Tag Archives: article 6 ECHR violation

Perverting the Course of Justice

Posted on by
Reply

As I said in one of my blog posts that the Defendants and/or their associates appear to have repeatedly manipulated my daughter, ex-husband, ex-boyfriend, the people I know, and even medical professionals not to believe what I say, to trap me and my daughter in their ongoing sexual abuse and exploitation via hidden cameras. It’s both coercive control and perverting the course of justice (tampering with evidence).

My ex-husband, Jørgen Mortensen, a white Danish man, has no idea that the British Prime Minister Keir Starmer and his associates may be sexually abusing and exploitating his own daughter via hidden cameras and live-streaming under the noses of everyone. Particularly when my every attempt to warn our daughter and him is met with evidence tampering to suppress the truth, as I said earlier.

Keir Starmer also has a daughter himself. How can he look his own daughter in the eye while at the same time appearing to sexually abuse my daughter via hidden cameras and live-streaming her life for profit? If he’s done nothing wrong, I invite him to publicly clarify it, and we should fight fairly in court without my access to lawyers being blocked.

It’s cheating and an abuse of process to prevent a citizen from having legal representation and simultaneously also illegally monitor all their legal strategies, so you can automatically win the case, which may also constitute perverting the course of justice.

If they have nothing to hide, there’s no need to manipulate or gaslight others into not believing me. They also isolate me as much as they can, to cut all help and support I could get. I now live in complete isolation. To make matter worse, they even block my access to lawyers. Again, this is not the behaviour of innocent parties.

At approximately 21:29 pm, immediately upon typing the above-mentioned paragraph, I heard someone suddenly begin to make some noise near my room. This is what the State Actor Defendants seem to be doing by cyberstalking me 24/7, and then as soon as I begin to expose their wrongdoing – either privately or publicly – they would immediately instruct an individual to come out of their room and begin to rummage in the kitchen near my room. Sometimes, the individual would close the microwave or something very loudly as a form of intimidation and discreet censorship, to make me feel intimidated.

Every time I begin to edit my injunction application bundle, housemates also begin to exit/return to the property and violently slam the main door near my room shut. This is a classic witness intimidation. Despite knowing full well that I am preparing my injunction application, the torture, abuse, illegal surveillance, secret filming, live-streaming / distributing the non-consensually recordings for profit, mass misuse of private information, witness intimidation and severe harassment just continue unabated, suggesting that they act with impunity.

At approximately 22:31 pm, another discreet witness intimidation occurred again. Because immediately after I added some negative hashtags regarding Keir Starmer in my Tumblr post before posting it, I heard someone return to the property and start making noises. I then opened my door to look this time, the individual was the one residing in room 3, wearing a very bright red jumper, one of the main colour signifiers often used in the harassment campaign against me, as if the State Actor Defendants could guess that I would come out of my room again to see who it was, they then appear to get him to wear a red jumper ready for me to see as a form of colour harassment.

This is how they also use hidden cameras to torture me daily and to plan their attacks, harassment and intimidation. Because just moments earlier, at approximately 21:29 pm, I heard some noise in the kitchen, as I said earlier, and went out to investigate. But the individual quickly disappeared as usual. The state actor defendants could then see via hidden cameras and CCTV in the house that I went out of my room to investigate, they then seem to get my housemate in room 3 to suddenly return home and make lots of noise at the exact moment I typed some negative hashtags regarding Keir Starmer, to make me go out and look. I would then see him wearing a very bright red jumper. This is how they try to be one step ahead of me using hidden cameras as their weapons to plan their next moves. They also seem to derive some kind of satisfaction from playing cat and mouse with me. This is like violence against women. They then also block my access to lawyers, to make it difficult for me to stop the abuse.

CCTV cameras in the house and everywhere, including on public transport, such as on buses and trains, are also being misused for malicious purposes, such as to surveil me at all times when I am not inside my room to let me know, they’re going to surveil me to death and everywhere! Because they intentionally let me know that they are also illegally surveilling me while I am traveling by bus or train by reflecting everything back to me, to let me know everything has been observed and recorded.

This is a misuse of power, a form of extreme torture and gross human rights violations violating both the domestic and international law. If Keir Starmer is also behind this, then it makes this case even more shocking and unprecedented. Particularly when he used to be a human rights lawyer himself, and now he’s running the country!

This is the post that I was just about to publish on Tumblr with some negative hashtags regarding Keir Starmer before a housemate suddenly returned home and began to make loud noises, to make me feel intimidated.

