Thus all attempts to appeal the three orders were thwarted, which I saw as persecution by the courts. I therefore started applying for asylum in other countries to escape the threat of a prison sentence arising from the abuse of process court judgment and there was no way I was going to be able to pay the sums required, but also because I was convinced that I was being harassed by numerous companies through television advertisements. On 25 May 2002 I wrote to the French Consulate General for asylum to live in France. The French Embassy replied on 20 June 2003 that I had to get to France on my British Passport and apply for asylum on French territory at Office Francais de protection des refugies et des apatrides (OFPRA). I had already written to the Indian High Commission on 12 August 1998 concerning the problems I had been facing and requesting to return to India if a suitable job could be identified. On 9 October 2002 I applied formally for asylum in India. My father registered this application at the Registration Officer, North 24 Parganas, Purta Bhavan, Salt Lake, Kolkata 700064. The Indian High Commission ignored the application. On 26 July 2002 I wrote to the Refugee Council concerning my immediate need for a Refugee Passport to escape the on-going state persecution in Britain. The Refugee Council could not assist me. On 20 January 2003 I applied for asylum in Switzerland through the United Nations High Commission for Refugees and the Swiss Embassy in London. On 11 July 2003 I applied to the South African High Commission for asylum to go and live in South Africa. I then applied for asylum in Malaysia. On 14 August 2003 I applied to the High Commission for Jamaica for asylum. On 18 September 2003 I applied to the Bangladesh High Commission for asylum in Bangladesh. On 3 October 2003 I made enquiries with the Somali Community Information Centre to go and live in Somalia. On 10 October 2003 I sent my passport to the United Kingdom Passport Office for renewal. On 13 November 2003 I wrote to the United States Embassy that I wish to emigrate to the United States of America immediately to follow in the footsteps of the Pilgrim Fathers. On 10 December 2003 I applied to the Yemen Embassy for asylum in Yemen. On 13 January 2004 I applied for asylum in Nepal with the Royal Nepalese Embassy: Dear Sir or Madam, APPLICATION FOR ASYLUM IN NEPAL I confirm that I telephoned 10 Downing Street again today and spoke with a Ms Lena expressing my disappointment that I had not received any legal redress even after my discussion with a Government official at 11 am on 5 January 2004 when I had telephoned to follow up on my 19 December 2003-dated document that I sent to 10 Downing Street, London, by post. On 5 January 2004 I had got transferred to a Mr Steve Coomber at the Cabinet Office Press Office with whom I discussed my Case and had left with him my name, address including postcode, and telephone number. Mr Coomber said that 10 Downing St had it's own Press Office. In view of the Collective Cabinet Responsibility of the British Constitution I acquainted Mr Coomber with the details of my Case of how I had been subjected to 6 years of systematic persecution by the British State through the use of its courts. I explained that as a result of having received a document on the morning of 5 January 2004 from the Medway County Court I had telephoned the United Nations High Commission for Human Rights in Geneva after first speaking with the Medway County Court, the Kent Magistrates Court Service and the Hull County Court and feeling very disappointed with their responses. Mr Coomber indicated that this might be a matter for the Home Office or the Department of Constitutional Affairs as it is concerned with a petition of mine that I had submitted to Her Majesty the Queen as a last resort in accordance with the British Constitution on judicial matters. Buckingham Palace had then forwarded the matter to the Lord Chancellor Lord Irvine under the Royal Prerogative element of the British Constitution although it is not clear whether this should have or did go to the Prime Minister then or got dealt with under Collective Cabinet Responsibility. Mr Coomber said that they could not do anything about the Prime Minister, and matters higher than that go to the Department of Constitutional Affairs. Notwithstanding, I indicated that I was the kind of person who had a tendency to give the benefit of the doubt until the last drop of my blood and I would therefore wait for the decision. However, in view of the report of the highly respected Mr Tony Robinson on Television that weekend that a certain 'Mr Michael Hastings' currently living in Australia is the real monarch of Britain according to lineage under the principle of the divine right of kings, it is possible that this was why my petition to Her Majesty did not receive the consideration to which I am entitled. If the present occupants of Buckingham Palace are illegitimate German imposters without the instinct to preserve the cultural heritage of Britain than this may explain the fate of my petition. Mr Coomber responded that this was bigotry, that he himself was a German, and the discovery of Mr Michael Hastings as being Britain's real monarch should not be treated as if it will affect the future course of events. I was quick to reply that time will tell, time will decide on that, asking then: so what harm had I done to Britain apart from slogging my guts out for 18 years at the Natural Resources Institute and enhancing the reputation of Britain? He did not respond to this. I said that the Lord Chancellor concerned had been replaced by a new one now. Mr Coomber said that I will have to go the European Union to which I replied that I had ascertained that Her Majesty is the Head of the European Union and that the highest Court of the world was the Security Council of the United Nations: do you accept the jurisdiction of the Security Council, or do you consider yourself to be the Ruler of the world and so direct the affairs of the Security Council? Why did you plant the cockroaches in the Indian High Commission in London to then send me the seven letters that I had received from it since October 2002 if it was not to destroy Indian culture? Mr Coomber said he did not know the details, to which I responded that I was acquainting him with the facts in describing the Indian High Commission to be infested with cockroaches of the British Empire. I asked: did he or did not accept that High Commissions and Embassies are sacrosanct places not to be interfered with by the host State in this manner? Mr Coomber did not answer. I asked: are you providing diplomatic immunity to Mr Roben Sen the Indian High Commissioner? Mr Coomber put the phone down. Having explained thus to Ms Lena today I asked: so what is the fate of my petition? She replied that she did not know. I should be grateful for your kind consideration.
I sent a copy of this letter to the Indian High Commission by Fax. On 16 January 2004 I approached Hungary for asylum through the United Nations High Commission for Refugees and with the Hungarian Embassy in London. On 23 January 2004 I approached the New Zealand High Commission for asylum in New Zealand. On 3 February 2004 I applied to the Canadian High Commission for asylum in Canada. On 1 March 2004 I approached the Portuguese Consulate in London for asylum in Portugal. (On 11 November 2003 I had written to the United Nations High Commission for Human Rights that my renewal passport was not being returned by the Passport Office of the United Kingdom).
With no positive outcomes to any of my applications for asylum in various countries I took this matter to the International Court of Justice, Peace Palace, Carnegieplien No 2, 2517 KJ, The Hague, The Netherlands on 16 July 2003. The court wrote back under Case No 116482 stating that its statute did not permit it to take any action on my application. My renewed passport was in fact returned to me by the United Kingdom Passport Office on 23 March 2004 - on the very day that I had gone to Dover to find out how to get across to France for asylum. I stopped applying for asylum from that day onwards as there was no point in following this line any longer.