"Due to the false preachings of modern politicians, you might have a completely mistaken idea of what democracy is — many people do".

The website http://www.democracydefined.org brings home the realities and the information provided therein enables you to judge whether you live in a democracy or a despotism.

NO BILL OF RIGHTS IN FRANCE

France is one of those countries who pride themselves on being the leading democracy in the world when they are not.

France has a constitution which was adopted in 1958, when changing the political regime in favor of De Gaulle was a necessity to put an end to colonial wars. De Gaulle had grandiose ideas about France but he did not respect the French, to wit he said repeatedly that he saw the French as if they were "calves". The fact is that the French constitution does not protect in writing the rights of the individuals. There is no written Bill of Rights in France within or without the constitution.

It is true that the Preamble of the constitution says that France is attached (" est attachée") to the 1789 Declaration of Rights dating back from the French Revolution. However "attached" is a word from usual language with no meaning as a term of law, such as could be the word "guarantee", for use before a court or tribunal.

Because there is no specific guarantee in writing protecting the individual, he or she stands no chance to get an ounce of justice unless a governmentally appointed judge feels like adjudicating fairly. This is rarely the case when individual rights are opposed against the authorities.

The difference between a country where there is a written Bill of Rights and a country where there is none like France is that the rights protected in the former country are defined and binding upon the judiciary whereas in the other countries Human Rights are an empty shell.

The "false preachings of modern politicians" in France are that, while many countries have chosen to draw up a comprehensive and up-to-date list of human rights, France has preferred to remain with the 1789 Declaration "which is sufficiently open to be adapted to developments in collective consciousness despite phenomenal transformations and has aged not a wit". This non-sense is taught to the American people on the web site of the French Embassy in the U.S. by a professor of constitutional law: collective consciousness vs. Bill of Rights.

CORRUPTION IN FRANCE

Corruption and Human Rights are opposite, they are not likely to coexist. Experience shows that the lower is the level of Human Rights protection in a country the higher is the level of corruption. That is true in France where protection of Human Rights is null, failing the constitution to provide for their protection, whereas corruption is widely spread. The former President of the Republic is going to be put under investigation for corruption now that his immunity is ended after he left office. One of the charges he may have to answer for is the payment by Paris City Hall when he was the Mayor of salaries of his political party head members.

Now, the second most important person in the state, Senate speaker Christian Poncelet, is under investigation in Paris for accepting bribe in order to help a friend win several public contracts. According to an investigative journalism weekly "Le Canard", the official intervened on several occasions to hepl his friend, Jean-Claude Bertoldi, an employee of Sogea (a public works company) in order to obtain contracts in France and abroad. Jean-Claude Bertoldi is currently detained for embezzlement, forgery and abuse. Newspaper "le Canard" tells about a fragment of Bertoldi's statements in front of prosecutors, saying that Poncelet was supposed to receive an 8,000 euros commission in order to help closing a deal. Among others, Poncelet met the Romanian Senate speaker, Nicolae Vacaroiu, on February 15, in order to arrange the opening of a Carrefour store in Romania, AFP informs. Prosecutors say Poncelet also used his influence in Iran, Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan. Indeed, it is difficult to prove corruption by a judge or tribunal chairman and their staff, considering that they have been allowed by the state to hide behind the law of immunity. They are not however immune from prosecution under criminal law for acts amounting to perverting the course of justice.

In Europe, most countries have the judiciary in the hands of governmentally appointed judges and the system is deeply entrenched. The judges are supposed to be independent because they cannot be dismissed or removed from office. People are used to that system and the possibility of switching to the Trial by Jury system appears sadly far remote.

In some European countries, France, Belgium and Germany among others, there are still the remains of napoleonic despotism, which are the worst in the judiciary.

That may appear horrible to common law countries and it is in fact a violation of Human Rights.

The French Emperor, Napoleon the First who reigned from 1804 till 1815, installed a special branch of the judiciary named "Administrative Justice", which has juridiction on disputes between citizens and the government. The judges therein are civil servants under the government's authority. Obviouly they have no independence. Moreover, there is no guarantee whatever that they should be bound to be impartial. In other words, the government is judged by its own empoyees.

MAGNA CARTA

June 15 is the anniversary day of the signing of Magna Carta

The most famous document of British and World constitutional history, issued by King John at Runnymede under compulsion from the barons and the church in June, 1215 for the benefit of all free men. Bibliography: See W. S. McKechnie, Magna Carta: A Commentary (2d ed. 1914, repr. 1960); H. E. Malden, ed., Magna Carta Commemoration Essays (1917); F. Thompson, The First Century of Magna Carta (1925, repr. 1967); J. C. Holt, Magna Carta (1965, repr. 1969); A. Pallister, Magna Carta (1971); J. C. Holt, Magna Carta and the Idea of Liberty (1972) and Magna Carta and Medieval Government (1985). The Essay© by Kenn d'Oudney, ALAM (Hons) Dip GSA., enlightens Specific Aspects of MAGNA CARTA with in depth research and knowledge.

This new Democracy Defined Essay explains that Magna Carta embodies the traditional pan-European Constitution. Magna Carta defines and prescribes the method by which government, its functionaries and employees are kept within the bounds of just, lawful behaviour. The U.S. Founding Fathers based the U.S. Constitution on the Common Law precepts inscribed into Magna Carta.
Most people are not aware that The Great Charter is still law throughout Britain, being ratified thirty-five times, including by Head of State Queen Elizabeth II, and applies "in perpetuity"...
Magna Carta cannot be repudiated, repealed or superseded by government legally: that is the difference between a constitutional law, a constitution, which is made by the people to control, guide and govern the government’s modus operandi for all time; and the statutes, which are made, and can be repealed, by governments.
As citizens, "We the People" already have at our disposal the legal power to intervene and nullify unjust legislation. After reading the Essay, one perceives how modern intrusive government everywhere can be kept under control. This is why the state, and owned and controlled mass media are not permitted to promulgate the information. The Democracy Defined Campaign strives for the reinstatement of this, the genuine pan-European constitution.
This and other Democracy Defined essays comprise material in a book being published by SRC Publishing. However, for the democratic cause, the Copyright owner gives permission to circulate it intact and unaltered to all interested parties.
Click here (Word) or Click here (Adobe) to download the Essay©

FRENCH PRESIDENT'S PRESS CONFERENCE

Was France's president Nicolas Sarkozy the worse for wear after his long meeting with Vladimir Putin at the G8 summit in Germany? Based on Sarkozy's erratic performance at a subsequent press conference - now a YouTube sensation in France - the experience may have gone to his head.