Five Steps to Understand the Constitution

To govern is to decide on what is morally acceptable and what is not within our community. It is to create boundaries to acceptable behaviour.

This will involve deciding on 'laws' and then enforcing them.

The person or group of people who decide on the laws of the community hold the power - because they hold the power to punish.
It's a simple question - 'Can government do what it likes?' If it can, then we're in a tyranny already and we might as well pack up now! If the answer is 'yes' to that question, then it was never much of a constitution in the first place and they should have gained a tyrannical power over us a long time ago.

If, however, the answer to the above question is no - they are not supposed to be able to do anything they like, then there must be constraints placed over the government to limit their powers.

Any right-minded individual with common sense knows that the government cannot do anything it wishes legitimately

The Government is indeed limited and does not have all power - that couldn't possibly be the case and never has been. People all through our history and the history of law have known and stated that there are checks and balances in place to prevent government tyranny and criminal behaviour from government itself!

And yet the government claims that parliament is sovereign! The absurdity of the claims they make on the Parliament website are simply breath-taking. We've pasted the first chunk below. Have a read of this sheer stupidity:

Parliamentary sovereignty is a principle of the UK constitution. It makes Parliament the supreme legal authority in the UK, which can create or end any law. Generally, the courts cannot overrule its legislation and no Parliament can pass laws that future Parliaments cannot change. Parliamentary sovereignty is the most important part of the UK constitution.

Somebody in parliament cannot see the absurd and imbecilic claims that are being made here and clearly understand nothing of the Constitution.

Remember this...

What is a constitution primarily for?
To guard against our own administrative government itself becoming criminal in nature
The part of government that deals with the creation of 'law' is Parliament. It is known as the 'legislature', one of the three traditional branches of government (Legislature, Judiciary and Executive).

The legislature (Parliament in Britain) is made up of two houses the lower and upper houses or House of Commons and House of Lords. In America, the legislative branch as a whole is known as Congress divided into the House of Representatives (lower house) and the Senate (upper house).

Government can only create law through this mechanism and the type of law it creates is known as legislation or statutory law.

If the government has checks, balances and limitations placed upon it, then clearly there must be a higher form of law above legislation. There must be rules and principles that limit the kinds of laws that our legislature can create.

We better be sure that's the case because the people who work in parliament are politicians - and most people don't trust them. So we better hope there are principles they have to follow and places they can't go with their power!
Trial by Jury is astounding. Not all societies around the world have a system of Trial by Jury because their Rule of Law is not based on Common Law.

Trial by Jury is fundamentally a Common Law mechanism and is the primary feature of a democratic system of governance (not voting in elections as most believe).

This is the astounding bit - Trial by Jury is not merely about judging on the guilt of the accused - important though that is.

A jury also has the power to judge on the justice of the law! They can decide on the appropriateness of a piece of legislation.

That feature above is the most profound and important of a common law-based constitution. Think about it! It places the people in authority over the legislature. Most people - even constitutional commentators and 'experts' in the establishment - never talk about this. Why? Either because the powers that shouldn't be don't want those concepts expressed openly and certainly not communicate it to you - or they are simply ignorant of it due to miseducation and propaganda.

The jury has the power to return a 'Not Guilty' verdict - even though the defendant has technically broken the law. This causes what is called Annulment by Jury or Jury Nullification. More simply, this is known as Jury Independence: the people's right to disregard the 'law' (legislation) and decide according to their conscience. That is the main way in which people retain their sovereignty and authority over their own administrative government under a Democratic Common Law Constitution.
In a Democratic Common Law-based governing system, the Head of State is the most senior public servant in the land and they have many important functions - but one of these is more important than any other.

Before stating what it is, we need to understand that all legislation that is proposed in the legislature (Parliament) in the form of Bills has to come before the Monarch to be ratified.

This mechanism is called Royal Assent in Britain. Importantly, however, the Monarch has the power to refuse that assent to a Bill of parliament, meaning they can block it. When people first hear about this, they often feel edgy and irritated, because they feel that this would be blocking the will of our 'representatives'. But it is meant to be there as a protection mechanism. Think about it...

The Monarch's most important role is to prevent the formation of legislation that infringes on the rights and liberties of the people and on the constitution.

It is to prevent too much power coming from politicians! Given that most people rightly don't trust politicians - maybe this is a good thing!

Now the powers-that-be will claim - as in fact they do on the parliament website - that, whilst the King or Queen has the power to refuse assent, they wouldn't do this because it is now regarded as a mere formality. Decided by who exactly?

Parliament cannot write itself into constitutional authority

Remember, that this is how the constitution was set-up to work. They are disregarding it and are getting away with it. Why? Because we, the people, aren't owning the constitution and defending it. We haven't cared enough!