However, English Bill of Rights (1688) states in its heads of declaration that King Charles II had “subverted and extirpated the Lawes and Liberties of this Kingdome” by amongst other things, “Committing and Prosecuting diverse Worthy Prelates for humbly Petitioning to be excused from Concurring to the said Assumed Power.”.
As a result, Article 5 of the Bill of Rights protects political speech that challenges HM Government by declaring for ever the following Subject’s Right, “That it is the Right of the Subjects to petition the King and all Commitments and Prosecutions for such Petitioning are Illegall.”
Scotland’s Claim of Rights (1689) has a similar clause:
“That it is the right of the subjects to petition the King and that all Imprisonments and prosecutiones for such petitioning are Contrary to law”
So long as HM Government is involved in the business of regulating what we eat, how we farm and the healthcare we receive, etc. the “auntient and indubitable Rights and Liberties of the People” to critique and question the speech, proceedings, policies, guidance and laws of HM Government remain sacrosanct and we will exercise and defend these liberties to the full extent of the law, using the Bill of Rights in the defence of our right to question government policy and laws.
Our concerns are that the Weston A. Price Foundation’s views against government policy on health and nutrition could be deemed harmful by government when in actual fact criticism of HM Government and its policies and laws has been been constitutionally protected speech in the UK and Commonwealth Realms since 1688. Art.5 of our Bill of Rights and associated English Common Law Rights were inspiration for USA’s 1st Amendment. They were a treaty between the people, represented by the Convention Parliament of 1688 and the King and Queen. No government was formed at the time and therefore no government can extinguish this treaty between the Crown and its Subjects.