The Queen has broken the terms of the English Bill of Rights (1689).

  The Queen has spent her entire reign selling the British folk down the river. She has never taken an opportunity to say no to any legislation, no matter what the situation or reality of it's purpose. We are clearly instructed that should the Monarch act in such a treasonous manner, we are to treat him as though they had died. (see below).

There is no hope of ever getting a prosecution. No court in the land would hear the case, no legal expert has the guts.

And whereas it hath been found by experience that it is inconsistent with the safety and welfare of this Protestant kingdom to be governed by a popish prince, or by any king or queen marrying a papist, the said Lords Spiritual and Temporal and Commons do further pray that it may be enacted, that all and every person and persons that is, are or shall be reconciled to or shall hold communion with the see or Church of Rome, or shall profess the popish religion, or shall marry a papist, shall be excluded and be for ever incapable to inherit, possess or enjoy the crown and government of this realm and Ireland and the dominions thereunto belonging or any part of the same, or to have, use or exercise any regal power, authority or jurisdiction within the same; and in all and every such case or cases the people of these realms shall be and are hereby absolved of their allegiance; and the said crown and government shall from time to time descend to and be enjoyed by such person or persons being Protestants as should have inherited and enjoyed the same in case the said person or persons so reconciled, holding communion or professing or marrying as aforesaid were naturally dead;and that every king and queen of this realm who at any time hereafter shall come to and succeed in the imperial crown of this kingdom shall on the first day of the meeting of the first Parliament next after his or her coming to the crown, sitting in his or her throne in the House of Peers in the presen e of the Lords and Commons therein assembled, or at his or her coronation before such person or persons who shall administer the coronation oath to him or her at the time of his or her taking the said oath (which shall first happen), make, subscribe and audibly repeat the declaration mentioned in the statute made in the thirtieth year of the reign of King Charles the Second entitled,  An Act for the more effectual preserving the king's person and government by disabling papists from sitting in either House of Parliament.
Bill of Rights, 1689, Wikipedia

communion:

[mass noun] the sharing or exchanging of intimate thoughts and feelings, especially on a mental or spiritual level:in this churchyard communion with the dead was almost palpable[in singular] :for a moment there was a blessed communion between them Oxford Dictionary.

Coronation Oath

The Coronation Oath (from the Order of Service for the Coronation of Elizabeth II in 1953) is administered in the form of questions:

Archbishop of Canterbury: Will you solemnly promise and swear to govern the Peoples of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Canada, Australia, New Zealand,the Union of South Africa, Pakistan and Ceylon, and of your Possessions and the other Territories to any of them belonging or pertaining, according to their respective laws and customs?

Queen: I solemnly promise so to

Archbishop: Will you to your power cause Law and Justice, in Mercy, to be executed in all your judgements?

Queen: I will.

Archbishop: Will you to the utmost of your power maintain the Laws of God and the true profession of the Gospel? Will you to the utmost of your power maintain in the United Kingdom the Protestant Reformed Religion established by law? Will you maintain and preserve inviolably the settlement of the Church of England, and the doctrine, worship, discipline, and government thereof, as by law established in England? And will you preserve unto the Bishops and Clergy of England, and to the Churches there committed to their charge, all such rights and privileges, as by law do or shall appertain to them or any of them

Queen: All this I promise to do.

Then the Queen, arising out of her chair, supported by peers and with the Sword of State being carried before her, goes to the altar to make her solemn oath in the sight of all the people to observe the premises by laying her right hand upon the Holy Gospel in the great Bible (which was before carried in the procession and is now brought from the altar by the archbishop, and tendered to her as she kneels upon the steps), saying:

Queen: The things which I have here before promised, I will perform and keep. So help me God.

Then the Queen kisses the Bible and signs the Oath.

Coronation Oath, Wikipedia

So: the Bill or Rights forbids communion with the pope, Vatican or papists, and she has sworn to maintain the United Kingdom and dominions as Protestant.

In the EU, (which means in Britain) government is above the law.
The EU's corpus juris now pervades right through our legal system. A policeman was let off by magistrates this year (2005) for driving his private car at 159 mph in Ludlow, Shropshire. Under Corpus Juris the government are above the law and cannot be prosecuted The judge ruled correctly under EU law. 45,000 police officers got off speed cameras in this way in 2004, although their speeding killed 44 innocent people. (Daily Mail 27.12.05.)

EU "monitoring Officers" have the right to dismiss our Councillors.
The Local Government Act of 2000 empowered the head of the EU government in England, the Office of the Deputy Prime Minster (ODPM) to appoint a monitoring officer to spy on every council. If an elected councillor disagrees with the EU or government line, the unelected "Standards Board for England" can suspend him for up to five years. An example is in Cambridgeshire, where the ODPM has threatened cllr Alex Riley with suspension if he attends any debate discussing the ODPM's plans to build a new town of 20,000 people called Nothstowe on his ward. The ODPM has the conflict of interest here; but its powers are becoming absolute.

