April 2024 Update

Monday 6 May, 2024, by Admin

If you read all 409 comments on our crowdfunder:

https://www.crowdfunder.co.uk/p/uk-eu-citizenship-goes-to-the-echr

there is a common theme - namely, did Politicians and Bureaucrats really have ANY legal right to simply "remove" EU Citizenship and Rights from 67 million UK EU Citizens, without telling all those Citizens that is what they planned to do, and also without seeking their Express Permission for the removal of their EU Citizenship and Rights?

On 14 March 2024, Judge Branko Lubarda determined that our Application 38104/23 of 15 October 2023 was "inadmissible, and therefore could not be Heard by the Court".

And yet, Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights seems to give us all the Right to a Public Hearing before an independent and impartial tribunal. This ‘interpretation’ needs to be addressed, within the appropriate judicial setting.

One of the reasons we brought this Application to the ECHR was that in an earlier Application to the General Court of the European Union (Case No. T-252/20), we were ALSO denied a Hearing by that Court. In the case of that earlier Application, the Court had actually first told us that they would hear our case – but then they found a mechanism to deny us a Hearing.

Judge Lubarda's decision of 14 March leads us to the conclusion that we (Rule of Law Limited, the not-for-profit promoter of the ECHR Crowdfunder) must now review the complete process of the attempted destruction of EU Citizenship and Rights of all 67 million UK EU Citizens, including, but not confined to, a thorough, detailed, and independent review of the way in which the Applications were both presented to the Court, and dealt with.

We are therefore now working toward a New Application to the ECHR, along with an Application to the United Nations.

We will update you all regularly on our progress.

Finally, we ask you to consider supporting us via our crowdfunder if you believe that the attempt to remove your EU Citizenship and Rights without your Agreement, was  categorically wrong, and potentially unlawful.