Updated complaint to the UN: Revised paragraph 8

Part 1: St Mungo’s Broadway: Seeking to illegally break our contract with the Mayor of London's Greater London Authority (GLA) Housing First programme under threat of eviction

Revised paragraph 8

8. The Applicant informed the IPT that he and his wife were living at the time in the same 'safe house' MI5 whistleblower David Shayler lived in for a couple of years (until 2007), where they were being repeatedly threatened and harassed by their live-in landlady, human rights activist Belinda McKenzie (see paragraphs 23-24 below). According to BBC Panorama, Mr Shayler "caused the biggest crisis of official secrecy since the spy catcher affair" – he was jailed for seven weeks in 2002 for breaking the Official Secrets Act. It is unfortunate that Mr Shayler declared that he was the Messiah in 2007, became a squatter, and was subsequently ridiculed in the press and media for changing his name to Delores Kane. A New Statesman article published in September 2006 featuring Mr Shayler and Ms McKenzie gives no indication that Mr Shayler believed he was the Messiah at that time; whilst a Daily Mail interview with Mr Shayler explicitly shows he believed himself to be Jesus by June 2007 (see Annex 2, MI5/GCHQ: MI5 whistleblower David Shayler, p. 19). The Applicant and his wife were evicted from their flat in this property on 14 March 2013, after Ms McKenzie's ex-husband, Dr Nigel McKenzie, a consultant psychiatrist in Highgate Mental Health Centre, wrote a letter to a Circuit Court judge on behalf of Ms McKenzie, stating that the Applicant and his wife’s flat was required for somebody with a mental illness (see paragraph 25 below).

Human rights activist Belinda McKenzie speaking at the UK Rally Against Child Abuse, 4 June 2011, Trafalgar Square

The Esquire article below* is mentioned in a Guardian article dated 27 March 2012. It is an eye-opener, highlighting the monitoring and surveillance that Shayler had to live with back in 2000, and the contradictory briefings and slanders that were coming out of the British establishment and the media. The author, Dr Eamonn O'Neill, is a lecturer in journalism at Strathclyde University.

*On 2 May 2013, Issuu removed this pdf from my Issuu account following a copyright complaint by Hearst Communications. I had uploaded the article to my Issuu account in December 2012. In March 2013, when last I checked, the article had been viewed more than 15,000 times. It can be viewed here.

BBC PANORAMA: The David Shayler Affair (August 1998)

According to BBC Panorama, Shayler "caused the biggest crisis of official secrecy since the spy catcher affair". In 2002, he was jailed for seven weeks for breaking the Official Secrets Act.

Updated complaint to the UN: Revised paragraphs 1-2

Part 1: Are we 'domestic extremists'? Metropolitan Police Service acknowledges receipt of Declan's request to know if he is on police databases

Revised paragraphs 1-2:

A. Information Concerning the Applicant of the Communication

1. The Applicant in this Communication is Declan Heavey, a citizen of the Republic of Ireland who lives in London in the United Kingdom. He was born on 4 September 1960 and is a former teacher. His wife is a naturalized Irish citizen born on 26 March 1965 in Madrid in Spain. She is a former psychologist and lives with the Applicant in London. They have no children. After moving to the United Kingdom in August 2003, the Applicant founded the Network for Church Monitoring (N4CM), a non-profit he registered as a company limited by guarantee in January 2011. He is currently employed as the Managing Director of N4CM, and his wife as the Webmaster of N4CM's Church and State website at churchandstate.org.uk. In 2014, N4CM's Church and State Press published two e-books; the second e-book, The Family Planning Fiasco: How the Vatican Subverted Family Planning in the Developing World by veteran senior development official Dr Dieter Ehrhardt, has been described by Dr Halfdan Mahler, WHO Director-General 1972-1988, as "consistent with my own life experience with population and should be read by everyone concerned with the future of the planet".

2. The Applicant and his wife were forced to sleep rough on the streets of London for almost four years in total, from 4 November 2006 to 13 July 2009 (see paragraphs 20-22 below) and from 14 April 2013 to 15 May 2014 (see paragraphs 23-26 below). This notwithstanding that participants in Church and State include 39 Nobel Prize winners, 13 US National Medal of Science winners, seven prominent members of the UK's House of Lords, and hundreds of distinguished scholars from around the world. Before the Applicant and his wife were made street homeless for the second time, having been evicted from a 'safe house' on 14 March 2013 (see paragraph 8 below), they were nominated for the US-based Population Institute's Global Media Award 2013 for a website described by one of the two nominators as "the most important cutting edge population website ever created" (see Annex 1, Declan and Lola Heavey: Global Media Award Nominees, p. 18).

Prof Milton P Siegel, who for 24 years was the Assistant Director-General of the World Health Organization, speaks to our Chairman Dr Stephen D Mumford in 1992 to reveal that although there was a consensus that overpopulation was a grave public health threat and would be a major cause of preventable death not too far in the future, the Vatican successfully fought off the incorporation of family planning and birth control into official WHO policy. This video is available for public viewing for the first time. Read the full transcript of the interview here.

