Dear Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy,

On 19th February 2021 I wrote to Lord True, Lord Agnew, Lord True, Minister Gove, Minister Skully and other Ministers via the Ministerial Correspondence email and their private email addresses to address issues of insolvency and judicial corruption. I wrote also to Minister Callanan of the Insolvency Service and other Ministers at BEIS.

I wrote in respect of the Ministerial Briefing Report of that date detailing:

"The matters present wide ranging public interest issues, demonstrating that in the UK one cannot rely on the terms of a completed contract to gain restitution in the courts in my own case and in both cases, that both the justice system and the Insolvency Service are rotten to the core with corrupt practices designed to defraud, conceal and asset strip".

"I am asking that following our Zoom call, you all raise this document in the House of Lords. This outrageous corruption under the façade of “justice” and insolvency has been going on for too long. Political interference is the main driver of this systemic corruption and inter-agency collusion".

No Minister, nor their representatives attended the Zoom call and absolutely no response to my concise 22-page report (with the table of contents for ease in navigation) was provided. I list however, the number of times the email and report was read by the various Ministers:

[email address] - (Lord Agnew) - Scot Young estate & Times article: Insolvency firms put under investigation - Inter agency collusion: Last read: 11:56, Mar 24 Read: 43 times
____________
[email address] - (Michael Gove) Ministers concealing indictable offences & fraud against creditors - The intel report: Last read: 16:09, Mar 18 - Read: 10 times
____________
[email address] - (Lord True) - Zoom meeting 12PM - 26/02/2021 - reminder: Last read: 11:04, Feb 26
Read: 1 time
____________
[email address] (Minister Zahawi) - Request for Zoom conference - P. Millinder / A. Stansfeld / M. Young / K. Hollinrake / BEIS & Cabinet Office Ministers: Last read: 13:42, Mar 4
Read: 26 times
____________
[email address] (Minister Zahawi) - Scot Young estate & Times article: Insolvency firms put under investigation - Inter agency collusion: Last read: 13:42, Mar 4 - Read: 43 times
____________
[email address] - (Minister Lopez) - Scot Young estate & Times article: Insolvency firms put under investigation - Inter agency collusion Last read: 9:30, Mar 2 - Read: 8 times
____________
[email address] - (Minister Callanan) - Scot Young estate & Times article: Insolvency firms put under investigation - Inter agency collusion Last read: 2.02, Feb 22, Read: 57 times
____________
[email address] - (Minister Mordaunt) - Zoom meeting 12PM - 26/02/2021 - reminder Last read: 13:08, Mar 1 -
Read: 4 times
____________
[email address] - (Minister Milling) - Ministers concealing indictable offences & fraud against creditors - The intel report 13:55, Feb 26
Read: 1 time
____________
[email address] - (Minister Lopez) - Request for Zoom conference - P. Millinder / A. Stansfeld / M. Young / K. Hollinrake / BEIS & Cabinet Office Ministers: Last read: 11:22, Feb 24
Read 4 times
____________

STATUTORY DUTIES IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST:

All ministers are required, under section 3(1) of the Constitutional Reform Act 2005 to "uphold the continued independence of the judiciary." The Lord Chancellor has an additional duty, expressed in the oath of office, to "defend" that independence. This defence includes preventing undue Government influence on judicial decisions (including undue ministerial criticism of judicial decisions), ensuring adequate resources for the judiciary to exercise their functions and having regard to the public interest.

It is undue political interference, by the Law Ministers of the Attorney General’s Office, the Lord Chief Justice and the Lord Chancellor himself who are driving this judicial corruption.

REQUEST UNDER THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT / DATA PROTECTION ACT 2018

1. We request to inspect all internal correspondences between officials and all Government departments in respect of that ministerial briefing report and The Times article referred to.

2. We request to see all instructions given in respect of the Ministerial Briefing Report and evidence of all action taken by the Cabinet Office and all replies in respect of the issues raised of judicial corruption and inter-agency collusion therein raised.

3. We request to inspect all documentation to establish what the Cabinet Office and its ministers are doing in the national public interest to perform on their statutory duties.

4. The scope of the request is from 12th February 2021 until 25th March 2021 and we request to inspect all information, in whichever form such information is available, including any oral recordings or handwritten notes, throughout that period in relation to the matters raised.

5. We request to inspect each and every single correspondence between ministers and officials within the Cabinet Office and BEIS to identify whether in fact ministers are performing on their duties under section 3(1) of the Constitutional Reform Act.
We have substantive reason to believe that ministers have adopted the “doctrine of willful blindness”. In doing so they are in breach of their duties and their oaths in office by concealing corruption driven by undue political interference (acting contrary to the law).

We ask that you observe the statutory timeframe for delivering on this request and that we are aware that there may be a charge for compiling this information. Please confirm what that fee is if there is and we would be happy to disburse it at once on account.

Thank you and we look forward to hearing from you.

Yours faithfully,

Paul Millinder

INTELLIGENCE UK INTERNATIONAL S.A.

Dear Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy,

I am writing to request an internal review of Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy's handling of my FOI request 'Judicial and Insolvency Service corruption - The Ministerial Briefing Report'. We have numbered this review request for ease in reference:

1. We have emailed you with an article published in our website today in relation to the concealment of wrongdoing by corrupt public officials. That is, in reality the reason you refused our request. Your actions in doing so defeats the entire purpose of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 which is designed to allow the public to scrutinise the work of public bodies.

2. Your actions in refusal to provide transparency, being open about the issues raised in the Report is contrary to your mandatory duty to act according to the Nolan Principles. In refusing the request you stated:

(a) “Your requests and related correspondence make accusations against BEIS Ministers and Insolvency Service employees that are not substantiated. Ministers have received numerous emails where you have repeatedly accused them of various offences, including fraud“.

3. You do however know that our accusations are substantiated and the evidence we were requesting you disclose, in particular tab_28 proves it. That categoric proof (along with the finding from the court that the claims are false) is contained in the article within our website titled:

(a) "BEIS and the Cabinet concealing corruption and refusing disclosure"

4. It is in the national public interest that BEIS and the Insolvency Service are shunning their duties to creditors they purport to act in the interests of whilst sustaining fraudulent claims to keep assets beyond reach of those creditors. We refer to the £4.1 million fraudulent claim.

5. It is in the national public interest that ministers seek to conceal and suppress acts of corruption whilst coercing the judiciary to do the same, as it is that Ministers are breaching their duty to act with honesty, integrity, openness and to provide accountability for their actions.

6. It is likewise in the public interest that ministers are fulfilling their duties in law, under section 3(1) of the Constitutional Reform Act 2005 to "uphold the continued independence of the judiciary

7. It would take less than 1-hour to ask the Ministers who were emailed to produce the responses and follow ups to comply with the request.

8. You attempted to assert that we have made multiple requests. We made one request to each of the 3-public bodies concerned. That is not vexatious, but it is a request for each of the public bodies to provide the information requested, which is what the Act is designed to achieve.

A full history of my FOI request and all correspondence is available on the Internet at this address: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/j...

Yours faithfully,

Stop Corruption UK LLP