Google| Subject | Re: Republicanism still an offence in England? (wasRe: Queen mother (of england) has died) |
| From | Matthew M. Huntbach |
| Date | 2002-04-03 13:37 (2002-04-03 13:37) |
| Message-ID | <a8epig$ho3$2@beta.qmul.ac.uk> |
| Client | |
| Newsgroups | alt.fan.tolkien,alt.uk.law,uk.current-events.general,uk.legal,uk.politics.constitution |
| Follows | Chris |
| Followups | David Flood (8h & 8m) |
Chris (webmaster@netpub.net) wrote:
Chris
"David Flood" <NOSPAMmaoltuile@utvinternet.ie>wrote in message news:<a8a5lk$qoig1$1@ID-121201.news.dfncis.de>...
David Flood
On a related note, I believe that 'The Guardian' is taking a test case against a UK law (dating from the mid-nineteenth century) making it an offence to advocate a republic.
ChrisA staple filler of newspaper columns and chat shows is to find archaic laws that are still on the statute book though no-one these days takes them seriously. The USA is a particularly ripe source of such things, seeing as each state makes its laws, so there's a lot to choose from.
I think you are reading slightly too much into the whole "treason" thing. Even in England we're talking more about "selling government secrets to other countries" treason, rather than: "Saying the Royal family sucks" treason. British people can say anything they want about the royal family.
The UK (or English - it predates the union with Scotland) Treason law is this sort of law. In theory, it's a serious matter to advocate the end of the monarchy. In practice, the state never takes legal action against the many people who do.
Matthew Huntbach
2002-03-30-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
