moment – or even an entire part – is needed to discuss the worldwide or global nature of this trend. I am told by friends in several countries that not only Manchester is impacted. Let’s devote today to this.

The pandemic referred to as COVID-19 appears to have been a major contributor or accelerator of this agenda, namely a rapid deterioration of services, then expecting the public to do (for free) all the work that public servants used to do. This is outsourcing, not automation. In general, in public services (that we all pay for collectively), everything gets worse. Yes, everything, even postal services. And even here, everywhere, any place there used to be something like a “Royal Mail”. We pay more, we get less. Privatisation is a common denominator.

“It looks like a package on the way here will likely not be delivered today,” a friend told me, “and instead spend the weekend in town.”

They don’t even deliver items like they used to. Drive to pick it up… what a waste of fuel! Bad for the climate!

“The goal is to shut down all government services,” the friend told me. “I disagree with the groups and the goals but those are what are aimed at by ignorant society.”

He said “some of that agenda is pushed by tech bros on behalf of the broligarchs who all aim to destroy democracies and, if they can, establish “network states” in their places…”

He noted that “the US won a temporary reprieve, but many (most?) of the elected politicians are beholden economically to either AIPAC or Kremlin or both.”

I am saddened to see how privatisation hurts everybody and everything. It impacts us as well.

bout half an hour ago I learned about another classic SLAPP in the UK. That’s transnational oppression/repression.

In our case, in addition to SLAPPs from America, there was also a swatting attempt. This new series about it added two more parts this morning:

oday is the day. The weather is fairly mild and I plan to go investigate why Manchester City Council is unable to provide the services taxpayers are paying for.

In this case, voting is not the solution. The Council is an organ not tied to any political party.

If necessary, I’ll raise the issue further up the chain.

oday there’s some very strong and stubborn bird here, one that tries to prevent us shutting the doors by sticking the head inside or using the body to obstruct the door.

It’s risky, but this bird does not care.

We’ve already fed all the birds except Edwin and it wasn’t even 8AM yet. It’s getting colder.

Thankfully, Mr. Green no longer has the sneeze (recuperation).

Today we plan a little celebration, seeing a shift to the left in the US. We’ll have some drinks and I’ve written Rianne some cards. She always enjoys these.

We envisage a year of political ‘activism’ in the technical side/angle. There’s a growing likelihood we’ll take this to the Court of Appeal.

Last week a speech was made by Mr Justice Fordham. It’s at the front page of the “News and updates” at judiciary.uk.

This is a part that I can relate to:

Focus for any appeal

4. This is my second point: the Judgment of the EDJ is the essential focus for any appeal to the High Court. It is the essential focus in principle, and in practice. In principle, it is the key prism for the analysis. Because the appeal court has to ask whether it thinks the EDJ went wrong. This is not an appeal afresh, like some appeals from magistrates courts to crown courts. It is not a fresh start, with fresh evidence. The necessary focus is on what the EDJ made of the case. In practice, the Judgment of the EDJ will always be a key reference point for the appeal. Because the Judgment of the EDJ will gather together the relevant features of the case in one helpful place. The starting point will always be to ask what the EDJ said about any particular feature of the case, in the Judgment.

5. For these reasons – of principle and practice – the EDJ’s Judgment is the High Court’s focus when dealing with an application for permission to appeal. It is the focus when determining any substantive appeal. But that does not mean that the EDJ was writing the Judgment for the High Court. They were writing the official product for the parties. In writing the product for the parties, and discharging the professional judge’s duty, the parties in any appeal and the court dealing with the appeal can see those features: the relevant statutory scheme and how it was applied; the relevant evidence and how it was evaluated; what the key findings of fact were; what the applicable legal principles were; what the EDJ made of the key arguments; what the EDJ’s key conclusions were; and key reasons for those conclusions.

6. Let me put you in the place of the Extradition High Court Judge. Here are the appeal papers in a new extradition case. There will be a bundle. There will be perfected grounds of appeal. There will be a respondent’s notice incorporating submissions. In the run up to a hearing, there will be skeleton arguments. There may be putative fresh evidence. There will be all the primary materials in the case. There will be the extradition request or warrant, perhaps supplementary information or further information. Statements and documents and reports and medical records and assurances and all the rest. Our hypothetical appeal Judge can see all of that. But their quest is for something else. Our High Court Judge is scanning the index to the bundle. There is one document which any High Court judge dealing with any extradition appeal will search for, will start with, will put at the front of a printing queue, will extract it from a hardcopy bundle. It is the golden document. It is the Judgment of the EDJ. That, in principle, is the prism for considering the appeal. That, in practice, is the reference-point for the features of the case.

