All the campaign actions around the G8 and Make Poverty History will only be honest if they publicly announce, and end the cover-up of, something that the big aid charities with their careerist association with the political world, have ignored for 6 years -

The court change in 148 countries: no legal decisions are final.

Its shifting of power in favour of ordinary people ensures that it has been under a media silence. Nevertheless, it's on publicly traceable record through petitions 730/99 in the European, PE6 and PE360 in the Scottish, parliaments. Since 7 July 1999 all court or other legal decisions are "open to open ended fault finding by all parties and recapitulation therupon" instead of final. Now, when you are helping to organise the G8 big day and inviting public contact about what to do at the demo, you should be able to answer messages. The following details about a major advance in democracy called the "court change", should be told to the big names involved in the present events, to ensure they announce it publicly on the day and end the media cover-up of it.Now, when you are helping to organise the G8 big day and inviting public contact about what to do at the demo, you should be able to answer messages. The following details about a major advance in democracy called the "court change", should be told to the big names involved in the present events, to ensure they announce it publicly on the day and end the media cover-up of it.

The court change has been relevant to debt relief ever since Seattle and Genoa, yet the big aid charities have all chosen to ignore it in order to remain on friendly terms with politicians. The World Development Movement even called me despicable for leafletting about the court change at one of its rallies in 1999,and Oxfam lied to me that it would tell people about the court change as the condition for accepting a standing order then when it was caught not doing it it made sure to get all the bank details destroyed before claiming it never had to do it!

You can see I have made my own efforts to make the big names hear of the court change (made more difficult by their public image of being down-to-earth blokes who can't use the web! except Midge Ure who has got an emailable site) and I have written directly to foreign embassies about it. For, once the court change is made public and hence operationally established in all the G8 countries, then it applies to the IMF/World Bank, and the indebted countries can use the fault-finding power (described below) of the court change,in the Western legal systems, both to annul their debts and to claim for proper world resource distribution.

Read the following to see for yourself this is true, and please query any logical step you don't get. Think of all the proclamations about human rights and the scale of unnecessary death in the world, and how this court change would extinguish the deciding power of the rich world to continue the status quo. Hence, any name with a big public profile, who knows about the court change and claims to even have a choice not to reveal it to the public to end its cover-up, will be recordedly a mass murderer. The same responsibility is on you to pass on this information to all parts of the campaign that you are in contact with. How close to getting directly to the high profile voices are you?



The court change follows from my European Court of Human Rights case 41597/98 on an insurance scam of evictions of unemployed people from hotels. This case referred to violation of civil status from 13 May 1997, yet the admissibility decision claimed the last inland decision stage was on 4 August 1995. ECHR has made itself illegal, by claiming finality in issuing a syntactically contradictory nonsense decision that reverses the physics of time. It violates every precedent of member countries' laws recognising the chronology of cause and effect, in evidence.

The European Convention's section on requiring a court to exist, now requires its member countries to create a new ECHR that removes the original's illegality, by its decisions not being final. It follows this requires inland courts to be compatible with open ended decisions and doing inland work connected to them. Hence legal decisions inland,within countries, also cease to be final and become open ended, in the 44 Council of Europe countries.

The concept of "leave to appeal" is abolished and judges no longer have to be crawled to as authority figures. Every party in a case is automatically entitled to lodge a fault finding against any decision, stating reasons. These are further return faultable, including by the original fault finder, stating reasons. A case reaches its outcome when all fault findings have been answered or accepted.

World trade irreversibly means jurisdictions are not cocooned but have overlapping cases. When a case overlaps an affected and unaffected country, the unaffected country becomes affected, through having to deal with open ended case content open endedly, that can affect any number of other cases open endedly. Open endedness is created in its system.

Anyone can add to the list of countries outside the Council of Europe, where the court change applies if people there want it, showing autocracies, pending their freer futures, as well as democracies. It is almost everywhere.
It starts with:
Israel and Lebanon through the case in Belgium on the Sabra-Chatila massacres.
America, Canada, Australia through my child brain research ethics dispute with Arizona university, stalled by an American government obstruction of justice. Oviously there will be many cases making these 3 countries court change, so I should not be seen as seeking the ego fantasy of taking personal credit for it through my case, but time priority entitles me to put my case in the list like this.