By preventing me from having legal representation, they don’t just try to protect themselves from being held accountable but also to allow themselves to continue to sexually abuse and exploit me and my daughter via hidden cameras and cybersex trafficking to no end. They must be making lots of money on us when they appear to do whatever they can to carry on their illegal enterprise under the radar, amounting to perverting the course of justice and money laundering.

They simply treat us as their properties, matching the definition of modern slavery in all its forms, which also includes sex trafficking and human trafficking.

Sexual Offences Act 2003 and Related Legislation

  • Secret filming of intimate acts without consent falls under voyeurism (section 67).
  • Dissemination of such recordings constitutes sexual exploitation and may fall under revenge pornography offences (Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015, section 33).

Modern Slavery Act 2015

  • Treating me and my daughter as “properties for business” by generating ongoing profits from the non-consensual distribution of our private lives amounts to exploitation through slavery and servitude.
  • Section 1 prohibits holding a person in slavery or servitude. Section 2 criminalises human trafficking, including sexual exploitation for profit.
  • The pattern of repeated exploitation despite pending injunction application and court proceedings shows we are being used as assets in an illegal enterprise.

On 6 June 2026, at precisely 01:03 am, immediately upon typing “They simply treat us as their properties” into the previous paragraph, I heard someone suddenly return home and slam the main door shut. The timing of this incident is significant, as the minute ended in the number 3, which I believe was used to symbolically reference Article 3 of the Human Rights Act 1998, the very right that prohibits torture, inhuman or degrading treatment. This incident is consistent with the ongoing pattern of harassment, where external noises, actions and symbolic harassment are deliberately synchronized with my private activities, clearly indicating that all my devices are being constantly monitored and that they intend for me to know it.

This is why I think they want to keep illegally monitoring all my devices, online activities and communications 24/7, to be able to control, intimidate and provoke me just at the right time. Again, that is why it’s important for them to keep unlawfully cyberstalking me at all times, so that as soon as I type in sensitive information, they will detect it right away and immediately orchestrate the harassment or intimidation. This is one of their methods of psychological torture. It’s also a form of Tech Abuse, which many women face. But typically by their own partners.

On 4 June 2026, at precisely 00:01 am, soon after publishing this blog post, I observed a helicopter flying low over my residence passing my window as if intentional as always. Because this is not an isolated incident. It has happened many times before. The timing of this incident is significant once again, as the minute ended in the number “01,” which I believe was used to symbolically reference the “No.10.” Because they have been using “No.01” or “No.10” persistently lately to harass me and to refer to something or someone as usual. For example, on one occasion, while walking on the street, two women walked past me, which seemed intentional. At the precise moment they were about to walk past me, one of them then suddenly pointed to something in a shop and loudly said, almost like shouting: “Look, it’s only £10!”

This is just one of the many incidents that No.10 seems to be uttered loudly within my earshot, or embedded in email correspondence, advertisements, social media posts and even in films, suggesting an industrial harassment campaign against me using all kinds of harassment techniques. “No.10” is one of them.

The Shadow Docket: When State Influence Closes the Courtroom Doors

Posted on by
Reply

A case study in the systemic denial of access to justice and the targeting of family life.

The Invisible Wall

In the United Kingdom, the “Right to a Fair Trial” under Article 6 of the Human Rights Act is often presented as an absolute guarantee. However, my current experience as a litigant in person reveals a different reality: One where state actors can effectively build an invisible wall between a citizen and the judiciary.

For months, I have attempted to bring a claim against the police, including other powerful individuals and entities, for egregious misconduct. Instead of a fair hearing, I have encountered a coordinated campaign of obstruction.

Systematic Obstruction of Justice

The barriers to justice are not just financial; they are procedural and structural:

  • The Vanishing File: On multiple occasions, I have filed urgent applications for injunctions to stop illegal surveillance, secret filming, sexual abuse via voyeurism, cybersex trafficking, misuse of private information, harassment and intimidation. Each time, the documents have “disappeared” from the court’s administrative record before reaching a judge.
  • Blocked Counsel: Despite the severity and complexity of the case, my attempts to secure independent legal representation have been systematically thwarted, leaving me to face state-funded legal teams alone—a direct violation of the “Equality of Arms” principle.

Beyond the Courtroom: Targeting the Family

The most disturbing aspect of this case is the shift from legal obstruction to domestic interference. I have reason to believe that state-led “honey trap” operations have been deployed to target my daughter.

