Search

Reporting Ineffective Policing and an Ineffective Independent Police Complaints Commission to the Go

Reporting Ineffective Policing and an Ineffective Independent Police Complaints Commission to the Government of the United Kingdom


On 31 May 2014 I considered it appropriate to make a representation to the government prompted by the fact that I had not received even an acknowledgement of my email of 30 May 2014, 21.06 hours, to the United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP) on my continuing concerns over its treatment of my Party membership rights. This was my second representation to the government over ineffective policing and ineffective monitoring of that policing in the United Kingdom. I wrote to Mrs Theresa May as the Home Secretary, copied to the Cabinet office, as follows:

Me To mayt@parliament.uk; publiccorrespondence@cabinet-office.gsi.gov.uk • 1 Attachment: ToTheresaMay17July2013.docx Subject: Ineffective Policing and an Ineffective Independent Police Complaints Commission 31 May 2014 at 12:33 PM Dear Mrs May 1. On 17 July 2013, I wrote to you that in my view the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) was not fit for purpose (see attached letter) and that there had to be fundamental changes in policing in our country as well as its monitoring. 2. As you consider that evidence I am now forwarding to you a second bit of evidence from a case of hate crime that I reported to the Police which again strongly suggests both ineffective policing as well as an ineffective IPCC to monitor that policing. 3. I am copying this email to the Cabinet Office in light of the fact that it is aware I tried to obtain a judicial review of the first case which subsequently became the subject of a complaint from me of misconduct in public office at the Administrative court of the Royal Courts of Justice, London. As I still wait for information on that complaint from the cabinet office I consider it futile to take Case 2 for the same judicial review until Case 1 has been satisfactorily resolved by the government. 4. I look forward to your consideration of these law and order matters as soon as possible. Yours sincerely Dr Shantanu Panigrahi

Forwarded message: on Friday, 30 May 2014, 21:06, Shan Panigrahi wrote:

Unresolved Allegation of Discrimination/Hate Crime by UKIP against Dr Shantanu Panigrahi

To Mr Stephen Crowther UKIP Party Chairman UK Independence Party PO Box 408, Newton Abbot TQ12 9BG

By email • sjcrowther@btinternet.com • nigel.farage@europarl.europa.eu

Dear Mr Crowther and Mr Farage

1. Please see the details of my blog ( https://shantanup.wordpress.com/2013/08/22/dr-shantanu-panigrahi-lodges-an-official-complaint-in-united-kingdom-independence-party-for-discrimination/ ) on which the Police has not thus far been able to decide whether UKIP is guilty of a Hate Crime or Incident against me in relation to your processing of my application to stand as a Member of Parliament for UKIP at the 2015 general election.

2. I would like my readers to have an fair and accurate idea of what UKIP stands for so am hereby offering you the chance to provide any comments that you would like me to incorporate in this blog in order to put across UKIP’s arguments and position on this matter as it stands today.

Yours sincerely

Dr Shantanu Panigrahi

My 17 July 2013 letter to the Home Secretary is as blogged here: http://discussionforumfortruthseekers.wordpress.com/2014/02/01/misfeasance-in-public-office-at-the-royal-courts-of-justice-london/ and discussed subsequently with the Cabinet Office as blogged here: https://shantanup.wordpress.com/2014/05/07/dr-shantanu-panigrahi-discusses-the-british-justice-system-with-the-cabinet-office-of-the-united-kingdom/.

There was no acknowledgement of my email from either the Home Secretary or the Cabinet Office, but soon afterwards, Kent Police did make up its mind on the position it would adopt concerning the UKIP-Hate Crime or incident submission as blogged here: https://shantanup.wordpress.com/2013/08/22/dr-shantanu-panigrahi-lodges-an-official-complaint-in-united-kingdom-independence-party-for-discrimination/. There was no response from the IPCC to my request for comment on this policing so that the representation made to the government for action still stands. It remains to be seen whether there will be any further developments in these matters. 29 October 2014 Update: For my further correspondence with the Legal Services Department of Kent Police, see: https://shantanup.wordpress.com/2014/08/15/enquiry-made-to-stephens-and-son-solicitors-kent-on-whether-kent-police-can-be-sued-for-compensation-for-poor-services/

June 7, 2014 - Posted by shantanup | Uncategorized

0 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All

Information Received - Review Letter - OTP-CR-76/22 Inbox from: OTP InformationDesk <OTP.InformationDesk@icc-cpi.int> to: "shanpanigrahi3000@gmail.com" <shanpanigrahi3000@gmail.com> date:

Your Reference: 22/444/CM/PCC Yahoo / Sent Shantanu Panigrahi <shantanupanigrahi@yahoo.com> To: civil.claims@kent.pnn.police.uk Tue, 10 May at 20:22 To Civil Claim Officers Thank you for this morning'