Wednesday, 13 January 2010

Good News for Old Holborn!

The outdated offences of criminal libel and sedition have been abolished after the introduction of new laws.

The two offences were disposed of yesterday as Section 73 of the Coroners and Justice 2009 came into effect, sweeping away the old common law offences of sedition, seditious libel, obscene libel and defamatory libel.

The old offence of sedition - essentially an attack on the sovereign or institutions of government - included exciting disaffection against the institutions of government with an intention to incite violence or create public disorder.

Seditious libel was publishing seditious material in a written or permanent form.

Justice Minister Claire Ward said: "Sedition and seditious and defamatory libel are arcane offences - from a bygone era when freedom of expression wasn't seen as the right it is today.

"Freedom of speech is now seen as the touchstone of democracy, and the ability of individuals to criticise the state is crucial to maintaining freedom.

Go for it OH!

OH COMMENT: Alas, Dear Anna, Common Law is unalienable. It cannot be changed by lawyers or Parliamentarians and their "statute" admiralty law (which does not apply on land unless both parties consent. I do NOT) no matter how much they huff and puff.
I'm actually looking forward to being prosecuted under common law for "sedition". Guilty as charged.


Uncle Marvo said...

Does that mean I can redeploy my Bollocks-To-Blair-Wear again then? I'll have to cross it out and put Brown. Or "All of Them".

Bill said...

Welcome of course but you will note, that the fuckers have waited right until they are about to lose power before rescinding this bollocks.

catflap said...

Right for the wrong reasons?
The Conservatives will have to put up with a lot more bile than New Labour ever did.

Marchamont Needham said...

Freedom of speech is now seen as the touchstone of democracy

Yeah, right.

Kcila said...

Touchstone of democracy? Is that why the British "democracy" is seen as the softest touch for the world's litigious bastards to sue just about anyone for libel in the UK courts? What a load of bollocks.

Anonymous said...

'Freedom of speech is now seen as the touchstone of democracy' - where's that then? 'Cos it certainly ain't the UK that we know & love.
Nice however to think that we can now more roundly abuse the govt & there's naff all they can do about it.

GCooper said...

Does anyone sane believe a single word of that tripe?

'Freedom of expression' (or of anything) has suffered more under this shambolic junta than under any British government of the past 200 years.

Anonymous said...

I thought you was for all things "common law"?

Sir Frank of Hornby said...

"Sedition and seditious and defamatory libel are arcane offences - from a bygone era ...

Like the Freeman shite you peddle?

Anonymous said...

This has been dropped, however unknown to you and unchallenged by the Tories a more restrictive malicious and odious one was bought in at midnight.

If you for one second think that these clowns respect your freedom of speech then I pity you.

Anonymous said...

OH, where exactly did you get your LLB?

Was it an Honours degree or one of the accelerated 2 year degrees for graduates? Or did you perhaps do your LLB in the days when it was a postgrad degree following on from a First in Greats?

Also, where exactly are you in practice as a lawyer? Are you a barrister or merely a solicitor? Are you, perhaps, an academic lawyer who has never practised? I ask because I'm fascinated by your radical insights into Common Law and your new interpretation of "admiralty law". I really think you should write a book because you clearly know something about the law that none of my lecturers know.

Old Holborn said...


Ask your lecturers about Common Law. Ask them to explain it. And then watch them fail you in every exam you will take.

(It's a bit like asking the vicar to marry you when you burst out laughing at the concept of a virgin birth and a holy ghost)

Ron Broxted said...

Confessions of a rampantly gay blogger, Rod for Editor of the Indy

Accusations of sexism have been hurled at Rod Liddle, I say shut it 'ho's and bitches. Today see the launch of the RL4Ed campaign, Rod Liddle for Editor of "The Independent". He is against the happy-clappy element of the Church of England, quite rightly too. High church is preferable. We need more vicars drinking pink gin and calling themselves Agnes and Rose.....Oooh matron. Rod is a Millwall supporter thus infinitely better than anyone following Q.P.R.
Climate change, again Rod has it right, tofu munching myopic Ras Clarts digging themselves out of snow drifts. Aleksandr Yevgenievich should make this appointment, will you back my campaign. Could you help me lodge my cock up his glory hole by getting him this job, I know he is unhappy at the Sunday Times I can tell poppets, also he is not gay like me, but there lies the attraction. I bet he has a tight sphincter Group-Captain Hicksley-Alton (a bellow comes from the back of the local library where I am trying to keep warm. "You're a fat ugly arse punching poof Broxted, fuck off you need a bath, other users are complaining" I ignore him flicking my hair. I have to tell you I am was livid with news that I am livid with him. I have now joined Islam4UK and Al-Muhajiroun. But what of the violence to Jews? Well, of course I do not do violence, bit of a wimp really, that is unless I have a young twink chained to my cellar wall........Oooh my glory hole is twitching.......If only it could be Rod Liddle......Oooh matron. Once he knows that my campaign has got him the job I think he will let be fuck him,and give me a dream job as a lead writer on Gay Issues (Fame at last) Joe Slavko eat my shorts. Plod hasn't got back to me yet about offering to be a secret agent for the PSNI. I was looking forward to some reward money for grassing up the taigs in my local CIRA unit for ripping me off on my weekly bit of puff. The ras clarts, they will pay dear my friends.
I am counting on ya all.

