“Dear Mr Desmond Browne QC, HHJ O’ Brien, Mr John Hamilton and Ms Catherine Taskis,
THE BAR STANDARDS BOARD V TARIQ REHMAN
HEARING 25TH AND 26TH JANUARY 2017 10.30
TRIBUNAL CHAMBERS 9 GRAY’S INN SQUARE, LONDON WC1R 5JD
Desmond Browne QC is the President of the Disciplinary Tribunal of the Inns of Court. Judge O’ Brien is the Chair of the Panel before whom the above proceedings are listed. Mr Hamilton and Ms Taskis are barrister Panel Members
This is copied to the Class of Barristers and to the Class of Victims [Land and Property Theft]
As has been made plain, the purported disciplinary proceedings against Mr Rehman are the subject of a Class Action brought on behalf of
1) The Class of Barristers
2) The Class of Solicitors
3) The Class of Victims [Theft of Land and Property] (being victims of dishonest barristers and solicitors )
(all as defined)
The aims and objectives of the Class Actions are set out in [ P4 -2 ] CL 1 PAGE 64-PAGE 67 . In summary, they are :
1) to take the first steps to establish a effective system for the regulation of lawyers, which truly protects consumer rights
2) to rid the profession of dishonest lawyers (whoever they may be) and hold them to account
3) to set aside disciplinary findings made against barristers and solicitors, where they have made unlawfully
4) to establish a fully funded legal aid system
The Class Action shows that far from protecting the public interest, the General Council of the Bar, the Bar Standards Board , the Law Society of England and Wales , the Solicitors’ Regulation Authority and the Legal Ombudsman’s Service are at the heart of a nationwide criminal network in which individuals such as Baroness Ruth Deech, former Chair of the Bar Standards Board, Patricia Robertson QC, former Vice Chair of the Bar Standards Board and Timothy Dutton QC, former Chairman of the Bar Council, play a pivotal role.
Put simply, if a barrister sees that a litigant (even his own client ) has land and property which he wants for himself, he will steal it. There is nothing to stop him.
He enjoys complete immunity from prosecution by Bar Standards Board and is protected from any liability to meet claims by the Bar Mutual.
Nor do Victims have any hope of obtaining compensation from LeO , who acts under the dictation of the Bar Council
As I show in the flowchart in the attached document . UK89 PAGE 16 , the Regulator’s Chairs and Chief Executives are themselves involved in an extremely transparent bank scam.
The Regulator’s treatment of the public’s complaints against barristers, which is either to ignore the complaints or to irrationally dismiss them, is an indication that these individuals are also engaged in widespread land and property theft .
The involvement of the same barristers (Marc Beaumont, Hugo Page QC , Paul Mitchell QC, Andrew Spaeight QC, to name just three) who are never accountable, suggests that barristers act in conspiracy with the Regulator, who probably takes a ‘cut’ of the stolen proceeds.
HHJ Sleeman directed that Mr Rehman provide a list of his witnesses.
Mr Rehman has specified his witnesses as being the Class of Barristers and the Class of Victims [Land and Property Theft]
Many Victims will not be able to travel to the hearing to give evidence in person : they are penniless , ill, disabled, elderly, sick or simply worn down by their struggle against the barristers who have stripped them of everything they own.
Accordingly, the Panel is asked to make provision for the Victims [Land and Property Theft] witnesses to give evidence by skype or by telephone.
I will be representing the interests of [redacted]
Ten Victims attended court to intervene in the Judicial Review Claim[ BSB] which shows that all of the BSB’s procedures are void and unlawful and in the Judicial Review Claim[ LeO], which shows that all of LeO’s procedures are void and unlawful. All they wanted to do was to hand over their papers to Hickinbottom J. The Victims are all living in desperate circumstances and attended at enormous financial and personal cost .
Hickinbottom J duped them into leaving the courtroom and then locked them out! It is sincerely hoped there will not be repetition of this conduct at the Tribunal hearing.
