TRAPPED IN A MASONIC WORLD

- 260 -
big-name lawyer Michael Mansfield got £740,000, its hard luck life for many, but a grand one for the few.
[13]
―No evidence of impropriety or malpractice‖ - I mentioned this earlier, as in November 2009 Jack
Straw‘s decision to no longer force applicants for the judiciary to declare if they are Freemasons was
announced. Straw said via a written statement that a review had shown; ―...no evidence of impropriety or
malpractice‖ [14] as a result of a judge being a Freemason and it would be ‗disproportionate‘ to continue
with the practice, introduced in 1998, also by the then Home Secretary Jack Straw when he said:
―Membership of secret societies such as Freemasonry could raise suspicions of impartiality and
objectivity‖. And he was of course 100% right then, but goes to show you how powerful the fraternity
really is.
Okay so some years have passed, but that‘s how groups like these work, as their like a dripping tap, -
and to not make too much of a fuss about it in 1998 they went along with it knowing there were certain
ways around it anyway. But it has obviously still been a thorn in the side of the fraternity, as why else
would they challenge such a requirement when in May 2009 the United Grand Lodge of England made
representations to ministers and indicated it might seek judicial review of the policy, if they were to be
expected to declare their membership of the Freemasons. [16] The announcement by way of written
ministerial statement was in the light of a [Masonic] European Court of Human Rights judgment against
the state of Italy, which was made in 2006/7, and to which our attention was drawn by the Grand Lodge of
Freemasons. ―It suggested that a continuation of a compulsory register...was likely to be unlawful. After
legal advice I accepted that. It is open to any judge to declare that they are Freemasons‖. Straw added:
―...that there had been ‗no evidence‘ of any unacceptable behaviour by Freemason judges‖. [14]
Though this is the point and crux of the matter, - if you are not doing anything unacceptably wrong or
illegal, have nothing to hide and are up front and honest such as the kind of Judges or Magistrates Jack
Straw has referred to, then why on earth would you fear declaring membership and wish to ‗cover-up‘ such
a thing, if indeed you‘re just a proud member of such a well respected fraternity such as the Freemasons?
And it‘s because of these kinds of objections by members of judiciary, that makes you wonder if a
Masonic Judge would treat a fellow Mason any differently than that of a non-Mason, if they were to come
before him during a court case, what do you think would happen? - And now there is no need whatsoever
for Judges or Magistrates to declare they‘re a member of the Freemasons.
And as a result of these back down, we‘ll never be able to get a true figure or know the real extent as to
how deep the fraternity has penetrated our judicial system. However, just over ten years ago within the
judiciary more than 240 judges and over 1,000 magistrates in the UK had owned up to being Freemasons.
[17]
A government survey revealed, - these revelation are not necessary the correct figures, in fact the true
figures are very likely to be much higher than those quoted, - that at least 247 judges - or 4.9% of the
judiciary - are members of the organisation. And at least 1,097 - or 6.8% - of justices of the peace also
belong to the Freemasons. The figures were revealed by the Lord Chancellor, Lord Irvine, in his
appearance before a Commons select committee of MPs in 1999. Some 64 judges declined to say whether
or not they were members of the freemasonry, and 867, or 5.4% of magistrates, refused to state whether or
not they were members. Speaking afterwards, Lord Irvine said it could not be inferred that those who
refused to make declarations were in fact Freemasons. – ―Some people are refusing to make a declaration
on grounds of conscience. I would not begin to infer that they are‖, he said. 5,033 judges and part-time
judges had returned forms out of 5,290 declaration forms sent out. ―The number of judges who declared
that they are Freemasons is relatively small at this stage, the figure stands at 247, that is; 4.9% of those
who have responded‖, he said. For magistrates, he said 26,000 questionnaires had been sent out, with
15,926 or 61% having responded to far. Magistrates who were not Freemason‘s accounted for 13,962, or
87% of those who have returned their forms. Conservative MP Gerald Howarth, [Aldershot] branded the
survey ―Appalling political correctness...‖ and said it had ―...stirred up something of a hornet‘s nest
amongst the judiciary‖. [17]
That fact of the matter is that these figures mean nothing, as of the thousands of questionnaires sent out
to, there is no requirement for the recipient to have to answer the questions, and by non admission does not
mean you‘re are in fact not a Freemason.
Also back in 1998 when those entering the judiciary had to say if they were a Freemason, at the same
time the move sparked a furious backlash, and any attempts to make a similar requirement for police
officers were scrapped in favour of ‗voluntary declarations‘. - Following the European Courts 2006/7
decision, John Hamill, spokesman for the United Grand Union, said: ―We are very happy the right thing
has been done at long last‖. [18]