“Though the Witch knew the Deep Magic, there is a magic deeper still which she did not know. Her knowledge goes back only to the dawn of time. But if she could have looked a little further back… she would have known that when a willing victim who had committed no treachery was killed in a traitor’s stead, the Table would crack and Death itself would start working backward.” - Aslan, C.S. Lewis, The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe
Showing posts with label Simlett v UK. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Simlett v UK. Show all posts

United Kingdom v. UNCRPD: The Shadow They Didn’t Want Submitted.


⟡ SWANK Treaty Archive: UNCRPD Shadow Report ⟡

“They Called It Policy. We Filed It as Violation.”
Filed: 21 May 2025
Reference: SWANK/UNCRPD/SHADOW-SIMLETTvUK
📎 Download PDF – 2025-05-21_SWANK_UNCRPD_ShadowReport_DisabilityViolations_SimlettvUK.pdf

I. A Treaty Was Ratified. A Life Was Retaliated Against.

This document is not an opinion.
It is a formal submission to the United Nations Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UN CRPD) — drafted in full alignment with treaty obligations the United Kingdom publicly affirmed, and institutionally ignored.

This isn’t lobbying.

It’s legal calibration by archive.

II. What the Shadow Report Asserts

  • That the UK has:

    • Breached Article 5 (equality and non-discrimination)

    • Violated Article 12 (equal recognition before the law)

    • Ignored Article 19 (right to independent living and community inclusion)

    • Abused Article 22 (privacy and data rights)

    • Weaponised Article 23 (respect for home and the family)

  • That public bodies (NHS, police, councils, regulators) colluded to:

    • Ignore communication adjustments

    • Force verbal contact in medical crises

    • Escalate safeguarding in retaliation for legal filings

    • Falsify records to protect themselves

  • That no mechanism of redress — domestic or regulatory — functioned without prejudice

This wasn’t administrative error.

It was disability-based erosion of law in real time.

III. Why SWANK Logged It

Because before the courts move, the archive must speak.
Because when domestic accountability fails, international obligation becomes defence.
Because rights are not confirmed by citizenship, but by record.

We filed this because:

  • You didn’t just survive it — you documented it

  • The systems didn’t just fail you — they choreographed retaliation

  • The law wasn’t missing — it was professionally inverted

Let the record show:

  • The retaliation crossed agencies

  • The discrimination was patterned

  • The accountability was refused

  • And this report — was filed, cited, and published

IV. SWANK’s Position

We do not tolerate rights being reinterpreted into vulnerability.
We do not accept treaties signed for pageantry but ignored in policy.
We do not write shadow reports in desperation.

We write them in preparation for public reckoning.

This wasn’t an allegation.
It was a record of patterned conduct under colour of law.

And now it’s international.

⟡ 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.


No comments:

Filed to the Foreign Desks: A Dispatch from the Disabled Front


⟡ This Isn’t a Complaint. It’s a Human Rights Dossier. ⟡

Filed: May 2025
Reference: SWANK/DIPLOMACY/UK-RETALIATION
📎 Download PDF — 2025-05_SWANK_IntlHumanRightsBriefing_DisabilityRetaliation_Simlett_v_UK_DiplomaticSubmission.pdf

I. Filed to the Foreign Desks: A Dispatch from the Disabled Front

This document was transmitted directly to:

  • EU diplomatic legal observers

  • U.S. State Department human rights units

  • Canadian federal disability rights offices

It was not shared for sympathy.
It was not styled for activism.
It was filed as a diplomatic intelligence briefing — formal evidence of:

  • Coordinated safeguarding retaliation

  • Housing endangerment by multiple UK boroughs

  • Disability erasure under pretext of policy

  • Procedural cruelty framed as “support”

You failed to protect domestically.
So we filed transnationally.

II. Not Advocacy. Strategy.

This briefing is structured with:

  • Chronological case framing

  • Procedural maps of institutional retaliation

  • Legal reference to the Human Rights Act 1998, UNCRPD, and ICCPR

  • Strategic grounds for diplomatic concern

This is not a request for help.
It is a record of your inaction, sent abroad.

It places the UK’s conduct on the table of foreign legal desks —
not as gossip, but as evidence.

III. Why SWANK Filed It

Because tribunals protect themselves.
Because local ombudsmen gatekeep harm.
Because the only form of safety is global documentation of what this country has done to disabled families in secret, with forms.

Let the record show:

  • The mother was documented

  • The children were endangered

  • The retaliation was mapped

  • And SWANK — sent it to Geneva, Brussels, Washington, and Ottawa

This isn’t escalation.
It’s sovereign testimony on a transnational stage.

IV. SWANK’s Position

We do not believe harm ends where jurisdiction begins.
We do not ask domestic regulators to correct abuses they enabled.
We do not wait for apology when we have documentation.

Let the record show:

The UK knew.
The documents were ready.
The retaliation was proven.
And SWANK — filed what Parliament refused to hear.

This isn’t a briefing.
It’s a velvet-wrapped indictment for the international shelf.




No comments:

Documented Obsessions