This tactic—using intimate human relationships as a tool for surveillance and control—is a gross violation of Article 8 ECHR (Right to Private and Family Life). It suggests that when the state cannot defeat a claim in the courtroom, it targets the claimant’s family to force silence.

Why This Matters to You

This is not a private dispute; it is a matter of profound public interest. If the state is permitted to monitor a citizen’s private life, target their family, and “lose” their court documents with impunity, then the rule of law is merely a suggestion.

I am calling for international oversight and investigative transparency. Justice must not only be done; it must be seen to be done in the open air, not in the shadows of administrative “errors.” 

Read about the Human Rights Act 1998 here.

And the Civil Procedure Rules here.

If public officials or authorities breach one of these rights and rules, they are breaking the law.

Film director
Buppha Witt, actress, writer and filmmaker, based in London.

What Article 6 Really Means And Why It Matters in My Case

Posted on by
Reply

Most people never have to think about Article 6 of the Human Rights Act. But when something goes wrong — when your privacy is violated, when you need legal protection, when you’re suddenly navigating the court system — Article 6 becomes one of the most important rights you have.

So what is Article 6?

Article 6 = The Right to a Fair Trial

In simple terms, Article 6 protects your right to:

– be heard 
– have a fair process 
– access legal advice 
– have equal footing with the other side 
– participate effectively in your own case 

It exists to stop situations where one side has all the power, resources, or representation — and the other side is left unprotected.

Why Article 6 Matters in My Case

In my situation, there appear to be barriers preventing me from securing legal representation, while the opposing side has full legal support. This creates an imbalance that undermines the fairness of the proceedings.

A fair trial requires equality of arms — meaning both sides should have a fair chance to present their case.

When one side has lawyers and the other is prevented from obtaining them, that balance is lost.

Why I’m Seeking an Urgent Injunction

To restore fairness, I am seeking an urgent injunction to also prevent any interference with my ability to obtain legal representation, including any actions that discourage, influence, or obstruct lawyers or organisations from providing me with impartial advice. Without legal advice, it becomes impossible to navigate complex digital privacy issues or defend my rights effectively.

Because access to legal representation is essential for a fair trial, and any obstruction undermines my Article 6 rights.

This is not just about me — many people facing digital harms struggle to obtain legal support. Article 6 exists to protect all of us.

Why This Is a Public‑Interest Issue

Digital privacy violations are increasing. So are barriers to justice. When people cannot access lawyers, the system fails.

By speaking out, I hope to:

– raise awareness 
– encourage transparency 
– highlight systemic barriers 
– protect my rights 
– support others facing similar obstacles 

Access to justice is a human right. Article 6 protects that right — and it must be upheld.

The royal court of justice

What is Judicial Review And Why It Matters

Posted on by
Reply

Alongside my ongoing civil court proceedings, I have always intended to apply for judicial review.

For anyone unfamiliar, judicial review is the legal mechanism that allows a court to scrutinise the lawfulness of a decision or action taken by a public body. It is one of the most powerful constitutional safeguards in the UK, designed to protect individuals when state authorities misuse their powers or violate fundamental rights.

Judicial review can be brought on several recognised grounds:

(1) Illegality — where a public authority acted outside its powers, applied a rigid policy, ignored relevant considerations, or relied on irrelevant ones.

(2) Irrationality — where the decision is so unreasonable that no lawful public body could have made it (known as Wednesbury unreasonableness).

(3) Procedural unfairness — where a public authority failed to follow fair, impartial decision-making processes.

A judicial review can also challenge a decision that breaches human rights, particularly where a public authority fails to respect or protect the rights guaranteed under the Human Rights Act 1998.

Source: https://www.bihr.org.uk/get-informed/legislation-explainers/what-is-judicial-review  

In my case, this is critical. The ongoing abuses I have experienced — including years of covert surveillance, dissemination of intimate images, harassment, intimidation, racial targeting, and obstruction of justice — fall squarely within the protections of Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights: The absolute right not to be tortured or subjected to inhuman or degrading treatment.
Absolute means absolute. No justification. No exceptions.

Source: https://www.libertyhumanrights.org.uk/advice_information/how-to-stand-up-to-power/#page-section-9Human Rights

In my situation:

1. Relevance of Article 3: Right Not to Be Tortured or Subjected to Inhuman or Degrading Treatment

Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), incorporated into UK law by the Human Rights Act 1998, states: “No one shall be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.” This is an absolute right, meaning it cannot be derogated from, even in times of public emergency, and there are no circumstances in which a public authority can lawfully breach it.