Dr Stephen D Mumford: "One of the bleakest facts of this century has been the unchecked growth in world population, with its resulting strain on the planet’s life-support systems and misery for countless millions of human beings. This represents an ethical failure of catastrophic proportions on the part of the peoples of the democratic West who, while providing the medical and agricultural advances which make it feasible for all people to live longer, healthier lives, have at the same time allowed their governments to be manipulated by the Vatican and other religious interests to block effective dissemination of the knowledge and use of population-growth-control measures. As documented in [the video above], the source of this calamity is to be found in the early days of the United Nations Organization, when the Western democracies that controlled the agenda of such UNO agencies as the fledgling World Health Organization caved in to political pressure from the Vatican out of fear of its influence on their Catholic voters. In today’s more secular Western democracies, the power of the Vatican to control the votes of its adherents is much diminished. However, we can see that on questions such as population-growth-control, this decrease in Vatican political power is offset in the United States by the increased power of fundamentalist Protestantism and on the international scene by rising fundamentalist Islam."

Church and State website

Church and State Press

Let me recommend an important web site churchandstate.org.uk. Operating out of London this well-designed and exciting web site covers church-state, population, climate change and other issues. Check it out -- Edd Doerr, President, Americans for Religious Liberty

Heavey v Single Homeless Project: Will the Central London County Court rule we consented to declarations for online referral that we are paying our own salaries and that we are both mentally ill, and despite our photographic evidence to the contrary?

Declan and I are clients of the Mayor of London's Greater London Authority Housing First programme. Last May we were housed by the Single Homeless Project (SHP), one of three charitable organisations that operate the Housing First service. At the time we wondered why we were put in an accommodation under the tutelage of the Mayor of London when we had been evicted from our previous flat and forced to sleep on the streets of London for over a year, where we were harassed and threatened by the police (see blog of 2 October, "City of London Police: If you want to challenge our word against yours again, you need to make an application to the High Court for permission to apply for judicial review").

It has transpired that SHP Housing First has circulated among any number of agencies via online referral that we are paying our own salaries as employees of Network for Church Monitoring (N4CM) and that we are both mentally ill. We are currently waiting for a ruling from the Central London County Court on this matter (see blog of 22 November, "Declan's response to the Single Homeless Project CEO's submission to the Central London County Court [DATA PROTECTION]"), the High Court having already ruled that the Mayor of London bears no responsibility for the Housing First programme he funds (see blog of 5 November, "High Court rules that the Mayor of London bears no responsibility for his Greater London Authority (GLA) Housing First Programme").

In the UK, data-protection law is often cited in the media as a powerful piece of legislation and organisations can't just write whatever they want:

Click to enlarge

Nonetheless, all the Information Commissioner could do for us was instruct SHP to disclose the information they hold about us on their computerised database. This is a screenshot of section 4 of the paper version of a referral form we completed with a SHP Housing First worker last March, co-signed by the worker himself:

Click to enlarge

It is quite clear from the above that we have incurred a personal debt of £6,000, but not according to SHP. They split the paper version of the form into two online forms, one for Declan and one for myself, and make out in both forms that we are paying our own salaries; they even made up their own scam to deliver this make-believe story, but more about that in the next paragraph. Under "Rent Arrears and Debt" that is in a different format than specified by the paper version of the form, not only do they not register a personal debt for either of us (£0.00), but on Declan's online form they add: "Mr Heavey has an American benefactor who has financed his website in a salaried manner. This totals £6000." On my online form, it reads: "Mrs Heavey and her partner have a debt of £6000 to an American benefactor who is paying them a salary over the course of this year. They wish to return this money." This is our photographic evidence:

Click to enlarge

Click to enlarge

As if this was not sufficient, they then made up the scam that our salaries are to facilitate our application for accommodation and that we could still qualify for benefits from the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP). If we were not paying our own salaries as part of this scam, we could not possibly qualify for benefits from the DWP because our salaries exceed the amount permitted for either of us to claim Jobseeker's Allowance. Contrary to SHP's made-believe story below, we are not claiming benefits from the DWP because we are not paying our own salaries and are therefore not entitled to claim any benefits from the DWP. Our Housing Benefit claim is paid by Newham Council, not DWP. This is our photographic evidence of a scam made up by SHP but never perpetrated by us:

Click to enlarge

And here's more made-up information that could only apply if I was paying my own salary:

Click to enlarge

Not only do we both have jobs but Declan has tried every possible means to communicate to SHP that we are not paying our own salaries. Our debt of £6,000 comes from a loan of £3,028.14 that was wired to us from America in October 2012 and a second loan of £3,140.15 that was wired to us in August 2013 (both loans are verifiable by bank statements, tax declarations and emails), and neither loan has anything to do with the £5,935.68 that was lodged to an account for N4CM in February 2014 in order to support our salaries for one year. Even this email from N4CM Chairman Dr Stephen Mumford to SHP splitting the two sums of money - £6,000 and £5,935.68 - has fallen on deaf ears:

Click to enlarge

Perhaps the ulterior motive for these breaches of the Data Protection Act lies in Dr Mumford's strong rebuttal of the personal opinion of a SHP Housing First manager who had not even met us when she declared that we are both mentally ill, an unqualified and biased opinion they also steadfastly refuse to remove from our personal data on their computerised database:

Click to enlarge

We claim that of the eight principles of good information handling cited in the Data Protection exhibit above, SHP have broken no less than five principles. Our data was not (1) fairly and lawfully processed; (2) processed for limited purposes; (3) adequate, relevant and not excessive; (4) accurate; and (5) processed in line with data subject's rights. Will the Central London County Court rule we consented to declarations for online referral that we are paying our own salaries and that we are both mentally ill, when we most certainly did neither? And why would SHP put us through the courts after over a year of street homelessness when they could rectify all this data in a matter of minutes?

