⟡ **“A Petition for Exile, or The Elegance of Refusing to Stay Where You Are Not Safe” ⟡
— On the Jurisprudence of Running Out of Patience with Crown Jurisdiction
Metadata Block
Filed: 1 July 2025
Reference: SWANK/INTL/PROTECTIVE-RELOCATION
📎 Download PDF – 2025-07-01_Position_ProtectiveRelocationAndOversight.pdf
Position Statement requesting international relocation, consular intervention, and human rights oversight.
I. What Happened
On 1 July 2025, Polly Chromatic filed a Position Statement that, in dignified and painstaking detail, enumerates the manifold degradations of remaining subject to UK procedural authority.
The document catalogues:
• Forced family separation,
• Denial of medical and contact rights,
• Disability-based persecution,
• And the recurring institutional fantasy that silence would purchase her compliance.
II. What the Complaint Establishes
• Procedural breaches so numerous they require their own index.
• Human impact: a disabled mother compelled to petition for refuge from the jurisdiction ostensibly protecting her children.
• Power dynamics: the state performing care while operationalising control.
• Institutional failure: safeguarding invoked as a ritual to conceal retaliation.
What is not acceptable:
That protective relocation is required not because of war or disaster—but because bureaucratic contempt is itself a hazard.
III. Why SWANK Logged It
Because documentation is the last defense when due process collapses.
Because every polite petition to a state’s better nature becomes, in time, a record of how little that nature had to offer.
Because evidence is not only what you submit but what you survive to describe.
IV. Violations
• Equality Act 2010 — disability discrimination in public function.
• UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities — Article 5 (equality before the law).
• Vienna Convention on Consular Relations — Article 36 (consular notification).
• ECHR Articles 3 and 8 — freedom from degrading treatment, right to family life.
V. SWANK’s Position
This was not relocation.
This was compelled evacuation from the spectacle of procedural cruelty.
⟡ We do not accept that retaliation can be dressed as safeguarding.
⟡ We do not accept that dignity is optional in cross-border family law.
We will document every threshold crossed—because leaving is also evidence.
⟡ This Dispatch Has Been Formally Archived by SWANK London Ltd. ⟡
Every entry is timestamped.
Every sentence is jurisdictional.
Every structure is protected.
To mimic this format without licence is not homage. It is breach.
We do not permit imitation. We preserve it as evidence.
This is not a blog.
This is a legal-aesthetic instrument.
Filed with velvet contempt, preserved for future litigation.
Because evidence deserves elegance.
And retaliation deserves an archive.
© 2025 SWANK London Ltd. All formatting and structural rights reserved.
Use requires express permission or formal licence. Unlicensed mimicry will be cited—as panic, not authorship.