Inquista vs King Hubert
Against King Hubert of the United Kingdom of Davishire and Bucks
The Microstate of Inquista is seeking to petition a trial against King Hubert of Davishire and Bucks. King Hubert's utter disregard for human rights and his absolute disdain towards democracy is a clear violation of the basic principles of the European Union. To quote the news coming out of Davishire:
QUOTE (On The Other Hand...; 14th March 2015)
It has been reported that His Majesty the King is set to use the Royal Prerogative for the first time in history today. This is an ancient power, that still exists, which gives the sovereign the authority to dissolve parliaments and set his own government.
QUOTE (On The Other Hand...; 23rd March 2015)
.. since been confirmed by Sandford Palace and Downing Street that His Majesty has removed Mr Cameron from office as Prime Minister and has appointed the Right Honourable Malcolm Tucker, leader of the Liberal Party as Prime Commissioner effective from 20:00hrs this evening with David Cameron leaving Downing street shortly after. Parliament will also be dissolved at that time. Fresh elections will be held on the 7th May.
We believes that these actions carried out by King Hubert have violated sections I, III and IV of the Article XX under the Universal Deceleration of Human Rights:
QUOTE (Universal Declaration of Human Rights; Article XX)
I. Everyone has the right to take part in the government of his country, directly or through freely chosen representatives
III. The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government.
IV. This will shall be expressed in periodic and genuine elections, conducted under universal and equal suffrage for all of legal voting age,and heldby secret vote or by equivalent free voting procedures.
It is clear that King Hubert (who is not not elected or selected by the Davishirian people as a monarch) has diminished the rights of Davishirian people to take part in their own government by removing their democratically elected head of state and replacing it with a candidate of his own favour. Conservative Prime Minister David Cameron was elected by the Davishirian people as their representative in government since winning an outright majority on November 21st 2014. King Hubert has directly used his powers as monarch to remove Mr. Cameron from office and has replaced him with leader of the Liberal Party, Malcolm Tucker. King Hubert has therefore unjustly destroyed the democratic process of Davishire and the right of its people to choose their own representatives.
It is also clear that the will of the Davishirian people no longer form the basis of authority of their own government, as popular opinion contrasts sharply with the actions of King Hubert, as evidenced by these following news articles printed in Davishire:
QUOTE (On The Other Hand...; 21st March 2015)
Opinions polls are showing the conservatives in the lead, ahead of the Liberal Party by 8 points with the Alternatives also rising in the polls at the expensive of the socialists and the greens.
QUOTE (On The Other Hand...; 23rd March 2015)
...never before has a monarch removed a Prime Minister from office, despite it being their right as sovereign. It is likely to be a highly controversial move considering the governments relative popularity[...] It must however be noted that the conservatives are more popular than the Liberal Party in the opinion polls
Even if it truly was the will of the Davishirian people, then the elected representative of Davishire should have removed Mr. Cameron from office, not the monarch.
Furthermore, King Hubert's actions have undermined the democratic and electoral process of the country. Having won 230 out of 400 seats in government following the election results on November 21st 2014, the Conservative Party had rightfully won its position in government as mandated by its people. Despite this, King Hubert has dissolved Parliament and called for fresh elections. These elections are definitely not a set of periodic elections set out by their law or constitution, nor is it an election that has been directly requested by the people. Rather, this election is completely arbitrary and has been called at the complete desire of King Hubert.
We believe that King Hubert has denied the right of democratic governance to his own people, and has completely interfered in their political affairs. We believe that the evidence we have provided is sufficient to show that King Hubert has broken numerous sections under the the UDHoR and should therefore face serious consequences.
Ryccia last edited by
We support this. A King cannot prive the people of their choice. King Hubert is violating a basic, principal and important right of the people: democracy.
Davishire last edited by
His Majesty the King does heavily dispute the allegations, bit will not comment until the case does come to court
Albion on sea last edited by
I, Harry Bielman of Albion, disputes the charges brought against King Hubert. What if the people of Davishire would rather their king have some power, rather than just be a figure-head? There just isn't enough information to support wrongdoing. No one was hurt either.
Poland-Lithuania last edited by
The Court will deliberate the merits of the case.
This case may potentially wait until the next elected court, as this court was severely debilitated by the lack of justices.
Inimicus last edited by
I would like to ask the Court if it has come to a decision on this Case, and if not, to (re)assess it. This is an important case, whatever one may think of it.