Heavey v Single Homeless Project

Brief details of claim

On 19 March 2014, the Claimant made a formal Subject Access Request under the Data Protection Act 1998 for any information held about him on the Defendant’s computerised database. This information was only submitted by the Defendant to the Claimant on 5 August 2014, following instruction from the Information Commissioner's Office. The Claimant then discovered that personal data contained in a printed referral form dated 17 March 2014 had been inaccurately entered online by the Defendant and submitted to the Clearing House for accommodation purposes. On 15 August 2014, the Claimant and his employer both wrote to the Defendant about inaccurate financial data that leaves the Claimant open to accusations of deception and fraud, but neither has been able to elicit a response from the Defendant on the matter. The Claimant is therefore making an application to the Court for a declaration that the Defendant has acted unlawfully and an order that the data controller rectify those financial data and any other personal data in respect of which he is the data controller and which contain an expression of opinion which appears to the Court to be based on the inaccurate financial data. He also seeks an award of damages and punitive damages for breach of data protection obligations.

Church and State website

Church and State Press

Let me recommend an important web site churchandstate.org.uk. Operating out of London this well-designed and exciting web site covers church-state, population, climate change and other issues. Check it out -- Edd Doerr, President, Americans for Religious Liberty

If you would like to help us personally, please feel free to pick up one of our books (shameless plug, I know, but every sale helps us to work our way out of our precarious situation). There is currently five books available in Church and State Press here, and all proceeds from the first four of these books go to us with the authors' permission. Thank you all for all the support you have given us, and I hope we can keep our Church and State website going despite the constant threats.

Update (8 May 2015): Declan is vindicated in court and wins £750 in damages from the Single Homeless Project

Are we 'domestic extremists'? Metropolitan Police Service acknowledges receipt of Declan's request to know if he is on police databases

Part 1: High Court rules that the Mayor of London bears no responsibility for his Greater London Authority (GLA) Housing First Programme

Click to enlarge

The Guardian: Are you a 'domestic extremist'? How to ask if you are on police databases

Click to enlarge

Click to enlarge

Declan is currently updating his complaint to the United Nations under Article 19 (freedom of expression) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. This is his revised paragraph 12 concerning discriminatory surveillance: nothing to hide, nothing to fear?

12. It is important to underscore that the discriminatory surveillance suffered by the Applicant and his wife is not an isolated event. Rather, it is emblematic of a larger pattern of surveillance by law enforcement officials in the UK that has been well-documented by international and domestic human rights bodies. In May 2012 Liberty, one of the UK's leading civil liberties and human rights organisations, expressed concern that "state sanctioned surveillance against specific individuals takes place on a massive scale". British police and government agencies are requesting personal information about Facebook users more than almost anywhere else in the world (behind the USA and India), according to the company's Government Requests Report 2013. Since the Guardian began publishing material leaked by US whistleblower Edward Snowden in June 2013, there have been a spate of top secret GCHQ documents reported on and published around the world. On 19 February 2014 Intercept journalist Glenn Greenwald, through whom Snowden's revelations came to the world, listed some of these documents: "They include detailed reports on GCHQ's attempts to compromise basic encryption methods used to safeguard internet security, the GCHQ's role in spying on the Brazilian oil company Petrobras, the GCHQ's targeting of UN charities and officials, the GCHQ's use of 'dirty tricks' including 'honeytraps' and fake victim blog posts, the GCHQ's attacks on 'hactivists', GCHQ's surveillance of YouTube and Blogger activity and related activities to covertly influence internet discourse, GCHQ's surveillance through phone apps such as 'Angry Birds', and GCHQ's covert monitoring of visitors to the WikiLeaks website." In February 2014, the Independent reported that GCHQ's online covert actions follow the "4 D's": deny, disrupt, degrade, deceive. Privacy groups have now commenced lawsuits against GCHQ for the use of malware to spy on mobile and internet users across the UK.

Let me recommend an important web site churchandstate.org.uk. Operating out of London this well-designed and exciting web site covers church-state, population, climate change and other issues. Check it out -- Edd Doerr, President, Americans for Religious Liberty

The publication of our second e-book on Amazon Kindle is far from a straightforward exercise

The book, "The Family Planning Fiasco" by veteran senior development official Dr Dieter Ehrhardt has now been published on Amazon Kindle but the strangest of things happened prior to its publication. All the links were working perfectly when I checked the ebook in Amazon's Kindle Previewer. However, after I uploaded the ebook to Amazon Kindle, we discovered that some of the links in the table of contents were not working, including a link to Dr Ehrhardt's sensational article in the appendices, "On Family Planning: Replies to questions asked by a friend in the Vatican". I thought I was going to have to postpone the publication of the ebook and contact Amazon with all my evidence, when the anomaly mysteriously resolved itself the next day.

"This book is consistent with my own life experience with population and should be read by everyone concerned with the future of the planet."

- Dr Halfdan Mahler
WHO Director-General 1972-1988

By Dieter Ehrhardt: On Family Planning: Replies to questions asked by a friend in the Vatican

Prof Milton P Siegel, who for 24 years was the Assistant Director-General of the World Health Organization, speaks to our Chairman Dr Stephen D Mumford in 1992 to reveal that although there was a consensus that overpopulation was a grave public health threat and would be a major cause of preventable death not too far in the future, the Vatican successfully fought off the incorporation of family planning and birth control into official WHO policy. This video is available for public viewing for the first time. Read the full transcript of the interview here.