Insofar as the Class of Barristers is concerned, I believe many would wish to give evidence that Michael Carter, the BSB’s main IHT Caseworker has lied, perjured himself , forged evidence and advanced a false case against them. Provision should be made for them to give evidence as well.
Attachment: Core bundle / skeleton PDF
District judge and his former lover who stole £1million from clients to fund lavish lifestyle drove accountant to suicide after duping him into covering up their crimes
From 4 Jan. 2017:
NOTICE IN THE CLASS ACTION TO VICTIMS OF LAND AND PROPERTY THEFT
A. THE CLASS ACTION
1. The cases of Tariq Rehman v The Bar Council, Anal Sheikh v The Law Society  EWHC 1409 (CH) [ 2006] are brought as a Class Action for Barristers, Solicitors and Victims of Land and Property Theft in cases in which the theft is invariable committed by dishonest barristers, solicitors and judges or by the use of fraudulent instruments.
2. The Judicial Review Claim [BSB] and the Judicial Review Claim [LeO] are judicial review claims brought by Tariq Rehman challenging the lawfulness of the procedures followed by the BSB and LeO. About 10 members of the public , whose homes and assets have been stolen, attended the permission hearing before Hickinbottom J in July 2016. Among them were some of the Victims referred to at Page 8 below : Mrs Margaret Gomm aged 86, disabled, ill, poor and desperate ; Grazyna Mekarsksa, unlawfully made homeless in 2014 and forced to live on the streets. All they wanted to do was to hand their papers to the Judge and intervene in the proceedings. They were respectful and courteous. Hickinbottom J duped all of the Victims into leaving the courtroom , locked them out and dismissed the Judicial Review Claims in their absence.
3. There is an online petition to the Minister of Justice requesting a public inquiry to investigate the use of fraudulent instruments in the courts. The petition can be accessed via the following link
4. A common set of files detailed in Class Action Index has been deposited in the Court of Appeal. The designation of the files is [A1-1 ] where A1 is the file number and -1 is the tab number.
5. The objectives of the Class Actions are set out in [ P4 -2] CL 1 PAGE 64-PAGE 67 . They are, in summary
1) To obtain compensation or reparation for those members of the public who have suffered loss as a result of the misconduct of dishonest barristers and solicitors
2) To rid the profession of dishonest lawyers (whoever they may be)
and hold them to account
3) To remove the designation of the Bar Council and the Law Society as Approved Regulators under the Legal Services Act 2007 and to take the first steps to establish an effective system for the regulation of lawyers, which truly protects consumer rights bringing about the most fundamental change the professional has seen for over one hundred and fifty years (since the days of Jinnah, Nehru and Gandhi)
4) To establish a fully funded legal aid system
7. Speaking at the 2016 Hay Literary Festival , investigative journalist Roberto Saviano, said
: “If I asked what is the most corrupt place on Earth, you might say it’s Afghanistan, maybe Greece, Nigeria, the south of Italy. I would say it is the UK. It’s not UK bureaucracy, police, or politics, but what is corrupt is the financial capital. Ninety per cent of the owners of capital in London have their headquarters offshore. Jersey and the Caymans are the access gates to criminal capital in Europe and the UK is the country that allows it
8. The fact is that UK is engaged in the unlawful and systematic appropriation of land and property from ordinary people; from the most vulnerable of them at that. Behind the thefts are some of the most powerful figures in the country.
9. The UK’s theft from its own people and the infringement of their rights and freedoms has been going on for decades, destroying the lives of ordinary men and women and stripping the country’s economy. The theft of land and the displacement of people is a global phenomenon. In the UK, which has net land value of £5.7 trillion, properties targeted for theft range from urban development sites and valuable agricultural land to ordinary residential homes.
10. The Class Action shows the UK’s judiciary falls into two groups: those judges who are too frightened to take a stand against fraud and corruption when they see it before their very eyes, and those judges who are corrupt and who use their judicial position to commit fraud.
11. Purported hearings take place in secret the UK, at which a man can be stripped of his money, his land, his property, his profession and his livelihood; and be condemned to spend his life in abject poverty. He is kept out of court for years on end, prevented from obtaining reparation or compensation and imprisoned for contempt of court if he attempts to recover his property.
