Direct Democracy Ireland

Direct Democracy Ireland, mentioned at the Talk in WicklowWe spend a lot of our time here at People for Economic Justice, putting out the fires that have sprung up all over the country as a result of disastrous economic decisions made since 2008. Those fires of course arise in the form of Sheriffs and Receivers. One area that is equally important to keeping people in their homes however, is the basic question: how on earth was this situation allowed to occur? How on earth was our country allowed to go from a period of economic boom, to economic bust, literally overnight? Well let’s take a proper look at that night.

On that fateful night in 2008, the banks for all intents and purposes, took a very ill man, Brian Lenihan into a room, and seemingly persuaded him to validate their breaking of serious banking liquidity laws, by signing over the banks private debt into ‘Sovereign debt’. At what point did the Irish people allow any one man, even the Minister for Finance, to have the awe-inspiring power of loading €64,000,000,000 in debt onto our backs, in the middle of the night, by the simple stroke of a pen?

The answer may be quite simple. In Bunreacht na hEireann (The Irish Constitution), our founding fathers left us a very powerful right. This right was and is referred to as Direct Democracy. In simple terms, Direct Democracy is the right of ANY citizen, to gather a certain number of signatures from fellow citizens (in the case of Ireland’s Direct Democracy, this was 75,000 signatures), with which they may call a Referendum on any topic. In real terms, had our right to Direct Democracy still been in effect, 75,000 signatures would have been gathered the same afternoon as the bank bailout was announced, in order to stop it, and ‘The People’ could have decided whether a private corporation was worth the economic destruction of the entire State.

This of course begs the question, if we had Direct Democracy in the first place, where did it go? Short answer:-

This vital function was removed by the Government. Upon entering power in the newly formed Irish Free State, Direct Democracy was immediately seen as a threat to the political class, and they used a loop-hole in the new Constitution to remove it.

This loop-hole, Article 50, was a right the Constitution granted to the sitting government, to ‘amend’ certain aspects of the Constitution. On removing or changing anything in the Constitution, the Government was obliged, by that same Constitution, to present this change for ratification to the people within a period of 2 years. The Government extended this period to 8 years and at the end of that period they extended the period by another 8 years, effectively denying the people of Ireland their right to hold a referendum on what they had done.

This was done under protest as there were 97,000 signatures gathered and presented to the Government against what the Government had done. These signatures were completely ignored. The excuse was ‘We are not denying you your right to hold a referendum on what we have taken out of the constitution, but rather we are putting it off for a while, to a later date’. This date never came.

In 1937, a new Constitution was drafted. This was the second Constitution. The Government put into our Constitution that they “retain the right of Referendum” along with any other changes that had been made in the interim. As it had at this point been 16 years, no one seemed to realise that the Government never had the right of Referendum to retain in the first place and it was never raised as an issue when the second Constitution was drafted. YOU, the Irish Citizen, were the owner of this right denied by the first Irish Free State Government (which incidentally, was a Fine Gael Government).

Moving Forward: Direct Democracy Ireland

Moving forward over 70 years, Raymond Whitehead, a one-time resident of Switzerland, the only country in the world where in Direct Democracy is fully practised, came across the revelation that we the Irish once had this right as well. He immediately set about fighting to bring it back, and formed the group (at the time) Direct Democracy Ireland. He rapidly gathered the 300 members required in forming a Political Party, and as of the 14th of November 2012, he has succeeded. On this date, Direct Democracy Ireland will officially launch in Buswell’s Hotel in Dublin, at 2pm, with Ben Gilroy as its party leader. All are welcome.

The beauty of Direct Democracy lies in one simple truth: Corruption and Party Politics are effectively impossible, under the imposing glare of Direct Democracy. No political party can steer our country towards their agenda, as all important decisions would ultimately land at the doorstep of the Irish voter. This is why you can trust Direct Democracy Ireland. We have one goal: Direct Democracy. If you want to know our “policies” on any other given issue, then you need only take a vote.