Rest of the list:
Yugoslavia through war crimes cases overlapping Bosnia.
Kosovo through war crimes cases overlapping Yugoslavia.
North Cyprus through Turkey's UN legal challenge against South Cyprus joining the EU.
Belarus through its election dispute with OSCE election monitoring.
Monaco through International Amateur Athletics Federation drug hearings there.
Vatican City through Sinead O'Connor's ordination as a Catholic priest.
Cuba through Elian Gonzalez.
Haiti through objecting to receiving petty crime deportations from America.
Antigua through its constitutional crisis on capital punishment.
Trinidad through its Privy Council case on capital punishment.
Jamaica through claims on both sides of American linked arms trade background to its violence.
Mexico through the Benjamin Felix drug mafia extradition to America.
Belize through Michael Ashcroft.
Guatemala through the child stealing and adoption scandal overlapping America.
Colombia through America's supposed human rights policy intervention in training Colombian police and military.
Venezuela through Luis Posada Carriles.
Guyana through the £12m debt claim dropped by Iceland (the shop).
Brazil through EU immigration unfairnesses to its football players, necessitating a mafia trade in false passports.
Argentina through its ECHR case on the General Belgrano.
Chile through General Pinochet.
Bolivia, Paraguay, Uruguay through Judge Garzon's citation of Henry Kissinger for the South American military conspiracy Operation Condor.
Chad and Senegal through a French action in Senegal obtaining Chad's former dictator Habre for trial under Pinochet's precedent.
Algeria through the Harkis'case from the Algerian war.
Liberia, Sierra Leone, Mali, Morocco through the Insight News case.
Ivory Coast through the chocolate slavery scandal.
Ghana through the World Bank's Dora slave scandal.
Togo through the Lome peace accords for Sierra Leone, and their breaking as an issue in factional arms supply to there.
Burkina Faso through an arms trade case of smuggling through it from Ukraine to civil war factions in Sierra Leone and Angola.
Niger and Rwanda through Oxfam's case of buying an arms trade "end user certificate" for Rwanda in Niger.
Burundi through the war crimes trial of Rwanda's 1994 head of state.
Tanzania and Japan through the 2000 G8 summit, because Tanzania Social and Economic Trust broadcast a contradiction in implementing both its wishes for economic advance and its debt relief terms.
Mozambique through its cashew nuts dispute with the World Bank.
South Africa and Lesotho through a WHO case against American pharmaceutical ethics there.
Nigeria through reported Nigerian drug mafia crime in South Africa.
Dahomey and Gabon through their slave trafficking scandals overlapping Nigeria and Togo.
Zimbabwe through its land finances dispute with Britain.
Equatorial Guinea through the charges in Zimbabwe of a coup conspiracy.
Malawi through its arrests of Zimbabwean refugees callously deported from Britain.
Zambia through Cafod's collection of objections to food supply and health violations in its IMF structural adjustment program.
Namibia through the Herero genocide case against Germany.
Angola, Congo Kinshasa, Ecuador through arms trade smuggling to them from Bulgaria and Slovakia.
Congo Brazzaville through the Jean-Francois Ndenge case in France.
Sudan through Al Shafi pharmaceutical factory suing America for bombing it.
Ethiopia through aid sector comment on its conditional debt relief.
Eritrea through its border dispute with Ethiopia.
Somaliland through its problem with Russian and South Korean coastal fishing.
Kenya through the Archer's Post munitions explosion case overlapping Britain.
Uganda through the Acholiland child slave crisis and Sudan's agreement to return children.
Mauritius through the Ilois rights judgment on the Chagos clearances.
Yemen through its problem with Spain over the missile shipment.
United Arab Emirates through Mohammed Lodi.
Saudi Arabia through the lawsuit by families of 911 victims.
Qatar through the capture of Saddam Hussein.
Bahrain through the call for American witnesses in Richard Meakin's case.
Kuwait through the terrorism arrests in Saudi Arabia.
Iraq through the weapons inspection dispute before the invasion. NB this does not mean the dispute or invasion were right!
Jordan through its threat of "unspecified measures" in its relations with Israel.
Egypt through its disputes with Tanzania and Kenya over use of Nile water.
Libya, Syria, Iran through the Lockerbie bomb trial.
Uzbekistan through the ambassadorial exposee on evdience obtained by torture there and used in Western courts.
Afghanistan through Ben Laden.
Pakistan through a dispute between supporters of enslaved women and the British embassy for not helping them escape.
India, Bangladesh, China, Indonesia through the World Wildlife Fund's campaign for tiger conservation, conflicting western romanticism with local populations affected by the homicidal absurdity of conserving a human predator.
Nepal through the Gurkhas' lawsuit for equal pay and pensions.
Vietnam through a church publicised refugee dispute overlapping China.
Cambodia through its enactment for a trial of the Khmer Rouge Holocaust.
Laos through Peter Tatchell's application to arrest Henry Kissinger.
Thailand through Sandra Gregory.
Burma through the Los Angeles judgment on the Unocal oil pipeline.
Sri Lanka through its call for the Tamil Tigers' banning in Britain.
East Timor through public reaction to the judgment against trying Suharto.
Papua New Guinea through WWF's Kikori mangrove logging affair.
New Zealand through its ban on British blood donations.
Nauru through the Australian civil liberty challenge on the Tampa refugees.
Fiji through its land crisis's nonracial solubility by a Commonwealth constitutional question against rent and mortgages.
Tuvalu through environmentalist challenges to America's rejection of international agreements on global warming and sea level.
Marshall Islands through the Nuclear Claims Tribunal cases.
Philippines and Malaysia through the international police investigation in the Jaybe Ofrasio trial in Northern Ireland.
South Korea through its jurisdiction dispute with the American army.
North Korea through its apology to Japan for abductions.