12. Far from protecting the public interest, the General Council of the Bar, the Bar Standards Board , the Law Society of England and Wales , the Solicitors’ Regulation Authority and the Legal Service Ombudsman are at the heart of a nationwide criminal network in which individuals such as Baroness Ruth Deech, former Chair of the Bar Standards Board, Patricia Robertson QC, former Vice Chair of the Bar Standards Board and Timothy Dutton QC, former Chairman of the Bar Council, play a pivotal role. [A1] EC UN CORE 108-126, 685 -701
C. DRAFT ORDER
13. The Court of Appeal is asked to make an order in the following terms
The Class Action [Victims of Land and Property Theft]
1) In the Judicial Review Claim [BSB ] and the Judicial Review Claim [LeO] ,
a) Tariq Rehman be treated as acting in a representative capacity for every consumer or client in the UK
b) Those seeking the remedy referred to below or seeking to be joined as Interested Parties or Interveners do notify the court of their interest and be joined
2) The Court do direct the Minister of Justice [NOTE 3] to pay compensation or reparation to those Victims of Land and Property Theft who can show a prima facie case that they have suffered loss and damage
a) by reason of the conduct of a barrister or solicitor
b) by reason of the conduct of a member of the judiciary
c) by reason of a false or fraudulent instrument used in court proceedings
3) The Court do make asset freezing orders against barrister and solicitors pending determination by the Minister of Justice about whether they should be personally accountable
Intervention and Representation
4) The Court do direct the Legal Services Board to intervene
5) The Court do direct the Attorney General to represent those Victims who are unable to represent themselves
D. OTHER INTERVENEES
14. Judicial integrity is the cornerstone of the rule of law and the protection of human rights ; judicial corruption not only erodes the pillars of a healthy justice system but every aspect of societal and family life
15. Every single person in the UK should be treated as an interested party or intervene because these matters concern everyone. In the interests of brevity, representations are confined to four groups:
16. In the Brexit Case, Lord Chief Justice, the Master of the Rolls and Lord Justice Sales said in the High Court Judgment
legislation enacted by the Crown of both Houses of Parliament is Supreme. Parliament can by enactment of primary legislation, change the law of the land in any way it chooses. There is no superior form of law than primary legislation,
17. That is a false statement: CL3 CL3-1
· In the so called Law Society’s interventions into solicitors’ practices (which are no more than raids and burglaries) the judiciary have disapplied the Solicitors. Act 1974 for over 50 years .
· In the case of Tariq Rehman v The Bar Council, the judiciary have disapplied the Legal Services Act 2007.
18. On 18th December 2016 Owen Boycott wrote in The Guardian
Thousands left homeless by shortage of legal aid lawyers, say charities
Thousands of people are being made homeless every year because they cannot find lawyers to help them resist eviction, charities are warning
The latest figures, highlighted by the Legal Action Group (LAG) and the homeless charity Shelter, reinforce warnings by the Law Society that “advice deserts”, where few, if any, lawyers are left in practice who are capable of dealing with legal aid housing cases, are emerging across England and Wales.
19. EC UN CORE shows the Law Society, the Bar Council and the judiciary are behind the implementation of legislation and policies which have an ulterior self serving motive : to steal land and homes and to convert solvent, employed, often wealthy individuals into unemployed, dispossessed, asset less people who are destined to be dependent on State benefits for the remainder of their lives – in effect , to create an economic underclass.