Let me recommend an important web site churchandstate.org.uk. Operating out of London this well-designed and exciting web site covers church-state, population, climate change and other issues. Check it out -- Edd Doerr, President, Americans for Religious Liberty

First 1/2 of Declan's claim against the Single Homeless Project not showing in this blog... again!

Part 1 (this afternoon): Declan's response to the Single Homeless Project CEO's submission to the Central London County Court [DATA PROTECTION]

I have written to TinyPic this evening. This is what Declan's claim against the Single Homeless Project under the Data Protection Act 1998 looks like in this blog at the moment (page 1 of the claim form is missing):

Click to enlarge

See my earlier blog this afternoon, Declan's response to the Single Homeless Project CEO's submission to the Central London County Court [DATA PROTECTION], where this particular anomaly will hopefully have been resolved by TinyPic for the second time this month.

Declan's response to the Single Homeless Project CEO's submission to the Central London County Court [DATA PROTECTION]

Part 1: High Court rules that the Mayor of London bears no responsibility for his Greater London Authority (GLA) Housing First programme

Click to enlarge

Heavey v Single Homeless Project

Brief details of claim

On 19 March 2014, the Claimant made a formal Subject Access Request under the Data Protection Act 1998 for any information held about him on the Defendant’s computerised database. This information was only submitted by the Defendant to the Claimant on 5 August 2014, following instruction from the Information Commissioner's Office. The Claimant then discovered that personal data contained in a printed referral form dated 17 March 2014 had been inaccurately entered online by the Defendant and submitted to the Clearing House for accommodation purposes. On 15 August 2014, the Claimant and his employer both wrote to the Defendant about inaccurate financial data that leaves the Claimant open to accusations of deception and fraud, but neither has been able to elicit a response from the Defendant on the matter. The Claimant is therefore making an application to the Court for a declaration that the Defendant has acted unlawfully and an order that the data controller rectify those financial data and any other personal data in respect of which he is the data controller and which contain an expression of opinion which appears to the Court to be based on the inaccurate financial data. He also seeks an award of damages and punitive damages for breach of data protection obligations.

Click to enlarge

Click to enlarge

This is our chairman's strong rebuttal of SHP's accusation that Declan and I are both mentally ill:

Click to enlarge

Church and State website

Church and State Press

Let me recommend an important web site churchandstate.org.uk. Operating out of London this well-designed and exciting web site covers church-state, population, climate change and other issues. Check it out -- Edd Doerr, President, Americans for Religious Liberty

Update: First 1/2 of Declan's claim against the Single Homeless Project not showing in this blog... again!

Yorkshire Building Society: my access to our account targeted?

Click to enlarge

I simply do not tell you both how deeply impressed I am by your work. I go to your website frequently and am just blown away by it every single time I look at it. -- Dr Stephen D Mumford, Chairman, Network for Church Monitoring

Now the photo selected by Facebook is not the one that appears on Facebook

Part 1 (last night): The first Church and State article I cannot share on Facebook

Last night I couldn't share a new Church and State article on Facebook - there was no such problem with articles already published. This morning the photo selected by Facebook is not the one that appears on Facebook. I chose this article to illustrate the anomaly:

Click to enlarge

Click to enlarge

Click to enlarge

I have been using Facebook for many years but have never encountered these sort of anomalies. We are however well used to losing Facebook shares, as Declan explains in paragraph 36 of his updated complaint to the United Nations under Article 19 (freedom of expression) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights:

Paragraph 36 of Declan's updated complaint to the United Nations

36. The Church and State website has been removed from the Internet on five distinct occasions. For example, in May 2012, Just Host, the domain’s then registrar, changed the domain name server records without permission or authorisation and disabled the Applicant’s wife’s facility to correct these records herself (see Annex 30, Just Host: Complaint to European Commission, pp. 78-83). No sooner had the Applicant’s wife successfully transferred the domain name to SiteGround’s registrar on 8 June 2012, than, on 14 June 2012, the site was vandalised to such an extent that the Applicant’s wife was advised by the wordpress theme designers that she had no option but to scratch the theme she had been working with for over two years and start over with a new theme (see Annex 31, WordPress: Final exchange with theme designer, p. 84). The Chairman of N4CM, Dr Stephen D Mumford from North Carolina, US, has been funding the site since December 2010, and the domain since June 2012. Nonetheless, the site continues to be attacked; for example, the Applicant’s wife has posted blogs showing that articles throughout the Church and State website are regularly targeted, and this includes the reduction of Facebook share counts in every section of the site by anything up to 600 shares a time to date.

Let me recommend an important web site churchandstate.org.uk. Operating out of London this well-designed and exciting web site covers church-state, population, climate change and other issues. Check it out -- Edd Doerr, President, Americans for Religious Liberty

The first Church and State article I cannot share on Facebook

The Vatican is behind much of the inaction of governments to tackle human overpopulation

Click to enlarge

A sample quote from the article

Ehrlich writes that the main source of opposition to contraception “is that of the Vatican and its bishops. Yet Catholics use contraception as much as non-Catholics, and they have abortions with even higher frequency. But the reason that the hierarchy fights against both is that the higher-ups don’t want to admit that the Protestants and Jews were right.” He adds that the “God-fearing” people’s “rigid opposition to something so basic, so critical to the future of life on Earth, as controlling reproduction is just as unethical as any major affront to the environment or terrorist act. They’re working to kill people – women who need safe abortion now, and our descendants who are likely to have much higher death rates related to the decay of human life-support systems as a consequence of overpopulation. The pope and many of the bishops are one of the truly evil, regressive forces on the planet, in my opinion, interested primarily in maintaining their power.”

