🔴 JUDICIAL POWER STRIP: LOWE’S GREAT CLARIFICATION ACT EXPOSED
Rupert Lowe and the Restore party have detailed a constitutional strategy centered on the proposed Great Clarification Act, a legislative mechanism designed to grant Parliament the power to override judicial decisions.
The policy, outlined in the document entitled Mass Deportations: Legitimacy and Logistics, signals a fundamental shift in the UK’s constitutional balance by seeking to dismantle the existing separation of powers between the executive and the judiciary.
Under the proposals, the government would gain the authority to bypass the High Court and other judicial bodies to facilitate a large-scale removal program targeting individuals deemed by the state to have no right to remain.
Legal analysis of the 112-page document indicates that the framework requires the total repeal of the Equality Act and the systematic removal of current asylum protections and tribunal routes.
The proposed legislation aims to strictly limit judicial review, effectively removing the legal mechanism that allows the courts to check the exercise of executive power.
This shift toward absolute parliamentary sovereignty is described by constitutional commentators as a permanent move that cannot be partially implemented, as subordinating the judiciary to a political majority fundamentally alters the rule of law.
The administrative requirements of the policy involve the creation of an expansive digital surveillance architecture, mandating biometric banking checks and cross-government data sharing between the NHS, local councils, and enforcement agencies.
Status verification would be embedded into essential services, including employment, housing, and healthcare, creating a pervasive system of state monitoring of the population.
The architecture of this proposed system includes mass detention facilities situated on former military bases and a public reporting portal incentivising citizens to provide information on others.
Procedural analysis suggests that once such a monitoring and data-sharing framework is established, it becomes a permanent feature of national governance rather than a temporary policy measure.
Comparisons have been drawn by legal scholars to the constitutional transitions observed in 1930s Germany, specifically regarding the use of popular policy goals to facilitate the underlying removal of constitutional safeguards.
The mechanism of the Great Clarification Act mirrors historical precedents where fast-track legislative tools were used to nullify independent judicial constraints via a majority vote in the name of national interest.
The strategy prioritises the execution of government policy over established judicial safeguards, creating a legal environment where the executive operates without traditional checks and balances.
The document acknowledges that the implementation of these measures would cost tens of billions of pounds over a five-year period, prior to factoring in the costs of legal welfare or international trade consequences.
Ultimately, the proposed removal of the separation of powers leaves the citizen reliant on executive discretion rather than the protection of independent courts.
The path toward centralised authority is framed as a restoration of sovereignty, yet it establishes a legal trapdoor allowing for the unlimited expansion of state power for any future purpose.