20. 10000 -15000 High Street law firms have been systematically closed down by the Law Society, and legal aid has been removed, to make it easier for their own officials and those who are part of their criminal network to steal homes and properties and to prevent the Victim from obtaining redress :
· In 1990, in the case of Theft of Margaret Gomm Home and Three and a Half Acres of Land [EC UN CORE PAGE 523-558 ] the Victim, then aged 53, attended court for what she believed was a small claims dispute. At 10am she was the owner of an unencumbered title valued at £85,000.00. By 4.30pm she was homeless. The theft of her title was undertaken as a conspiracy between Marc Beaumont of 9 Stone Buildings – Mrs Gomm’s purported barrister, Tim Treherne, a partner in the firm of Beaumont’s – Mrs Gomm’s purported solicitor Harold Godwyn – the Builder’s solicitor, now District Judge Harold Godwin of Haverfordwest and Aberystwyth County Court and the President of the Association of Her Majesty’s District Judges Mr Milwyn Jarman QC – the Builder’s Leading Counsel, now His Honour Milwyn Jarman a Judge in the Lands Tribunal Mr T Lewis-Bowen, purporting to be His Honour Judge Lewis-Bowen, the purported judge at Aberystwyth County Court The Legal Aid Agency , or rogue staff there or Mr Matthew Coats ,Director General of the Legal Aid Agency .
The property is now probably worth £1m
But for the offer of friend’s couch , Mrs Gomm would have been living on the streets.
A quarter of a century later, she is still suffering . She has written
‘If I could take a pill and die, I would’
How many people have been made homeless over the past 25 years in similar circumstances , perhaps by the same individuals: 100, 1000 or 10000?
· In the case of Grazyna Merkarksa [EC UN CORE PAGE 558-565] the Victim was aged 43. She had rights and interests in her home including the right of occupation registered at HM Land Registry. At 9.30 am on Thursday 6th March 2014 eight men arrived at her home. They drilled the locks to gain entry . Mrs Mekarska called the police for help. When they came , the police helped the bailiffs to forcibly eject her. There was no court order. She told the police that there was no court order and that they should ask to see it, if it was claimed it existed. The police refused to ask for it.
Mrs Mekarska was thrown out in the streets in her nightdress without any of her possessions . The Property was locked up immediately and later boarded up.
On an application for an urgent interim remedy, Henderson J refused to hear the case and said she should litigate to recover her property. Her own barrister, Jonathan Allcock of Maitland Chambers, agreed with him.
In other words, a High Court Judge and a barrister from prestigious chambers believes that the Protection from Eviction Act 1977 no longer applies in the UK, and anyone can be thrown out of their home at any time
Three years later, Mrs Mekarska is still homeless. She has had to live on the streets.
Given the sheer irrationally of their conduct, there is every reason to believe that Henderson J and Mr Allcock took a ‘cut’ of the sale proceeds of Mrs Mekarska’s property.
· In proceedings referred to as BSB1 in Tariq Rehman v The Bar Council, a barrister was prosecuted for ‘thinking something which shocked a solicitor – but not much’ . The real reason was to suppress the fact that the solicitor, Adrian Green, who happened to be a Law Society official, had forged a document , in all probability, to steal the title to the Landlord’s Property How many other titles have been stolen by that solicitor ?
· The Rt. Hon. the Lord Justice Briggs , Justice of the Chancery Division of the High Court (2006 – 2013), Lord Justice of Appeal and Member of the Privy Council and Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers (Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales (2005-2008) and also Member of the Privy Council, committed the Red River Conveyancing and Mortgage Fraud, which is described as the most preposterous and stupid fraud in the history of conveyancing. They fraudulently altered the title the Stoke Newington Site while the register was frozen under the Land Registration Act 2002 s 72 (Priority Protection) which it is impossible to do.
About £1m worth of property is processed every minute at the Land Registry and there is one property transaction every 9 seconds. There are hundreds of millions of transactions transacted every year. The particular modus used in this case means that
a) 5 million people can be displaced every day. Assuming 25% can pay for hotel accommodation for a single night or have alternative accommodation or can stay with friends, 4 million people will have to sleep rough.
b) in 10 day, the entire population of the UK will be made homeless.
c) in 1 year, the entire asset base of UK will have disappeared.