Let me recommend an important web site churchandstate.org.uk. Operating out of London this well-designed and exciting web site covers church-state, population, climate change and other issues. Check it out -- Edd Doerr, President, Americans for Religious Liberty

Update: Now the photo selected by Facebook is not the one that appears on Facebook

This blog: TinyPic images... not showing!

I have written to TinyPic tonight. This is what Declan's claim against the Single Homeless Project under the Data Protection Act 1998 looks like in this blog at the moment (page 1 of the claim form is missing):

Click to enlarge

This is the main content that is missing:

Brief details of claim

On 19 March 2014, the Claimant made a formal Subject Access Request under the Data Protection Act 1998 for any information held about him on the Defendant’s computerised database. This information was only submitted by the Defendant to the Claimant on 5 August 2014, following instruction from the Information Commissioner's Office. The Claimant then discovered that personal data contained in a printed referral form dated 17 March 2014 had been inaccurately entered online by the Defendant and submitted to the Clearing House for accommodation purposes. On 15 August 2014, the Claimant and his employer both wrote to the Defendant about inaccurate financial data that leaves the Claimant open to accusations of deception and fraud, but neither has been able to elicit a response from the Defendant on the matter. The Claimant is therefore making an application to the Court for a declaration that the Defendant has acted unlawfully and an order that the data controller rectify those financial data and any other personal data in respect of which he is the data controller and which contain an expression of opinion which appears to the Court to be based on the inaccurate financial data. He also seeks an award of damages and punitive damages for breach of data protection obligations.

Page 2 of the claim form is still showing:

Click to enlarge

This is our Chairman's strong rebuttal of SHP's accusation that Declan and I are both mentally ill:

Click to enlarge

Church and State website

Church and State Press

Let me recommend an important web site churchandstate.org.uk. Operating out of London this well-designed and exciting web site covers church-state, population, climate change and other issues. Check it out -- Edd Doerr, President, Americans for Religious Liberty

St Mungo’s Broadway: Seeking to illegally break our contract with the Mayor of London's Greater London Authority (GLA) Housing First programme under threat of eviction

Part 1: High Court rules that the Mayor of London bears no responsibility for his Greater London Authority (GLA) Housing First programme

At the beginning of our tenancy we kept wondering why we were put in an accommodation under the tutelage of the Mayor of London when we had been evicted from our previous flat (see blog of 15 October, "Newham College: We reserve the right to terminate your course at any time") and forced to sleep on the streets of London for over a year, where we were harassed and threatened by the police (see blog of 2 October, "City of London Police: If you want to challenge our word against yours again, you need to make an application to the High Court for permission to apply for judicial review"). But the email below to the Single Homeless Project, one of three charities that operate the Mayor of London's Greater London Authority (GLA) Housing First programme, might just provide a hint of the reason. It concerns St Mungo's Broadway, another premier homelessness organisation, which is seeking to illegally break our contract as clients of GLA Housing First under the threat of eviction:

Click to enlarge

We have a long history with St Mungo's Broadway, formally called Broadway or Broadway Homelessness and Support. This is Declan's account of our last run-in with them in his updated complaint to the United Nations under Article 19 (freedom of expression) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights:

Paragraph 30 of Declan's updated complaint to the United Nations

30. In March 2013, Broadway CEO Howard Sinclair wrote in the Guardian that there are occasions when the charity has accommodated rough sleepers straight from the streets. In addition to the Mayor of London providing Broadway with £5 million under his No Second Night Out project, the charity has received £10 million from London and Quadrant Housing Trust, alongside the support of three other trusts, to accommodate people in London for whom there has been no other option, according to Mr Sinclair in the same article. On 29 August 2013, the Applicant filed a claim in the High Court for judicial review against Commissioner of Police for the City of London Adrian Leppard and Home Secretary Theresa May following the decision of the former not to ask Broadway to engage with him and his wife in relation to their welfare and access to the charity’s service for supporting clients to find accommodation in the private rented sector, because the police service has “no mandate to become involved” (see Annex 24, City of London Police: Reply from Commissioner Adrian Leppard (2013), p. 63). The Applicant argued in his claim form that it was unreasonable for the City of London Police to refuse to ask Broadway to help them find private sector accommodation whilst at the same time threatening them with hosings by street cleaners (see Annex 25, City of London Police: Application for Judicial Review, pp. 64-69). On 6 February 2014, Deputy High Court Judge Bidder ruled: “The refusal of the First Defendant to ask the charity ‘Broadway’ to engage or help the Claimant and his wife with their welfare or accommodation is not arguably unreasonable. It is not its job to intervene in any disagreement between a charity and those seeking that charity’s help” (see Annex 26, City of London Police: Order by Deputy High Court Judge Bidding, p. 70).

This is the court order quoted above:

Click to enlarge

Update: Heavey v Single Homeless Project: Will the Central London County Court rule we consented to declarations for online referral that we are paying our own salaries and that we are both mentally ill, and despite our photographic evidence to the contrary?