At this point it is my personal hope that you are reading this, wondering how you can get involved, and bring back the awesome power of Direct Democracy to the Irish People. The most effective way to do this is simple: Join the Party. Does joining the Party mean that in 2016 you are suddenly obliged to run for government? No it most certainly does not. Joining the Party allows us to build a critical mass of votes to get people who do wish to run, into Government. Upon entering Government, Direct Democracy Ireland will focus on two key tasks. Objective one is restoring Articles 47 and 48 to the Constitution (one article covered the right of Direct Democracy, the other covered the right of Recall, which is the power to remove any TD who is not living up to his election mandate, and replace him with someone willing to take on that mandate). The second objective is to ensure that no loop-hole in the law can EVER allow these rights to be removed from us again.

Join today. Give yourself back your personal power. This country and its assets belong to we the people, not the politicians.

- Ben Gilroy

Like People For Economic Justice on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/PeopleForEconomicJustice

Like Direct Democracy Ireland on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/directdemocracyireland

Removal of Implied Right of Access

In anticipation of an upcoming section of the site, which will be entitled “Templates”, we have decided to share one trick with you a little early. The document in the image below hangs on Ben Gilroy’s front door, and is called the “Removal of Implied Right of Access”.

Implied right of access is what is known as an implicit right. An implicit right is one in which a person feels they have the right to do something, despite that right never having been directly granted to them. An example of this is your postman. Your postman has the implied right to enter onto your land, walk or drive up to your door, and insert letters into your letter box. The reason this is an implied right, is that at no point do you ever actually say to the postman “I give you the right to enter my land, and push letters through my letter box”.

Where one can run into trouble with this implied right, is that so-called licence inspectors, Sheriffs, debt collectors, and other such undesirables feel that they have the right to enter into your land, approach your door, and unsolicited engage with you. This notice politely, but firmly, informs them that you grant them no such right, and better yet, lays down compensation due for anyone who exercises this right, that you have now relieved them of.

The Document To Remove Implied Right of Access

Door Notice for Removal of Implied Right of Access

Click the above image to enlarge it for ease of reading, or click here to download an Editable Word Document.

Ben Gilroy Halts Receivers

Today we join Ben Gilroy outside the business Stitch ‘n’ Fix owned by Mr. Gerry Burns in Navan. After several requests for meetings and documents from Mr. Burns to the banks were apparently ignored, receivers turned up on the premises, changed the locks, and denied Mr. Burns access to his business. Luckily he decided to contact People For Economic Justice, and Ben Gilroy informed Gerry that the receiver worked as an agent, not only for the bank, but for he, Gerry, as well.

Under Irish law, a person cannot have an agent forced upon them. This is due to the fact that when someone is acting as an agent on half of a person, that person, not the agent, is responsible for everything that agent does. The receiver also has what is called an “equitable duty of care” for both parties. We’ll discuss the specific event after the video.

Ben Gilroy, Gerry Burns, Fergus Lowe and Ms Justice Mary Laffoy

So in this case the receiver refused to detail whether he had or had not seen the tri-party agreement between the bank and Mr. Burns. If the receiver has not seen such a thing, then he has absolutely no basis to act against the debtor, and perhaps more importantly, if the bank does not have this agreement, then Mr. Burns would owe the bank absolutely nothing.

Notice also how the Garda in the video states plainly “this matter appears civil”. This is a basis for many of Ben Gilroy’s meetings with An Garda Siochana. As Gerry (or indeed any debtor) has broken no laws, the Gardai have absolutely no reason to even be present. In this specific case however, Ben Gilroy had shown that the receiver was in fact trespassing. As is almost a theme across the various People For Economic Justice videos, the only laws being broken are done on the part of the bank.

Perhaps the most important point raised in this video is the issue of signed orders. The receiver turned up with a court order, which granted him the power to receive the business. This order was not signed by the judge who issued it, but was in fact signed by the registrar, in black ink. If a court order is not signed in blue ink, but the judge that issued it, it is totally invalid, and grants no power what so ever. On top of this, if the receiver does not have a copy of the mortgage deed, and a copy of the tri-party agreement, then he has not acted on his duty of care, and is illegally trespassing in your business. Do not let them take your business without these three things.

As for the actions of the judge, Ms Justice Mary Laffoy, while in the commercial court itself, we will leave any conclusions on that matter to you the reader.