- HISTORY OF LEPTOSPIROSIS INJURY FROM COCO-BAY MALAYSIA
- Damaged Heart from the infection – https://youtu.be/6aY90OyWqUU
- BREAKDOWN FROM THE PAIN
THE BOOK OF 25 -August 12 2017 update – the Leptospirosis Pain https://youtu.be/QVKfpDtaVYw
THE BOOK of 25 -LEPTOSPIROSIS REALITY CHECK – PAINFUL
THE BOOK of 25 – LEPTOSPIROSIS BLISTERS AND THE PAIN
THE BOOK OF 25 – DANGEROUS-SUNWAY MEDICAL – WE PREFER YOU DIE -PLEASE HURRY UP
The Blog moved to the following – just click on the link below to take you there. Merci!
– I am in the midst of dying from a horrible infection – Leptospirosis in Malaysia. I am Canadian but according to Justin Trudeau – And Canada’s consular division – not Canadian enough to be rescued. Malaysia refuses to treat me – and I collapsed many times – became bed ridden ad occasionally surfaced and begin to fight for my life. Its now a very complicated story and I am now having to appeal to a selected few countries to fight Canada’s King’s Prerogative that JT insists – he can use to block my care – But that means will die -or succumb to the infections myriad – smorgasbord of illness- all leading to death. So I am appealing to the Vatican- France – England – Australia – Germany & Sweden for Refugee Status – based on urgent medical grounds – as the disease increases – i will have no choice – Yes, the laws support my only decision – and as I will be on deaths door in the next few weeks. I either die here in Malaysia in bed – disowned by Canada – and as I have been warned – Malaysia is so horrific that more than likely – after I am deceased- Malaysia can actually just dump my body anywhere. I did alert Interpol in the event – The Vatican finally responded and now i must wait for directions as to how to proceed and which countries will take me. Italy, England – Sweden – France – Germany are all positioned to accept me – once The Vatican proceeds. I am just not sure I am going to make it.
Cristoph De Caermichael
https://writerswrite000.wordpress.com/2017/11/27/canadian-applying-for-urgent-asylum-canadas-deadly-kings-preoragative/The Queen can ignore or overrule ministerial advice in “grave constitutional crisis.”
While the overwhelming majority of the Queen’s prerogative powers are devolved to her ministers, there is one exception that allows her to wield power herself. Only “in grave constitutional crisis,” the Sovereign can “act contrary to or without Ministerial advice.” With no precedent in modern times, it’s not clear what would actually constitute this, but the possibility remains.
Prerogative powers are defined as “the residue of discretionary or arbitrary authority which at any given time is legally left in the hands of the CROWN.
“The Royal Prerogative remains a significant source of constitutional law which is largely immune from scrutiny by the courts.” The question here is, do we agree with the view that the Royal Prerogative is immune from scrutiny by the courts, and whether it remains a significant source of constitutional law. In addressing this view, the first point to consider is the definitional controversy of the term, ‘royal prerogative’ and its origin, then consider its nature, modern position and its significance within the UK Constitution, and finally, whether or not the royal prerogative is immune from scrutiny by the courts. Under the UK Constitution, all actions of government are undertaken in the name of the Crown. Historically, the term, ‘royal prerogative’ has been applied to those special rights and privileges, which the King had as a feudal lord. There are two schools of thought on the definitional controversy of the term. Blackstone advanced the first ‘narrow’ or ‘restrictive’ interpretation. Blackstone defines the prerogative in his Commentaries1 as: …..that special pre-eminence which the King hath over and above all other persons, and out of the ordinary course of the common law, in right of his regal dignity
In some statutes, the prerogative power is expressly preserved, for example, the Immigration Act 1971, s33 (5).12 The prerogative is divided into that which is exercised by ministers (in the name of the Crown), the ‘political prerogative’ and that which is personal to the monarch, ‘personal prerogative’. While regal powers are exercised in the name of the Crown by the government of the day, the Crown nevertheless retains important residual power. Of these, the dissolution of Parliament and the appointment of Prime Minister are the most significant. ‘There still remains the prerogative notion that the Crown never dies and can do no wrong’13, thus placing the Queen outside the jurisdiction of the courts and guaranteeing immunity from prosecution in her own courts. The political prerogative is usually sub-classified into Executive, Judicial and Legislative prerogatives. The Executive prerogative relates to international and national affairs, covering matters such as: disposition of the armed forces, conduct of the realm in time war and emergency, declaring war and peace, issuing passports, making treaties and the general conduct of external relations, including recognising foreign states and the consequential privileges and immunities flowing therefrom.14 The Judicial prerogative include that of mercy (power to issue pardon for offences)
The prerogative seems not to be subject to a satisfactory degree of accountability, either through Parliament or the courts. There have been a number of proposals for the reform of the royal prerogative by academics such as Professor Munro and Professor Brazier. Former Labour MP, Tony Benn campaigned for the abolition of the Royal Prerogative in the 1990’s, arguing that all governmental powers exercised on the advice of the Prime Minister and Cabinet should be subject to parliamentary scrutiny and require parliamentary approval. In conclusion, it is clear the view that the royal prerogative is immune from scrutiny by the courts, as the citation of the different types of prerogative powers and the reference to decided cases illustrate, is not quite accurate. However, saying that the royal prerogative is not immune from judicial scrutiny would be inaccurate, as the personal prerogative powers of the Queen is at least one element of the royal prerogative that supports the view above. It would be more accurate to say that royal prerogative powers within the UK are immune from judicial scrutiny to a certain extent, depending upon the nature of the power, not their source
- GO TO THE CHANNEL
- THE CHANNEL https://www.youtube.com/c/CristophDeCaermichael