THE SUN NEWSPAPER’S CONSTITUTIONAL BIAS ON EU VOTE AT POLLS

The article stated that the Queen’s comments were not evidence that she supports Brexit, however, most people will have got this impression. The supplier of information was wise to distinguish between her comments made in private, and her implied public obligation never to interfere in politics. The paper only a few weeks ago published an article, in which the private conversation of the Queen, was leaked to the Sun- Britain’s best selling daily newspaper.

Buckingham Palace complained to Ipso- the regulatory body for the press- who ordered a front page apology and clarification that the title of the article did not ” support the text”. ”It went far beyond conjecture”, according to the regulatory body, and suggested that”the queen had breached her constitutional obligations”.

The article today thankfully left it in no doubt that no such obligations had been breached. Her comments had been made in private. However, the essence of her obligations not to interfere in political matters, was inadvertently undermined. Her majesty is constitutionally above politics, and does not get involved in political matters, in order to prevent a conflict of interest between her role as Head of the Monarch, and the democratic political process. If the Queen were able to interfere in politics, it would also expose her to criticism from dissenters of her stance. And political figures and Royal scholars, are unified in the view that Her Majesty, the Queen should be immune from the type of open criticisms that politicians tacitly subscribe to, as part of the culture and requirements of political life.

The constitutional bias of today’s article meant that the views of the electorate may be influenced by the Queen, contrary to the tenets of the constitution, over which she presides. The one issue that may absolve the Sun of fault here, is the debatable view that the country should know how the Queen feels on a topic as serious as the referendum. This is an arguable point , yet to be made by The Sun if it be the case.  The editorial news of The Sun were not available immediately for comment, but promised to do so tomorrow.

The right for the public to know how the Queen feels on  matters of great significance, is a value judgment a press organization can make, one, not yet made. The Queens constitutional obligations in no way impinges on her right to have an opinion and express it freely. The limitations of her rights voluntarily submitted to by herself and the uncoded constitution over which she reigns, is only restricted to public declarations by the Queen with respect to political matters.

A spokesperson from Buckingham Palace told the eye of media.com,”the   Queen is above politics, and we do not comment on the private conversations of the Queen. This means that the private conversations of the Queen are not officially meant for public consumption. Members of the press also have a right to freedom of opinion and expression, guaranteed by the Humans Rights Act, 1998. They are entitled that to believe that the views of the Queen on such a historical referendum should be known by the public, but the constitutional bias it potentially induces my do the public a disservice.

One could ask that if the Queen acts on the advice of her government, then should her distrust of the government stance on the EU, not be taken seriously?The Sun newspaper are avid supporters of Brexit, and would understandably feel that this anomaly between the government’s stance and that of her Majesty the Queen, should be public knowledge. After all, the Queen should be expected to have the best interests of the country at heart, so her views must count, one could reason. An whilst her position was not explicitly stated in the article, it can reasonably be inferred.

The confusing element is the fact she is inadvertently portrayed as one whose private conversations easily leak out to the public, as though there is an absence of a reliable network of guests at her palace.

Notwithstanding, there may be nothing wrong if the views of the Queen on inconsequential matters of politics a re put in the public domain, provided the Queen is not left feeling hugely and continuously betrayed. It may be a good thing for some of her views to be known, but on the very day of the EU referendum?The timing was perfect for the Sun Newspaper, but not ideal for the dispassionate assessment of the electorate. They should base their vote on all they have gathered from the campaigning groups. Many reasons have been presented for the Remain and the Leave camps.

It is a matter of value judgment what way we sway. The alarm bells sounded by economists and David Cameron has been dismissed as scaremongering, but what the future holds if we vote one way or another, remains a conjecture. Immigration has been cited as the issue uppermost among voters, who lament the appallingly weak state of our boarders, and decry the erosion of the UK national sovereignty by EU judges. Advocates for the Remain side,say immigration is overall beneficial to the economy, and point out that departure from the EU will weaken our alliances with the network of EU members in collaborating effectively to share intelligence about terrorism. They, all believe the economy will suffer sharply in the event of a Brexit, something Boris Johnson has repeatedly disputed, saying we are the 5th biggest economy and will never be short of trading partners.

The debate has been tense throughout, with U.S President, Barack Obama, intervening on behalfof the Remain. Tony Blair, John Major, and David Beckham, have also pleaded with voters to keep Britain in The EU.The pleas will fall on many deaf ears, because voters will ultimately follow their own knowledge and intuition. Many Brexiters I have spoken up stress the burden of the NHS and the struggles of many in an Island that simply needs to shut the gates of it’s boarders. Many resent the fact refugees in Britain are put in decent housing whilst our own homeless shame the country walking the streets like vagabonds, begging endlessly for change.

Reality is that genuine refugees deserve a home and cannot be relegated to the streets among Britain’s homeless people. Yet, the need for alot more to be done to address the issues of British born individuals, has been an issue of vexation for many British citizens. Remain campaigners argue that those born here ought to apply themselves more and have no excuse to be at the bottom pile of society, counted among society’s losers. They say Britain cannot leave without the EU, something Johnson says is an under estimation of our capabilities as a country. The campaigning has been fierce, so fierce that an exemplary MP by the known of Joe Cox was brutally murdered, jut days before the final votes were to be cast. Campaigning seized for  three days, but momentum was hardly lost.

What appears to be the Queen’s views might just sway the votes, which are vacillating from a Remain win to a neck and neck situation. It may boil down to a default situation, depending on how many  Remain or Leave supporters actually do not vote in the end.