At 13.05 yesterday 12th November 2010 I received an email copy of a letter dated the 12th November 2010 from Osborne Clarke Solicitors in Bristol addressed to District Judge Watson.
Whilst much of the letter is relevant to a case that is subject to an intended appeal as a result of a Civil Servant introducing forged documents onto the public record and with holding evidence as found by the Information Commissioner, sections of the letter have profound implication for the public and personal freedoms of the citizens of the United Kingdom.
As per an earlier press release Secretary of State for Defence Dr Liam Fox MP has called this case a ‘scandal’ and has had a private meeting with the responsible Minister Mr Edward Davey MP who has ordered an internal investigation by senior officials. The last email from Ed Davey’s personal office was on the 4th November 2010-
Apologies for the delay in getting back to you on this matter. Mr Davey wishes officials in the department to look into this matter as it is so complex. Hopefully we will have some more news soon.
Kind regards
However the letter from Osborne Clarke Solicitorsto the District Judge starts-
We are instructed by the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills…………
If this is not a true statement that either Vince Cable or the responsible Minister Ed Davey have not instructed this firm of solicitors to act on their his behalf this raises issues of at best public servants seeking to mislead the Court or at worst a contempt of Court.
If this letter is to be taken at face value Osborne Clarke on behalf of their client the Secretary of State have raised an objection to the Court to myself acting as Leader or holding any position in the Libertarian Party in the ‘public interest’.
Furthermore Osborne Clarke on behalf of their Client the Secretary of State have raised objections to myself holding any executive position in commercial companies that are registered in legal jurisdictions that are outside of the competence of the English and Scottish Courts. These companies are registered in the United States and outside of the European Union.
To quote from the letter-
Further no attempts have been made to provide evidence of the safeguards that Mr Withers intends to be bound by in order to protect the public……….
As these companies are not subject to the Laws of England & Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland nor under any treaty obligations to the European Union nor do these companies trade in this country, I am under no obligation in Law to give any undertakings to the State in respect of the ‘public interest’.
The Libertarian Party has been subject to an anonymous smear campaign against myself that the local Police believe is coming from politicised public servants, as this is not the first time this has happened, but it is how to get the proof of who is responsible before a Court is the difficulty.
Osborne Clarke on behalf of their client are also questioning the District Judge on his right to issue a direction in an earlier direction made on the 11th October 2010. Which appears to be placing undue pressure on the District Judge to ‘conform’.
The Information Commissioner on the 22nd September found that the Secretary of State had broken the Data Protection Act by withholding evidence that I required in October 2009, in relation to the involvement of Peter Mandelson the then Secretary of State, Lord Digby Jones and the British Ambassador to Paris in this case. Documentation obtained from Paris from British officials stated that this was the ‘Ministers case’ and that it was ‘sensitive’.
The Department apologised but said it held no data on myself. This was a palpable nonsense as Dr Fox supplied originals of correspondence to and from Mandelson. With the agreement of the Information Commissioners Office on the 25th October 2010, I filed an application into the Bristol Courts under section 7(9) of the Data Protection Act requiring a Court Order to release this correspondence, emails, faxes and notes.
Yesterday I also received directions from Bristol Registry that this application will be heard on the 28th January 2011 with the Secretary of State as the Defendant.
Dr Fox has suggested that I attend a meeting with officials, a meeting that I was willing to have to resolve this case. However the officials involved in this case are more intent on a cover up to protect their activities under the previous administration.
Like most British citizens I consider that I am a freeman, I do not consider that I am a danger to the public, but as a Libertarian my views are unacceptable to a bloated State bureaucracy. I saw the treatment meted out to the outgoing party leader by the BBC, which was nothing more than a continued personal attack.
This week the State found against a man who made a joke about ‘blowing up Robin Hood ‘ airport, I hope and trust that this will go to appeal as it demonstrates how despite there be in a change of Government the same intrusive public servants are still in post.
There will be a hearing after November 22nd, at which time it will be tested who is instructing Osborne Clarke, Vince Cable or anonymous public servants.
I am sure that the members of the Libertarian Party will have little problem confirming me as Party Leader despite the wishes of Vince Cable on the 27th November 2010. In which case Vince Cable will be required to take out an injunction against the Libertarian Party to prevent me being leader.
Twitter Andrew_Withers
Twitter UKlibertarians
Why is it?
1 day ago
3 comments:
Personally, I feel that it is not the place of the government—which is, after all, made up of two rival political parties—to tell the UK Libertarian Party who they can and cannot elect as Leader.
So, my considered response to Vince Cable and his merry men is as follows: "Go fuck yourselves."
DK
Let them injuct - I see it as a marketing opprtunity.
Counsel advises the 'Liberal' is acting somewhat ultra vires
Post a Comment