High Court rules that the Mayor of London bears no responsibility for his Greater London Authority (GLA) Housing First programme

Click to enlarge

Heavey v Mayor of London

SECTION 5 Detailed statement of grounds

The Claimant's letter before claim challenges the decision of the Defendant's GLA Housing First programme to insist upon issuing him with Support Plans ("the decision"). The Claimant asserts that the decision is not compatible with Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights ("ECHR"), guaranteeing the right to a private life. In a final response letter, the Defendant distorts the Claimant’s claim with reference to the Data Protection Act 1998. The Defendant further alleges that the GLA bears no responsibility for Housing First. The Claimant contends that this is incorrect and an unsustainable position. Under the ECHR, the right to security of tenure is guaranteed with the right of privacy and respect of the home. Failing the remedy being sought (see Section 7 below), the Claimant seeks permission to proceed with a claim for judicial review on the ground that the decision of the Defendant’s GLA Housing First programme to insist upon issuing him with Support Plans is in breach of European Community Law.

https://issuu.com/lolaheavey/docs/jr_claim_form/2

This is our Chairman's strong rebuttal of the Mayor of London's GLA Housing First programme's accusation that Declan and I are both mentally ill:

Click to enlarge

Church and State website

Church and State Press

Let me recommend an important web site churchandstate.org.uk. Operating out of London this well-designed and exciting web site covers church-state, population, climate change and other issues. Check it out -- Edd Doerr, President, Americans for Religious Liberty

If you would like to help us personally, please feel free to pick up one of our books (shameless plug, I know, but every sale helps us to work our way out of our precarious situation). There is currently five books available in Church and State Press here, and all proceeds from the first four of these books go to us with the authors' permission. Thank you all for all the support you have given us, and I hope we can keep our Church and State website going despite the constant threats.

Update (10 September 2015): Threat to life and wellbeing: Our claim against the Greater London Authority filed at the Central London County Court this afternoon

Single Homeless Project: Will a County Court Judge rule that we consented to declarations for online referral that we are paying our own salaries and that we are both two lunatics?

Declan and I are clients of the Mayor of London's Greater London Authority (GLA) Housing First programme. Last May we were housed by the Single Homeless Project (SHP), one of three charitable organisations that operate the Housing First service. Declan is currently suing SHP under the Data Protection Act for circulating among any number of support agencies via online referral that we consented to declarations that we are paying our own salaries and that we are both mentally ill. Since submitting his claim to the Royal Courts of Justice on 12 September, Declan has repeatedly told SHP GLA Housing First in writing and verbally that the immediate and thorough rectification of our data is a prerequisite to any discussion about Look Ahead Care and Support taking over our support (see blog of 23 October, "Look Ahead Care and Support: Seeking to illegally break our contract with the Mayor of London's Greater London Authority (GLA) Housing First programme under threat of eviction"). Declan wrote this email to SHP GLA Housing First tonight very much with an eviction court trial in mind:

Click to enlarge

Heavey v Single Homeless Project

Brief details of claim

On 19 March 2014, the Claimant made a formal Subject Access Request under the Data Protection Act 1998 for any information held about him on the Defendant’s computerised database. This information was only submitted by the Defendant to the Claimant on 5 August 2014, following instruction from the Information Commissioner's Office. The Claimant then discovered that personal data contained in a printed referral form dated 17 March 2014 had been inaccurately entered online by the Defendant and submitted to the Clearing House for accommodation purposes. On 15 August 2014, the Claimant and his employer both wrote to the Defendant about inaccurate financial data that leaves the Claimant open to accusations of deception and fraud, but neither has been able to elicit a response from the Defendant on the matter. The Claimant is therefore making an application to the Court for a declaration that the Defendant has acted unlawfully and an order that the data controller rectify those financial data and any other personal data in respect of which he is the data controller and which contain an expression of opinion which appears to the Court to be based on the inaccurate financial data. He also seeks an award of damages and punitive damages for breach of data protection obligations.

Click to enlarge

Click to enlarge

This is our chairman's strong rebuttal of SHP's accusation that Declan and I are both mentally ill:

Click to enlarge

Church and State website

Church and State Press

Let me recommend an important web site churchandstate.org.uk. Operating out of London this well-designed and exciting web site covers church-state, population, climate change and other issues. Check it out -- Edd Doerr, President, Americans for Religious Liberty

Our Church and State website restored for 100,000 visitors per month

This month and last month our Church and State website at churchandstate.org.uk was blocked by our web host because we exceeded our limit of 25,000 visitors per month. This month we exceeded the limit in less than three weeks, so we have upgraded a notch to be able to cope with up to 100,000 visitors per month. The most popular articles so far this month:

Click to enlarge

If you are under surveillance check your NHS records (especially your surname!)

Invalid National Health Service (NHS) Certificate for full help with health costs:

Click to enlarge

Declan is currently updating his complaint to the United Nations under Article 19 (freedom of expression) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. This is his revised paragraph 12 concerning discriminatory surveillance: nothing to hide, nothing to fear?

