Importance In Context: International Criminal Group Action: Introductory

Special note: This document is not the final version of the one that was faxed along with over eleven thousand pages of supporting documents to the International Criminal Court on 1 July 2010. It is on the strength of this document that death threats were made against this Author, who also drafted this document, by agents of State when attempts to discredit the Action met with complete failure. Note also that the list exhibits are not included, these are not public domain documents.

IN THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT

COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND:

PROPOSED GROUP ACTION BETWEEN:

___________________________________

For and on behalf of the collective plaintiff(s) of the UNITED KINGDOM, encompassing ENGLAND, WALES, SCOTLAND and NORTHERN IRELAND

(Plaintiff(s))

Against

THE FAMILY COURT(S) of the UNITED KINGDOM, encompassing ENGLAND, WALES, SCOTLAND and NOTHERN IRELAND

(1st Defendant Collective)

And

THE LOCAL AUTHORITIES, encompassing PARISH, DISTRICT, BOROUGH CITY and COUNTY COUNCILS operating in the UNITED KINGDOM, encompassing ENGLAND, WALES, SCOTLAND and NORTHERN IRELAND

(2nd Defendant Collective)

1) This action arises from the unlawful joint actions of both the FAMILY COURT(S) of the UNITED KINGDOM, encompassing ENGLAND, WALES, SCOTLAND and NORTHERN IRELAND, and THE LOCAL AUTHORITIES of the UNITED KINGDOM, encompassing PARISH, DISTRICT, BOROUGH, CITY and COUNTY COUNCIL(S) operating in the UNITED KINGDOM, encompassing ENGLAND, WALES, SCOTLAND and NORTHERN IRELAND, as below named defendants (refer Special Exhibits B. & C.[1]).

2) The plaintiff(s) (refer Special Exhibit A.[2]) are individuals who have suffered injustice, duress, stress, emotional loss or damage or financial loss, resulting from the questionable actions of the FAMILY COURTS (B.), and the LOCAL AUTHORITIES (C.). This does not included additional family members affected to the same measure of the plaintiff(s), but equally affected in their own right, and must be equally treated as plaintiff(s).

3) The collective plaintiff(s) (A.) bring this class action against the defendant(s) for constant denial of human rights and fundamental freedoms (section ) resulting from the continual abuse of power pre, during and post proceedings in relation to the FAMILY COURT(S) (B), and the unjust, predetermined actions of the LOCAL AUTHORITY(S)(C.).

4) The collective plaintiff(s) (A.) bring this class action against the defendant(s) for the tortious, contingent, accomplice, remedial, and vicarious liabilities of both the FAMILY COURT(S) and the LOCAL AUTHORITY(S) (B. and C.).

5) The plaintiff(s) (A.) request immunity to seek “safe haven” through all available legal channels, including political asylum and protection from malicious incarceration of political prisoners, for same under international treaties. This will include safe passage and non-persecution by either the FAMILY COURT(S) or the LOCAL AUTHORITY(S) (B. and C.), or any other agencies, 3rd parties, for and on behalf of the FAMILY COURT(S) or the LOCAL AUTHORITY(S) (B. and C.).

6) The plaintiff(s) are seeking a collective “Writ of Certiorari”[3] against the FAMILY COURT(S) (B.), whereby, the writ will allow the release of information regarding all legal process, documentation and Orders so as to be fully explored and investigated in detail, for all irregularities, administrative error and abuse of judicial process. The plaintiff(s) (A.) believe that the FAMILY COURT(S) (B.) have acted with a complicit nature, to incorporate detrimental, fabricated and manipulated evidence from the LOCAL AUTHORITY(S) (C.), and assist them in the systematic and unjustified removal of offspring from the plaintiff(s) (A.), resulting in the intentional infliction of emotional abuse, obstruction of justice and misfeasance, against both the plaintiff(s) and the extended family members of the plaintiff(s), and to commits acts of genocide.

7) The plaintiff(s) make claim against the maladministration and vicarious liability of the LOCAL AUTHORITY(S) (C.), this has directly affected the plaintiff(s) (A.) as the following complaint;

a) Maladministration on the part of the staff directly involved in the relative actions against the individual plaintiff(s) (A.), identifiable as allocated services providers directly responsible for all direct “1st point contact”. The plaintiff(s) (A.) request a full and thorough audit of stored data, reports, files, mirror files, inter-office correspondences, personal notes and other multi-agencies communications.

b) Vicarious Liability[4] of the corporate body responsible for the management, training and administering of duty, to those mentioned in (i.)

8) The plaintiff(s) (A.) lay claim to serious infringements of the listed United Kingdom Statutes and Laws, European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and many conventions as laid down by the United Nations and signed as Permanent Members by successive Governments of the United Kingdom of Great Britain on behalf of her Queen and her Subjects. These infringements have been from direct intervention and involvement from the FAMILY COURT(S) and the LOCAL AUTHORITY(S) (B. and C.) with no regard for the plaintiff(s), or the extended family of the plaintiff(s) (A.) who in their own right should equally be treated as plaintiffs.