We have lost the right to freedom
The EU arrest warrant (signed by the Queen on 18th November 2003) allows us to be arrested without charge and held indefinitely with no right to see a solicitor, make a phone call, or even a right to a trial. You can simply disappear.
Under the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act (SOCPA) 2005, we can now be arrested and held in the cells by any police officer for any petty offence, like dropping litter. Before it had to be an offense that carried a 5 year jail term. This also applies to all of the EU's 107,000 regulations. Do you know them all?
The Civil Contingences Act 2004 allows government to confiscate anything you possess permanently; you have no right to object. This includes your house. It also gives government the right to forceably move its population around to different locations; you can be left with no place to call your own and live like a refugee. The only check and balance here is a Minister just needs to utter the words "This is a national emergency." If a demonstration or strike government doesn't like is being organised, they can cut off all communications in a town - phones, mobiles, the internet, TV, and block all access to that town including closing roads and railways. It has all the powers and more of Hitler's Enabling Act of 1933.
We have lost the right to free speech
At the Labour Party conference the police held an 82 year old man, Walter Woolfgang, and denied him access to the conference under the EU's "anti terrorist" legislation because he had shouted the word "nonsense" at Jack Straw, who was speaking about Iraq. Terrified the true nature of the laws they have passed on behalf of the EU was escaping too early, the Labour Party stopped the police and begged the man to return to conference.
On October 25th 2005 Miss Maya Evans was arrested under the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005, for a lone protest at the Cenotaph by reading out the names of the 97 British soldiers killed in the Iraq war. She was arrested by no less than 14 police officers and found guilty at Bow Street Magistrates Court on the 8th December 2005.
Would you hand over our nation, to be ruled by a foreign power, with oppressive laws like these, ? That's what's happening.

We have lost the right to protest
These laws make protest very difficult; if we did hold a General Strike and blockade Westminster it would now require some bravery: the powers the EU has demanded from our government enable it to respond in a way similar to the Chinese government's in Tiaanamen Square should it so wish.
It is no coincidence that since 2004, all MP's offices in Westminster are guarded by police with machine guns, inside and out.
The Governments "terrorism" deception
All these new EU laws, including massive "anti terrorism" acts (recently 2000, 2001, 2005) were passed with the pretence they were only directed at terrorists, or in the case of Asbos, ruffians who terrorise the streets. In each case they are used far more often against ordinary law abiding people, particularly to suppress dissent. (91% of those detained under Terrorism Acts are innocent and have been improperly arrested. Most of the remainder are charged with offences that have nothing to do with terrorism, but cover up over zealous arrests).
We have lost the right to life
Under EU law the "Shoot to kill" policy did not need democratic authorisation. Just two senior police officers authorised the police to kill British people. A democratic vote by Parliament was not required, but even that would not have legalised the killing under British common law. A recent victim was an innocent Brazilian, Jean de Menezes, shot dead in Stockwell underground station, even though he was being held down by police officers at the time of the execution. The police used dum-dum bullets, outlawed under the Geneva Convention because they blow a man to pieces inside.

eutruth.org

Corpus Juris is Vatican created and operated law.(Here) England operates under the Common Law system.

Why is the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland supplanting a tried-and-tested system of law and traditions of justice which have endured for 800 years? Why are we depriving ourselves of one of the greatest gifts we have given to the civilised world? Why are we abandoning our liberties and embracing the shackles of a foreign power?

And since this is manifestly not at the behest of the people, why are those who govern us seeking to abjure those very laws and customs which Her Majesty swore in her Coronation Oath to uphold?

 archbishop-cranmer.blogspot.com

To have enabled and allowed this evil European Union Roman Law to be introduced into the United Kingdom breaks the Monarchs coronation oath.

What is emerging in Europe is a new Holy European Empire, an attempt to resurrect the old Holy Roman Empire that existed under the Pope. This is becoming increasingly blatant.  The Vatican is playing a major role in the creation of the new European Empire, and Catholic social values — so-called “Christian Socialism” — are at its heart. The present Pope has repeatedly called for religious unity in Europe. This means a united, Catholic Europe, which was consecrated to Mary by the Vatican in 1309.

When I visited Strasbourg, the French city near the German border which, with Brussels, co-hosts the European Parliament, I was introduced to the head of the house of Habsburg, Otto von Habsburg, a man whose family dominated Europe for centuries. Full of charm and intelligence, he said that instead of war, a great new Europe could be built on peaceful cooperation. His ideas go far beyond this, however. In his book, The Social Order of Tomorrow, he writes:

Now we do possess a European symbol which belongs to all nations equally. This is the crown of the Holy Roman Empire, which embodies the tradition of Charlemagne, the ruler of a united occident . . . the Crown represents not merely the sovereignty of the monarch, but also the ties between authority and the people. True, it is the monarch who is crowned, but in this sacred act he appears as the representative of the whole people. It should therefore be considered whether the European head of state, as the protector of European law and justice, should not also become the guardian of a symbol which, more than any other, represents the sovereignty of the European community.

Dr. Habsburg wants to see Europe have an elected head of state — a man elected for life. This influence of both Charlemagne and the Habsburgs hangs heavily over the new federal Europe. The crown of Charlemagne, the first person to attempt to revive the Roman Empire in 800 AD, is an inspiration to those who promote the breaking down of nation states, and a Charlemagne prize has been established for those who work hardest for European unity. One who did was ex-President Clinton, who in June 2000, was the first American president to receive the Charlemagne prize for his work in promoting European unity. He received the prize at the cathedral in Aachen, Germany, where the first Holy Roman Emperor lies buried. Clinton called for an enlargement of the EU to even take in Russia. 

http://www.inplainsite.org/html/european_union.html#Superstate

Enough proof?

Either The Bill of Rights 1689 stands in Law or it should be abolished.

Why not? Why is it still in FULL FORCE? Why does no parliament ever just strike it through with a vote?

They cannot. I don't know why, I don't understand it, but they cannot.