12. It is important to underscore that the discriminatory surveillance suffered by the Applicant and his wife is not an isolated event. Rather, it is emblematic of a larger pattern of surveillance by law enforcement officials in the UK that has been well-documented by international and domestic human rights bodies. In May 2012 Liberty, one of the UK's leading civil liberties and human rights organisations, expressed concern that "state sanctioned surveillance against specific individuals takes place on a massive scale". British police and government agencies are requesting personal information about Facebook users more than almost anywhere else in the world (behind the USA and India), according to the company's Government Requests Report 2013. Since the Guardian began publishing material leaked by US whistleblower Edward Snowden in June 2013, there have been a spate of top secret GCHQ documents reported on and published around the world. On 19 February 2014 Intercept journalist Glenn Greenwald, through whom Snowden's revelations came to the world, listed some of these documents: "They include detailed reports on GCHQ's attempts to compromise basic encryption methods used to safeguard internet security, the GCHQ's role in spying on the Brazilian oil company Petrobras, the GCHQ's targeting of UN charities and officials, the GCHQ's use of 'dirty tricks' including 'honeytraps' and fake victim blog posts, the GCHQ's attacks on 'hactivists', GCHQ's surveillance of YouTube and Blogger activity and related activities to covertly influence internet discourse, GCHQ's surveillance through phone apps such as 'Angry Birds', and GCHQ's covert monitoring of visitors to the WikiLeaks website." In February 2014, the Independent reported that GCHQ's online covert actions follow the "4 D's": deny, disrupt, degrade, deceive. Privacy groups have now commenced lawsuits against GCHQ for the use of malware to spy on mobile and internet users across the UK.

Look Ahead Care and Support: Seeking to illegally break our contract with the Mayor of London's Greater London Authority (GLA) Housing First programme under threat of eviction

Part 1: Declan filed his claim against the Mayor of London in the High Court this morning

At the beginning of our tenancy we kept wondering why we were put in an accommodation under the tutelage of the Mayor of London when we had been evicted from our previous flat (see blog of 15 October, "Newham College: We reserve the right to terminate your course at any time") and forced to sleep on the streets of London for over a year, where we were harassed and threatened by the police (see blog of 2 October, "City of London Police: If you want to challenge our word against yours again, you need to make an application to the High Court for permission to apply for judicial review"). But the email below to the Single Homeless Project, one of three charities that run the Mayor of London's Greater London Authority (GLA) Housing First programme, might just provide a hint of the reason. It concerns Look Ahead Care and Support, another premier homelessness organisation, which is seeking to illegally break our contract as clients of GLA Housing First. Hopefully Declan has finished this email with an angle for the press upon our receipt of the threatened eviction notice:

Click to enlarge

Are we now going to be put through another three eviction courts for the second time? This is Declan's account of the last three eviction courts - two District Courts and a Circuit Court - in his updated complaint to the United Nations under Article 19 (freedom of expression) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights:

Paragraph 25 of Declan's updated complaint to the United Nations

25. On 17 October 2012, Deputy District Judge Peart issued an accelerated possession order granting Ms McKenzie possession of the Applicant and his wife’s flat on 1 November 2012 (see Annex 16, Belinda McKenzie: Accelerated Possession Order by Deputy District Judge Peart, p. 43). At an appeal hearing, District Judge Alderson acknowledged that there was a note in the file from Peart J stating that he had not read the Applicant’s defence. Alderson J conceded that Ms McKenzie’s claim for accelerated possession did not contain the correct paperwork; however, because he had all the paperwork relating to the tenancy in the Applicant’s appeal bundle, he set aside Peart J’s accelerated possession order and issued an ordinary possession order with the same effect, i.e. eviction within two weeks of his order (see Annex 17, Belinda McKenzie: Possession Order by District Judge Alderson, p. 44). On 11 March 2013, Circuit Judge Cryan refused the Applicant permission to appeal to the Circuit Court against a decision by the District Court to refuse him a stay of eviction. Cryan J had before him a statement dated 5 March 2013 from Ms McKenzie’s ex-husband, Dr Nigel McKenzie, a consultant psychiatrist in Highgate Mental Health Centre, stating that the Applicant and his wife’s flat was required for somebody with a mental illness. He dismissed the Applicant’s request for permission to appeal on the basis that it had no reasonable prospects of success (see Annex 19, Belinda McKenzie: Eviction Order by Circuit Judge Cryan, p. 50). Accordingly, the Applicant and his wife were evicted from their flat by the bailiff on 14 March 2013.

Human rights activist Belinda McKenzie speaking at the UK Rally Against Child Abuse, 4 June 2011, Trafalgar Square

Single Homeless Project: Now you will agree that you are two lunatics or face eviction

Part 1: Declan filed his claim against the Mayor of London in the High Court this morning

At the beginning of our tenancy we kept wondering why we were put in an accommodation under the tutelage of the Mayor of London when we had been evicted from our previous flat (see previous blog) and forced to sleep on the streets of London for over a year, where we were harassed and threatened by the police (see blog of 2 October, "City of London Police: If you want to challenge our word against yours again, you need to make an application to the High Court for permission to apply for judicial review"). But this email to the Single Homeless Project, which is one of three charities that run the Mayor of London's Greater London Authority Housing First project, might just provide a hint of the reason (hopefully Declan has finished it with an angle for the press upon our receipt of an eviction notice):

Click to enlarge

Church and State website

Church and State Press

Are we now going to be put through another three eviction courts for the second time? This is Declan's account of the last three eviction courts - two District Courts and one Circuit Court - in his updated complaint to the United Nations under Article 19 (freedom of expression) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights:

