Cornwall and implies a further separation from the UK. (Para.2).

(15). Will the government please provide legal equality to prevent official discrimination against the right of Cornwall to be separated, as with Scotland and Wales, from the English Census form 2011 (in line with the separation of Cornwall from the Crown Estate) to create a dedicated Duchy of Cornwall Census 2011 form, and as a precedent to ensure the inclusion of the Cornish within the human rights Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities as a legally recognised people?

Thank you for your time,

Yours sincerely,


Colin Murley,
Stannary Information Office,
Bal Lake, Camborne, Cornwall TR14 0JG


www.cornishstannaryparliament.org
 

What's Related

Document Options

Trackback

Trackback URL for this entry: http://cornishstannaryparliament.co.uk//resources//trackback.php?id=20100518165203147

No trackback comments for this entry.
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION REQUEST TO HOME OFFICE | 0 comments | Create New Account
The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
copyright CSP 2006 ..... Designed and hosted by FTI