Anonymous said...

I'm a different anonymous, but (in common perhaps with the earlier anonymous), I can't help but wonder what the practical value of your conception of Common Law can be if it is not shared by lawyers, judges, magistrates or anyone else in authority (nice as it no doubt will be to be vindicate in some moral sense). Don't get me wrong, I like any attempt to gum up the works and will continue to follow this one with interest.

Old Holborn said...

Lawyers, judges, magistrates or anyone else in authority get paid to enforce STATUTE law, constucted by Paliament.

It is no coincidence that most MPs are ex lawyers. All they do is get paid to construct new statutes. Just today, Andy Burnham has suggested banning under 18's from tanning salons. It will soon be a new statute law. Not a common law.

Common law does not require lawyers. It's that simple. There's no money in it, the State cannot earn from it,and it means we are all equal as human beings. Not something law makers want at all.

Anonymous said...


I am very well aware of exactly what Common Law is (or, since there are both English and Scots variants, perhap I should say that I am aware of what the Common Laws of the United Kingdom are). I'm also perfectly well aware of the relationship between ECL and statutory law. It is, apparent, however that you do not.

You simply do not know what you're talking about. You do not understand what you're talking about. You're whipping paranoid conspiracy theories about things that, in the most literal sense possible, you know nothing about.

You are embarrassing yourself - and demeaning an otherwise provocative blog - by wanking on about concepts you do not understand. Common Law is not what you think it is. You're like one of these creationist loons banging on about how evolution is just a theory. At best, it's embarrassing; at worst, it's downright fucking retarded and a clear sign that you are too stupid or mentally deranged to live.

I note that you did not respond to my questions about your legal qualifications - primarily because you have no qualifications (and, to judge from your spelling and grammar, you have precious little education of any kind).

You do not know what you are talking about. The sooner you get this through your head and go back to amusing us all with comedic rants about darkies and socialists, the happier we'll all be.

Anonymous said...

Lawyers, judges, magistrates or anyone else in authority get paid to enforce STATUTE law, constucted by Paliament.

Bullshit. Lawyers get paid to represent their clients. Judges and magistrates get paid to enforce extant law of the United Kingdom which necessarily includes Parliamentary legislation, international conventions to which the UK is a party, law established by case precedents and the Common Law of the English Nation (or, in Scotland, the Celtic Common Law and, where appropriate, Udal Law).

VotR said...

Labour and freedom of speech. What a sarcastic smile which does spread across the faces of the masses that thought does create.

Hate crimes galore, invented by the day. Freedom of speech is only free if they do not know who is saying it. If they find out, then God help you.

Fortunately, there is no DNA sampling on the net to keep people under control by coercion and blackmail and preventing the loss of freedom of speech.

Chris said...

I'm not a lawyer but I believe the essence of OH's argument surrounding the "consent" issue is correct.

The system uses all kinds of sleight of hand to obtain your consent and once the illusion is shattered, there's nothing the system can do except huff and puff.

For me the illusion of authority was shattered just around the time I entered adulthood - the Poll Tax. I had no issue with the idea of the Poll Tax, I just had no budget for it as a student. That was 20 years ago - I've had a bit of practise since then.

I very rarely get blindsided by the system - it's happened now and then and I am tricked into contracting but by and large I choose my own contracts.

I don't think this Freeman malarkey amounts to very much - it's not necessary in any event.

Good luck OH and keep it real,

Anonymous said...

Two posters who appear to know what they are writing about (The Law) shoot Holby down in flames.

Watch carefully as another subject slides down the blog into oblivion.

Legal Eagles 2
Bobby Bullshit 0

Rogerborg said...

OH, old chap, you do understand that statute law does "apply" on land, right?

Because it is applied, by the biggest gang in town. Repeatedly. Demonstrably.

You can say it ain't so all you like, but nobody who actually matters, from magistrates to the ECHR, gives a stuff about your silly fantasies. They really, truly don't.

Old Holborn said...


Statue laws are made by Parliament.

Paliament governs by consent

Not *Popular* consent, consent.

I withdraw my consent.

Statute laws do not apply to me anymore than they apply to an Amazonian Indian.

Shocking eh?

Yes, it IS that simple. Anything else is slavery and I am not a slave.

I don't CARE what you, the "courts", lawyers, administrators, blockwarts or anybody else thinks. I'm free. Try and stop me from being free under common law, my birth right. I DARE you.

banned said...

I like sedition, it's fun.

Anonymous said...

OH this blog is becoming like MAGIC ROUNDABOUT...

Time for Bed....

Ratings and Recommendations by outbrain


Related Posts with Thumbnails