Paragraph 25 of Declan's updated complaint to the United Nations

25. On 17 October 2012, Deputy District Judge Peart issued an accelerated possession order granting Ms McKenzie possession of the Applicant and his wife’s flat on 1 November 2012 (see Annex 16, Belinda McKenzie: Accelerated Possession Order by Deputy District Judge Peart, p. 43). At an appeal hearing, District Judge Alderson acknowledged that there was a note in the file from Peart J stating that he had not read the Applicant’s defence. Alderson J conceded that Ms McKenzie’s claim for accelerated possession did not contain the correct paperwork; however, because he had all the paperwork relating to the tenancy in the Applicant’s appeal bundle, he set aside Peart J’s accelerated possession order and issued an ordinary possession order with the same effect, i.e. eviction within two weeks of his order (see Annex 17, Belinda McKenzie: Possession Order by District Judge Alderson, p. 44). On 11 March 2013, Circuit Judge Cryan refused the Applicant permission to appeal to the Circuit Court against a decision by the District Court to refuse him a stay of eviction. Cryan J had before him a statement dated 5 March 2013 from Ms McKenzie’s ex-husband, Dr Nigel McKenzie, a consultant psychiatrist in Highgate Mental Health Centre, stating that the Applicant and his wife’s flat was required for somebody with a mental illness. He dismissed the Applicant’s request for permission to appeal on the basis that it had no reasonable prospects of success (see Annex 19, Belinda McKenzie: Eviction Order by Circuit Judge Cryan, p. 50). Accordingly, the Applicant and his wife were evicted from their flat by the bailiff on 14 March 2013.

Human rights activist Belinda McKenzie speaking at the UK Rally Against Child Abuse, 4 June 2011, Trafalgar Square

Let me recommend an important web site churchandstate.org.uk. Operating out of London this well-designed and exciting web site covers church-state, population, climate change and other issues. Check it out -- Edd Doerr, President, Americans for Religious Liberty

Newham College: We reserve the right to terminate your course at any time

I have been attending a course in care two nights a week at Newham College in East Ham for a month now, with assignments that can take up to two days a week to complete. Nonetheless, any week now my class can be informed that the course has been cancelled due to lack of numbers, we were told on Monday night. I have yet to receive a reply to this email to Newham College Principal and Chief Executive Di Gowland yesterday and have no idea if I will be informed tonight that all the work I have put into this course - at the expense of other important work for N4CM's Church and State website (and for which I am paid a salary) - has been for nothing:

Click to enlarge

Declan is currently updating his complaint to the United Nations under Article 19 (freedom of expression) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. This is his revised paragraph 12 concerning discriminatory surveillance: nothing to hide, nothing to fear?

12. It is important to underscore that the discriminatory surveillance suffered by the Applicant and his wife is not an isolated event. Rather, it is emblematic of a larger pattern of surveillance by law enforcement officials in the UK that has been well-documented by international and domestic human rights bodies. In May 2012 Liberty, one of the UK's leading civil liberties and human rights organisations, expressed concern that "state sanctioned surveillance against specific individuals takes place on a massive scale". British police and government agencies are requesting personal information about Facebook users more than almost anywhere else in the world (behind the USA and India), according to the company's Government Requests Report 2013. Since the Guardian began publishing material leaked by US whistleblower Edward Snowden in June 2013, there have been a spate of top secret GCHQ documents reported on and published around the world. On 19 February 2014 Intercept journalist Glenn Greenwald, through whom Snowden's revelations came to the world, listed some of these documents: "They include detailed reports on GCHQ's attempts to compromise basic encryption methods used to safeguard internet security, the GCHQ's role in spying on the Brazilian oil company Petrobras, the GCHQ's targeting of UN charities and officials, the GCHQ's use of 'dirty tricks' including 'honeytraps' and fake victim blog posts, the GCHQ's attacks on 'hactivists', GCHQ's surveillance of YouTube and Blogger activity and related activities to covertly influence internet discourse, GCHQ's surveillance through phone apps such as 'Angry Birds', and GCHQ's covert monitoring of visitors to the WikiLeaks website." In February 2014, the Independent reported that GCHQ's online covert actions follow the "4 D's": deny, disrupt, degrade, deceive. Privacy groups have now commenced lawsuits against GCHQ for the use of malware to spy on mobile and internet users across the UK.

***

On 14 March 2013 we were evicted from our previous flat because according to our then live-in landlady's ex-husband, Dr Nigel McKenzie, a consultant psychiatrist in Highgate Mental Health Centre, our flat was needed for somebody with a mental illness. As Declan states in paragraph 8 of his previous complaint to the United Nations, MI5 whistleblower David Shayler also lived with human rights activist Belinda McKenzie in the same house for a couple of years until 2007. It is indeed unfortunate Shayler then declared that he was the Messiah, became a squatter, and was subsequently ridiculed in the press for changing his name to Delores Kane. A New Statesman article dated 11 September 2006 featuring Shayler and Belinda gives no indication that Shayler believed he was the Messiah at that time; whilst a Daily Mail interview with Shayler explicitly shows he believed himself to be Jesus by June 2007.

The Esquire article below* is mentioned in a Guardian article dated 27 March 2012. It is an eye-opener, highlighting the monitoring and surveillance that Shayler had to live with back in 2000, and the contradictory briefings and slanders that were coming out of the British establishment and the media. The author, Dr Eamonn O'Neill, is a lecturer in journalism at Strathclyde University.

*On 2 May 2013, Issuu removed this pdf from my Issuu account following a copyright complaint by Hearst Communications. I had uploaded the article to my Issuu account in December 2012. In March 2013, when last I checked, the article had been viewed more than 15,000 times. It can be viewed here.

BBC PANORAMA: The David Shayler Affair (August 1998)

According to BBC Panorama, Shayler "caused the biggest crisis of official secrecy since the spy catcher affair". In 2002, he was jailed for seven weeks for breaking the Official Secrets Act.