7. In my experience, whenever any party to any appeal wants to make a point about a feature of the case, it is always helpful to know the answer to this question: what did the EDJ say about this point in the Judgment? My own practice, whenever I am preparing an extradition appeal ahead of a hearing, is to make notes on a single piece of A4 paper. I will try to note the key features of the case, as relevant to the issues in the appeal. They may be documents with dates, or relevant events. They may be people or the key evidence they gave. They will include facts as found by the EDJ. They will include the relevant law, with the key statutory provisions, and key passages from key authorities. In noting the key features of the case, I will annotate my notes using red numbering, to identify where in the Judgment of the EDJ this feature is to be found. To do this is to use the Judgment of the EDJ as a reference-point for the appeal. Sometimes, an appeal will involve issues or materials which were not addressed in the Judgment of the EDJ. There may be putative fresh evidence, including any relevant updating evidence. Or it may be said that there has been some change in circumstances which warrants the introduction of a fresh issue. But in those situations it is important to recognise that a point was not argued before the EDJ, or certain evidence was not relied on before the EDJ.

8. Sometimes, in extradition appeals to the High Court, advocates are unable to resist the temptation to try and put the Judgment of the EDJ to one side, and argue the facts and law “from scratch”. It is as though the appeal starts with a blank sheet, like an appeal afresh (“de novo”). Perhaps they cannot resist blocking and pasting written submissions which they used below, or perhaps some stock submissions on the Article 8 caselaw. Questions on an appeal, which relate to evidence and fact, will always need to be addressed having regard to what the EDJ said about the evidence, and found as to the facts. For questions of law, there is no need to reinvent the wheel. The Judgment of the EDJ will be the reference-point. It is the focus for the parties to pinpoint any error or omission of law which they say has occurred, if that is what they are saying. The position is illustrated by something I said about the Judgment of the EDJ in a recent case (Hojka v Polish Judicial Authority [2026] EWHC 2400 (Admin) at §2):

The Judge set out the law … in great detail and with great care. 16 principles were identified by the Judge over the course of 3 pages in the Judgment, citing 20 authorities. As [Counsel] rightly recognises, the clear focus and reference-point for the appeal can and should be the Judge’s analysis of the law. Nowhere is it said on behalf of the Appellant that the Judge was wrong in his description of the law. No misdescription or omission is identified. Rather, this case concerns the application of the established principles from the leading authorities.

9. So – in principle because it is the relevant prism, and in practice because it is the key reference point – the Judgment of the EDJ is the essential focus for an appeal.

oday’s election results in the US seem good. Even Cheeto propaganda sites concede defeat [1, 2] and accept Cheeto was a disaster to the GOP.

I’m meanwhile publishing a series that also, in more recent parts, speaks about the issues of electronic voting:

he US elections is turning out or seems to go well for Democrats. I saw someone say that Cheeto had not said anything for hours. Signs of shock?

HE purpose of life isn’t like pinball with a high score. There’s no “token” to “cash in” and regardless, even if a pinball machine spat out some tokens, so what?

Consumerism has become like somewhat of a religion, but this is promoted and preached so as to keep the cycle of predatory capitalism going.

Speaking to friends, many people would simply enjoy nature and health; others, who only see things in terms like money, envy joy found in simple things like a tree in fall, birds in the sky etc. rather than something like the idea of chasing money to do something with that money but instead just chasing money and never knowing what to actually do with it and when.

Happiness typically evades those who chase money and nothing else because no matter how much money they get, there will always be someone else “ahead” of them.

They participate in a game where the score is something like a bank balance. At some point that number cannot be converted into material things. A billionaire who buys a thousand prestigious cars can never use them all.

Some years ago we decided that principles matter most. People aren’t remembered for bank balances but for measurable contributions to society.

My wife and I are nowadays becoming known to many judges and gaining some recognition with high-level British ministers.

These are immaterial things. About other people, one friend told me that “many are rotten to the core and see land without buildings as “empty”…”

As if nature is not an “asset”.

his coming Thursday it will be two weeks or ten working days since I went to study the lack of service at a “customer service” centre that we as taxpayers are forced to pay for.

I was told it can take up to 10 working days (but typically just 5) to process, so I can wait a few more days.

I spoke to 4 ladies there. I wrote 4 articles about that:

• Manchester City Council Customer Service Issues – Part I – Denying Access to Browsers That Aren’t GAFAM or Chrom*-based
• Manchester City Council Customer Service Issues – Part II – No More Complaints by Paper, Only Digital and Without Tracking of Reports
• Manchester City Council Customer Service Issues – Part III – Understaffed Line, Not Even Queue (They Keep Saying Phone Back Later)
• Manchester City Council Customer Service Issues – Part IV – Cautious Hope for a Better Future

This week I will chase those 4 issues again, plus an additional one. As usual, I’ll bring a notebook with me but keep this impersonal (no names of staff).

I am just trying to document how awful customer services became, even where they totally lack competition (a monopoly of the government).

oday the Americans vote for a party, or for local candidates who occupy the democratic institutions (whose democracy is fast perishing).

I’ll be writing about technical aspects of this. Today I released the latest part below:

I hope that the party of the insurrectionist will lose many seats. Go vote.

verybody seems to be talking about politics. Some people do it only privately. Some are very public and vocal about it.

To me, integrity of proprietary voting machines is an important subject. I don’t believe that voting should be done on computers at all. Modern computers have way too many defects in them. The task of managing elections (ballots) is simple enough to be done manually.

I currently have a series going which deals with voting in the US (more recent parts):