Henderson J and Marc Beaumont were also involved in the Red River Conveyancing and Mortgage Fraud
Healthcare , education and social welfare
28. The Victim of fraud undertaken by the judiciary through the courts is not only the land or property owner, but the taxpayer who has to foot the cost of sham proceedings (eg. the cost of light, heat, rates, salaries of court officers, administration and the like in the use of court premises cost of the application for registration the Red River Conveyancing and Mortgage Fraud would have been about £25.00 (twenty five pounds) in a solicitor’s office. I have estimated the cost to the taxpayer of the 9 ‘hearings’ which took place in September and October 2007 in the Red River fraud was £100,000.00. The entire cost of all 200 ‘hearings’ is to the taxpayer is about £10m
29. The Red River Conveyancing and Mortgage Fraud is only one fraud committed in the civil justice system. Extrapolating from the above statistics, the cost of all of the sham proceedings taken over a 10 year period is £100,108.45 billion. That money could be used for schools, hospitals, legal aid and for other social welfare.
Black Lives Matter, Tell Mama and others
30. A comparative study of regulatory decisions would lead anyone to believe that the only dishonest , incompetent and unfit lawyers in the UK are black and ethnic minority lawyers , while lawyers who are supremely honest , highly competent and eminently fit for the profession, are white.
31. Tariq Rehman, a black and ethnic minority barrister, has had to face 161 charges, prosecuted in 27 sets of proceedings over a three year period. The prosecutions against him range from ‘saying something’ or ‘thinking something’ to shock a (white) solicitor ‘but not much’ (BSB 1) to not paying LeO compensation awards or refunds to clients who have never instructed him, whom he does not know , who have never paid him any money and who are clients of other barristers, because a gym instructor, restaurant manager or life coach (the Investigator’s typical pre LeO employment) says he should!
32. In Anal Sheikh v Law Society, a black and ethnic solicitor has been struck off for doing bills which end with a zero, for taking her own remortgage monies from client account and for not completing the administration of an estate which usually takes eighteen months to two years, in which over 100 letters were written and received, in seven hours!
33. In the case of solicitor X, the SRA wrote to the effect of
Let’s get the black solicitor and use the
white solicitor’s evidence against him
The black solicitor was aggrieved when the white solicitor had said ‘All Nigerian’s are criminals. The white solicitor had committed money laundering offences
THE SUPREME COURT’S FAILURE TO DISCHARGE ITS JUDICIAL FUNCTION
34. The Theft of Margaret Gomm Home and Three and a Half Acres of Land, the case of Grazyna Merkarksa and the Red River Conveyancing and Mortgage Fraud have been before the Supreme Court for over three years now without response. Tariq Rehman v The Bar Council has been put before the Supreme Court this year. The SRA’s Bank Scam, Compensation Fund Fraud, in which the Law Society has no choice but to reinstate 30000 solicitors to the Roll and re-establish all the law firms it has unlawfully closed down, was before the House of Lords in 2006.
35. The Supreme Court could have singlehandedly eradicated homelessness and brought about a fully funded National Health Service, and education and social welfare system, bolstering social and economic well-being for the UK for generations to come. Why hasn’t the Supreme Court done that?
1st January 2017
The implementation of UK11 will result in the following
· 15000 sole practitioner firms and small law firms which have been can immediately reopen TOMORROW
· All disciplinary decisions against solicitors made over the past 50 years will be automatically rescinded .
· The 30000-40000 solicitors who have lost their profession, business and livelihood will be entitled to receive compensation
· The past and current Presidents of the Law Society can be arrested and charged for bank fraud and other criminal offences
[NOTE 2] .
