“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

Recently Tried in the Court of Public Opinion

Showing posts with label diplomatic rights violation. Show all posts
Showing posts with label diplomatic rights violation. Show all posts

In re Chromatic – On the Detention of Regal, Prerogative, Heir, and Kingdom by the United Kingdom State Apparatus


A Velvet Petition to Geneva: The Archive That Filed Its Own Complaint

Re: The Arbitrary Detention of Four U.S. Citizen Children by the United Kingdom — Now Submitted to the United Nations

Metadata

  • Filed: 9 July 2025

  • Reference Code: SWANK-INTL-0711-WGAD

  • Document Title: 2025-07-9_Submission_UNWGAD_ChildrenEPO_ArbitraryDetention

  • Summary: SWANK London Ltd. has formally submitted a complaint to the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention regarding the unlawful seizure and continued deprivation of liberty of four U.S. citizen children — Regal, Prerogative, Heir, and Kingdom — by U.K. authorities.

I. What Happened

On 23 June 2025, four dual-national U.S.-U.K. children were removed from their home under an Emergency Protection Order (EPO) issued by Westminster Children’s Services. The seizure was not preceded by any emergency. It was preceded by a criminal referral, a cease and desist letter, and a civil claim naming the local authority.

The children were:

  • Not in danger

  • Not legally represented

  • Not lawfully served

  • Not permitted to contact their family freely

They are now placed under state control — without lawful threshold, without transparent oversight, and without their mother, who is both their primary caregiver and a U.S. citizen actively engaged in litigation against the very authorities who removed them.

II. Why SWANK Filed to the United Nations

The post-filing timeline makes it clear:

  • 13 Feb 2025 – Police report filed against social worker Kirsty Hornal

  • 3 Mar 2025 – N1 civil claim filed against Westminster

  • 5 May 2025 – Master witness statement submitted

  • Mid-June 2025 – Cease and desist + audit demand issued

  • 21 June 2025 – Criminal referral submitted

  • 23 June 2025 – EPO executed

  • 4 July 2025 – Post-filing retaliation documented publicly

There was no new incident.
Only filings.

Therefore, SWANK London Ltd. has now filed an international complaint with the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, asserting that the EPO was used not as a safeguarding measure, but as an instrument of state retaliation.

III. Who This Affects

The children in question are:

  • Regal

  • Prerogative

  • Heir

  • Kingdom

Each child is a documented U.S. citizen, with dual nationality, and full consular rights under the Vienna Convention. Two were born in a British Overseas Territory. All four have been denied medical continuity, routine contact, and lawful safeguarding review.

Their mother — the claimant — is a U.S. citizen, an ethical AI researcher, and the director of this evidentiary archive.

IV. What the Submission Asserts

That the UK government, through local authority actors:

  • Deprived four children of liberty without emergent justification

  • Failed to serve legal documents properly

  • Acted in retaliation for civil and criminal filings

  • Violated their rights under Article 9 of the ICCPR and Article 8 of the ECHR

This constitutes arbitrary detention under Category II and III as defined by the United Nations.

V. SWANK’s Position

The Emergency Protection Order has now been escalated to international review.

Because this archive does not simply record misconduct —
It transmits it.

We do not petition.
We submit.

And we do not wait to be rescued.
We document until the world responds.

⟡ 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: