(29th July 1924 – 7th February 2009)
“Champion of the British Constitution and fearless avocate of Liberty and Justice”
~ The Namaste Team
“I am old and now seriously ill. I cannot die without making clear to you,
that you have broken your oath to us your people.”
~ (Elisabeth Beckett’s last letter to the Queen January 21st 2009)
Press Release February 2009
by Namaste Team
It is with great sadness that we share the news of the passing of Mrs Elisabeth Beckett after her fight against leukemia. Elisabeth was the daughter of a High Court judge. The fact she managed one last shot across the bows of the nation’s ever-dwindling sovereignty says so much about her steadfastness.
She went on the offensive when she discovered that her Council Tax bill was being used as a vehicle to extract money from her (and every other resident of this nation) for the European Union inspired Regional Assemblies. She took a one woman’s legal stance, using her profound knowledge of the British Constitution against her local Eden District Council, and refused to pay her Council Tax whilst under the threat of bankruptcy. Elizabeth launched four legal cases against the government citing Erosion of the Constitution, Breach of Contract, Breach of Trust and for Treason and Legal Fraud. She also took out an injunction against Prime Minister Gordon Brown for Treason against the British People.
In 2007, Namaste Magazine launched an appeal for funds to avert her bankruptcy, which was successful. The funds enabled her to start the process to appeal to the High Court. Whilst working with her she became our latter day Boudica. The depth of Elisabeth’s Constitutional knowledge coupled with her courage and her unfailing determination to protect our country and its people from the loss of British Sovereignty against the relentless ever invading totalitarian powers of the EU, is testament to her uniqueness.
It has been an honour and privilege to have known and worked with her. Thank you, dear Elisabeth, for your sterling efforts. You will be very sadly missed.
All who read this obituary can only have the utmost respect and admiration for such a great lady and the passionate, abiding love which she had for this country and its people.
The following is the last letter Elisabeth’s son was able to read to his mother on the morning of the 7th Febraury, the day before she passed away.
“My dear Elisabeth,
I have read your letter of 21st January to the Queen, sent to me with the email of
It seems that leukaemia cannot stop your mind working or your determined action in pursuit of your longstanding defence of our constitution, institutions and law. You are marvellous.
Mrs Elisabeth Beckett handing over a letter to a Police Sergent in Penrith, Cumbria, asking the Chief Constable to protect her rights under the Constitution.
The following is Elisabeth’s last letter to the Queen, written before she died.
Her Majesty The Queen
London SW1A 1AA
21 January 2009
Giving careful consideration to the mode of address in this letter, although in courtesy I have addressed it in conventional manner, it is clear that having, in effect, abdicated by failure to perform your coronation oath you leave the people of this nation without effective titular head to whom we may address our petitions. I write to you only in your pre-eminence in Common Law.
I write on Edmund Burke’s remark that for evil to flourish it is sufficient for good men to do nothing.
At your coronation you swore on oath to rule this country according to our laws and customs. This contract with us was written clearly in Magna Carta and replicated by Edward I in 1274. After saying that he would give no such oath, the archbishops, bishops, barons and freemen said that, in this case, they would get another king.
In Magna Carta it was made clear that if the monarch went against this oath then chapter 61 would apply, the contract would be broken and the monarch would have to give up his position and possessions. You have, throughout your reign, disregarded our laws and customs in the legislation that has gone through Parliament.
I believe that you have done this on the basis of the Fabian inspired Parliament Act of 1911 which argued untruthfully that since royal assent had never been denied by a monarch since 1707 (when Queen Anne sent back a Bill) the use of the royal assent had fallen into abeyance. This claim was untrue and treasonable. Only the year before, Asquith had been forced to go to the country by Edward VII who sent back the same Bill to Parliament. And indeed monarchs had refused assent on at least six other occasions since 1707. On each occasion this refusal of assent was because the Bills concerned breached our constitution.
In other words, the 1911 claim, is incorrect and the monarch’s assent was never and can never be deemed unnecessary or automatic, even though George V chose to accept that the royal assent was now a formality and that the monarch could not, in reality refuse assent – as in the Northern Ireland Bill.
Despite all the long years of your reign this method of agreement, either forced on you, or under “automatic assent” nevertheless cannot be upheld as lawful.
Many people who have written to you on constitutional matters have received replies from your secretary (most recently, Sonia Bonici) saying that their letter had been forwarded to the government department misleadingly called the Department of Constitutional Affairs and Ministry of Justice. Your compliance with this has permitted the judiciary under these government departments to claim, as in the Chagos Archipelago appeal, that our fundamental liberties do not exist and that the peoples of these islands have no rights under our law.
I am old and now seriously ill. I cannot die without making clear to you that you have broken your oath to us your people.
The 1911 act purports to permit taxes to be levied on us merely by a majority in the House of Commons and without reference to the upper chamber. This again is against our constitution and specifically not permitted by our Petition of Right of 1627. The most serious instance of this is the use of our taxes to fund the banking system of this country: this is being explained to the electorate as a step which will in some way make us rich, whilst in fact it is not only unlawful, but a most serious abrogation of our rights and your duties under our constitution.
Your contract with the people of this country and the colonies and dominions cannot be destroyed by the chicanery of the Fabians in the 1911 Act, nor by subsequent legislation. If you have the courage to fulfil your contract, however belatedly, you could prorogue Parliament now and have a free election with or without party divisions so that this country can go forward in a proper and united way to remove us from the difficulties that have ensued since the 1911 Parliament Act.
The Archbishop of Canterbury