UK61 sets out in detail why all prosecutions are said to be ab initio void . A summary is in in UK89-2, namely
· a Member of the Investigation and Hearings Team (Paul Pretty, Robert Burn, Michael Carter) attends the Professional Conduct Committee Meetings at which barristers are referred to the Tribunal in violation of the entire principle of separation of powers, thereby vitiating the entire process
The Investigations and Hearings Caseworker is involved at every stage of the disciplinary process. He will
a) Receive the complaint against the Barrister
b) Decide whether or not to accept jurisdiction for the complaint
c) Investigate the complaint on paper
d) Undertake an investigation into the Barrister’s chambers practices by visiting chambers
e) Make recommendations to the Barrister, which if the Barrister does not follow, he will be charged
f) Decide whether or not to refer the complaint to the PCC
g) Prepare the papers for the PCC
h) Prepare the papers for the drafting of the charge
i) Where he purports to exercise delegated authority on behalf of the PCC refer the barrister to the Tribunal himself
j) Prosecute the case at the Tribunal or instruct a barrister to prosecute the case (in which case he will attend the hearing as a representative of the BSB and the person instructing counsel )
k) Prosecute any appeal or instruct a barrister to prosecute the appeal (in which case he will attend the hearing as a representative of the BSB and the person instructing counsel )
· In Mr Rehman’s case, a member of the Board attended the investigation
· In Mr Rehman’s case, a member of the Professional Conduct Committee attended the investigation
· The allegations against the Bar Council, put at their highest, are these:
a) That the Approved Regulator does not perform any regulatory function : the Bar Council’s function is to facilitate the serious organised crime in the UK which is committed by barristers using the purported judicial system
a) That the Bar Standards Board targets barristers through racial hatred , personal malice or mere whimsy.
b) That there is no Professional Conduct Committee in that
1) No one meets
2) No sees any documents
3) No one reads anything
c) That Barristers are referred to the Tribunal through a rubber stamping process for which the caseworkers are responsible. In theory, the system of delegation permits a single caseworker to have absolute and unfettered control over the outcome of a complaint against a Barrister from the receipt of a complaint to his suspension to his debarment. In other words, an unqualified caseworker has a professional man’s life in his hands – and he knows it!
d) The Investigation and Hearings Team, in particular, Robert Burns and Michael Carter, routinely falsify evidence, lie to the Tribunal and advance a false and perjured case against the disciplined barrister.
· The following allegations are made against the Tribunal
a) That the Tribunal acts under the dictation and in collusion with the Bar Council
b) That the Tribunal blatantly disregards the most fundamental of principles of trial.
c) That the Tribunal blatantly disregards or breaches the Disciplinary Tribunals Regulations 2014
d) There is collusion between the Secretariat of the Tribunal and the Bar Standards Board.
e) There is evidence of perjury by Margaret Hilson ( in Yash Mehey’s case) and the falsification evidence by Andy Russell and Margeret Hilson (in Tariq Rehman’s case)
In summary , the proposal is that the Minister of Justice compensates the Victim , because there is simply no other way in which the Victim can recover his losses. There is no reason for the Minister of Justice to suffer financial because, with the Victim’s help, the Minister could seek an indemnity from those responsible. The Minister of Justice could immediately obtain asset freezing orders against them in anticipation of compensating the Victim
The UK Government is bound under international law to regulate the and the Minister of Justice is bound under statute to regulate the legal bound to regulate the legal profession and the judiciary . There is no regulation of the legal profession and of the judiciary. The UK Government and Minister of Justice should compensate Victims who have suffered loss as a consequence of the breach of their obligation
Victims will have a claim against the State, at the very least, for damages arising from a judicial act under s 9 of the Human Rights Act 1988 , if not a claim under the Treaty of Lisbon and Member States’ obligations under the Civil Law Convention on Corruption which obliges Member States to provide in its internal law for effective remedies for persons who have suffered damage as a result of acts of corruption by its public officials in the exercise of their functions to enable them to defend their rights and interests including offering the possibility of obtaining compensation for damage.
Professional indemnity insurers should meet claims which are indefensible without the need for litigation. Insurers arbitrarily refuse to meet claims, knowing that the Victim has no right of redress: litigation is beyond his pocket and legal aid is not available ; even the Victim could afford to pay , no barrister or solicitor would take on the case or , if they did , they might very well cheat him.
It is not even possible for the Victim to act on his own account. The court office will generally refuse to issue claims against barristers or solicitors
If by chance, the Victim manages to issue a claim, the court will refuse to obtain judgment in default.
A judgment in default which is entered is removed from the court record. The judgment in default (an Article I Protocol 1 Right to Property) removed by the court after it has been entered can be said to be stolen by the court.