George F wrote:

To all veterans and subscribers to this PJM forum.

The next couple of weeks are going to be very important, regards this Rebuttal Statement

I can't emphasise too much how important George's call to arms is right now.

We are at a pivotal stage. The Rebuttal is being considered with the Petition we have submitted to the Queen. Every letter sent to those considering our submissions will have an effect.

This is your chance to make a difference - a significant difference. It takes but a few minutes to write something - the shorter the better - and the addresses are on the Lobby Page.

Barry


_________________
BarryF, who fought for the Right to Wear the Pingat Jasa Malaysia

Whilst the civil servants are telling us that we cannot wear the PJM because it is (a.) a double (b.) more than 5 years since the event (c.) it is a foreign award and lastly, it is a commemorative medal, let us look at these arguments a little closer.

The first instance in modern times that the British were allowed to wear a 'double' was with the award of the Kedives Star awarded by the Tewfik of Egypt to those who had the Egypt Medal. This went on to the Sudan medal, same conditions, the Kings & Queens South Africa Medals and so on. At least a dozen similar campaign medals were issued in this fashion 'unrestricted'. A little closer to home was the Russian Convoy Medal which was a campaign, commemorative and foreign award as well as being a double, yes the recipients had the 39/45 Star!

But hypocracy knows no bounds when you take into account the Malta George Cross 50th. Anniversary Commemorative Medal! Issued by the Government of Malta (instituted in 1992) to those who had served between 1940 and 1943 on the Island and who held the Africa Star, it was accepted by HM Government and permission was given for it to be worn by all those so qualified. Dear Mr. Coney, perhaps you should read that wonderful tome The Medals Yearbook when making up the rules as you go along and then you will not get them so wrong!!!

There is no law in this country to stop me wearing the PJM in line with my Queens medals and so I will.

John

jireland wrote:

But hypocracy knows no bounds when you take into account the Malta George Cross 50th. Anniversary Commemorative Medal! Issued by the Government of Malta (instituted in 1992) to those who had served between 1940 and 1943 on the Island and who held the Africa Star, it was accepted by HM Government and permission was given for it to be worn by all those so qualified. Dear Mr. Coney, perhaps you should read that wonderful tome The Medals Yearbook when making up the rules as you go along and then you will not get them so wrong!!!

There is no law in this country to stop me wearing the PJM in line with my Queens medals and so I will.

John

John

I understand that the visit by Her Majesty and The DoE to Malta for the 50th Anniversary was nearly called off as The HD Committee had refused (initially) the wearing of this medal, it was only after a great deal of behind the scenes activity that the visit was 'on' again after the HD Committee had a change of heart thus avoiding an embarrassing snub. The DoE is of course a recipient and wearer of the medal.

I might just add that this is a story I have heard second hand.


_________________
--------------------------------------------------------------
HD Committee: Amateurs in a Professional World
---------------------------------------------------------------

You are quite right John they make the rules up as they go along. There is no record of the 'double medaling' in the regulations (the rules yes), there is no 'permission to wear formally being refused' in the rules, and the Queen 'wishes' her subjects not to accept or wear a foreign award without her permission in the regulations - not No British Citizen will wear or accept etc etc. in the rules.
Neena Thanderassi of the Cabinet Office says that 'decision on the acceptance and wear are non-statutory law'. Now this is a misnomer as it is not a law if not on the statute book and a law cannot be non-statutory. We have of course, common law used through time immemorial but I doubt if that covers medals, perhaps some heraldic matters but not medals.

They cannot get out of the hole they have dug themselves into so they are now hiding behind the Royal Prerogative. Their backs are definitely against the wall and would be advised to seek a truce before it is too late for all involved.

Dear mcdangle, I have fired this off to Mr. Coney copied to his boss, Michael Jay and if and when I get a reply you will be the second person to read it.

Regards

John

Dear Mr. Coney, I note with interest your curt reply to a colleague of mine in respect of appeals against the Royal Prerogative, you state erroneously that there is no right of appeal, well you are wrong.



As well as the rights of every citizen of England to appeal to the Sovereign for justice as enshrined in the common law it is also part and parcel of the Magna Carta as is the right of 12 Barons and or Lords to enter the Palace to place a petition of Right directly to the Sovereign. But when talking about service personnel as you were when you made your statement, it is also the right of every soldier who has the Queen as their Colonel in Chief to appeal to her for redress as a last resort. Those affected in the quest to wear the Pingat Jasa Malaysia Medal despite having long retired obviously fall into this category.



But let us discuss justice for a moment, if the alleged rules that you quote for denying them this honour are indeed rules then they must be written down somewhere, are they? If not then they are hearsay and are being used to discriminate against citizens of the United Kingdom unlawfully. If these alleged rules are as you say, cast in stone, the award by the Maltese Government of their 50th. Anniversary Medal instituted in 1992 should have been treated in the very same manner; it was not, why not? Here we have a prima facie case of discrimination.



I have taken the matter to my Member of Parliament, a QC and a Privy Councillor, who supports my view and is taking the matter forward.



I await your reply with interest.



John Ireland

Councillor

I have trawled through each and every page of Hansard connected with medals over the past 7 days, I think this sums it all up by BOB BLIZZARD MP Waveney, This Hansard report goes back to May 2002 and relates to The GSM Suez Clasp, BUT PLEASE read it, right through, it affects us re the PJM

If ever there was a smack in the eye to The HD Committee from a CURRENT Labour MP this is it ...................

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200102/cmhansrd/vo020521/halltext/20521h03.htm


_________________
--------------------------------------------------------------
HD Committee: Amateurs in a Professional World
---------------------------------------------------------------

John Cooper wrote:

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200102/cmhansrd/vo020521/halltext/20521h03.htm

This debate in Parliament has the following....

Quote;

Does the HD committee stand above the law? Even criminal justice cases can be reopened as we have recently seen. Both Australia and Canada have created retrospective awards for prescribed operations between 1945 and 1975. I have said that the matter seems to be locked in procedure; in fact, it seems to be locked in arcane procedure. The Library said that

"this process was not necessarily logical and is sometimes bureaucratic."

It has been claimed that there is a five-year rule beyond which retrospection cannot occur. It was said that King George VI decided that rule, although it has now been conceded that there is no proof that he did. Indeed, an HD committee official admitted in a letter last year that

"we do not have any record of the Committee's initial formal agreement to operate this rule".

Interestingly, I have been told that there are two instances when retrospective awards have been approved by the committee, although not actually made by it. They involve a Russian award that was made to British service men in 1985 and an award from Malta in 1995. The HD committee allows those medals to be worn.

end of quote.


_________________
Merdeka, Merdeka, Merdeka,
from the HD Committee and its decision.

John,

I would not wait with baited breath on a reply from Mr R Phoney at the MOD, or his boss. I have been put on their black list (for which they will be sorry later) and have been referred to the MOD Correspondence Unit who attempts to answer in 40 days.

I maintain and will argue till the cows come home that the rules they have quoted to make civilians toe the establishment line are in fact not legal rules and are not worth the paper they are written on.

Surely someone somewhere in our government has enough bottle to realise just what an unjust and undemocratic mess this is.

Look forward to hearing your reply, if any.