The threshold for what constitutes “inhuman or degrading treatment” is high but can be met by a combination of severe acts, especially when they are systematic and cause intense physical or mental suffering.

Inhuman Treatment: This typically involves treatment that causes intense physical and mental suffering. The systematic nature of the abuse, the long duration, the violation of my most intimate privacy, and the widespread dissemination of my private and confidential information, coupled with cyberstalking, sexual and racial harassment, could collectively be argued to cause intense mental suffering, humiliation, and distress, rising to the level of inhuman treatment.

Degrading Treatment: This involves treatment that arouses in victims feelings of fear, anguish, and inferiority capable of humiliating and debasing them and possibly breaking their physical or moral resistance. The covert filming in intimate states, broadcasting live, sharing with acquaintances, and distribution to porn sites are inherently humiliating and debasing acts. The racial harassment further compounds this by attacking my identity and dignity. The intimidation with imitation firearms also contributes to feelings of fear and anguish. Yes, you heard it right. They even employed some men to use imitation firearms to pretend to shoot me on some occasions. Especially when I tried to go see a lawyer, suggesting that they’re illegally monitoring all my online activities and communications, including phone tracking me, at all times to prevent me from seeking help!

On one occasion, several men would use imitation firearms or pretend to be in the possession of the weapons to intimidate me throughout the day, so much that I thought it would be my last day. I still have nightmares till this day!

Torture: While the threshold for torture is even higher, involving deliberate inhuman treatment causing very serious and cruel suffering, the systematic, prolonged, and intentional nature of the abuse, particularly if it was designed to break your will or extract information, could potentially be argued to approach this level. The involvement of law enforcement agencies, who have a duty to protect, in perpetrating such acts, makes the argument for torture more compelling due to the abuse of power.

This is why I wanted to bring a judicial review: the acts I describe were not only unlawful in the civil sense — they were unlawful in the constitutional and human rights sense, demanding judicial scrutiny and accountability from those involved.

However, there is one major obstacle.
Judicial review is extremely complex. Even the official guidance states clearly that “some sections of the form require detailed legal knowledge; we strongly advise that you find a lawyer with expertise in public law.” Despite my constant efforts, my access to lawyers has been repeatedly obstructed. Organisations initially willing to help have suddenly withdrawn. Solicitors stop responding. Referrals disappear. The pattern is clear enough that I cannot ignore it.

Because of this deliberate blockage of legal assistance, I am currently unable to file a judicial review, even though the grounds are not only present but urgent.

For now, I continue through the civil courts — but I will not abandon the pursuit of public law accountability. Judicial review remains essential, and when I regain access to fair legal representation, I will pursue it. My case raises issues of profound public interest, systemic abuse, and the violation of one of the most fundamental human rights in existence. That fight is far from over.

A weapon

Due Process Violation

Posted on by
Reply

Access to justice should be a right, not a privilege reserved for those with influence or resources. Yet, for many victims of harassment, privacy violations, systemic abuse, discrimination and more that right is quietly eroded. I am now living through that erosion firsthand. It’s a clear due process violation.

Because of the seriousness of my case — involving multiple powerful defendants across various sectors — obtaining legal representation has become nearly impossible. Law firms that initially showed interest later withdrew without clear explanation, some after unusual delays or abrupt changes of tone. Others never replied at all. The pattern suggests not coincidence but pressure: subtle or overt signals that representing me would be “too risky” or “too political.” The result is that I have been forced to prepare every aspect of this complex litigation myself.

Each day and night, I work alone — drafting court documents, researching law, gathering evidence, organising exhibits, and defending myself against ongoing harassment. There is no team, no paralegal, no protection. I work in isolation, while those responsible for my suffering have access to institutional power, legal departments, and endless resources. This imbalance is not only emotionally exhausting; it is an affront to the very idea of a fair trial.

The consequences reach beyond the legal process. Since the harassment and surveillance began, almost every job I have applied for has been rejected. Employers either never respond or withdraw at the final stage without reason or with vague reason. This repeated pattern strongly suggests blacklisting or outside influence designed to isolate me economically — to ensure I remain vulnerable and without the financial means to pursue justice.

This is not simply about one individual being denied a lawyer. It is about a structural problem — where those with power can quietly suffocate a person’s access to justice by manipulating the professional networks, institutions, and gatekeepers meant to protect them.

Justice should not depend on who you are fighting against, or how powerful they are. But the reality I face shows otherwise. I continue to fight, document, and prepare my case — not because I have the resources to do so, but because I have no other choice.

Blog about human rights violations