Zersetzen, the Surveillance State, Spies & the Absence of Rule of Law

ZERSETZEN IS POLITICAL

Nothing is more threatening to our democracy than the illegal links that are forming between power elites and our secret security / intelligence agencies.

It does seem that these Spy agencies are fast morphing into a secret police. Zersetzen is not the tool of a democratic State. Developed by the STASI in the former communist east block, Zersetzen is the tool of totalitarian and authoritarian States.

Zersetzen involves the intentional shutdown of all our normal avenues for the resolution of grievances. It is about a deliberate "failure to protect" its citizens by government. As a result of this there is a complete "denial of justice". Where our spy agencies are involved, the Rule of Law no longer applies

Some of our security agencies are becoming a law unto themselves and, where they are involved, our elected politicians don't seem to matter. There is a form of “Overton Window” developing where establishment Bully Boys with Spy agency connections can override the boundaries of decency normally set by the Rule of Law - and persecute innocent citizens with impunity.

Unfortunately our politicians are too scared of our Spy Agencies to rein them in. Once the secret intelligence agencies are involved, people are too scared to help - police, politicians, human rights agencies, media, the Courts. All the support structures and the institutions that one normally relies upon for justice simply freeze up. The rules are still there, but they are not followed

Government should be Protecting – not Persecuting

My complaint involves two countries – UK and Canada. The Zersetzen attacks initially started in Vancouver, Canada. Thinking they were localized to Canada, I fled to the UK only to find that the attacks continued there as well. 

Most of the incidents (i.e. Zersetzen attacks) are documented in the Russell Zersetzen Report. - see Section 2 of this Site. To go to the Table of Contents click on the hamburger sign on the left of this page.

In the UK:

Two UK Members of Parliament made strenuous efforts to have this matter honestly investigated by the UK government; unfortunately, in vain - so strong is the cover up conspiracy to obstruct justice.

Three times the Rt. Hon. Hazel Blears MP -- UK Cabinet Minister [then] responsible for their secret security / intelligence services (MI5 & Special Branch) -- rejected the MP’s requests for an honest investigation with written excuses that are not only untrue but actually contradict each other. Sinisterly, at the same time as we were making written requests for an investigation to Minister Blears, my wife and I were also being intimidated, threatened and harassed to get us to stop complaining.

The only consistency in Minister Blears' three letters was that she ensured that my issue - intimidation, harassment and threats - was always covered-up and never investigated

These letters to/from Minister Blears can be seen by downloading the OneNote version of the “Russell Zersetzen” Report and viewing sub-sections L1 and L2.

After I had returned to Canada one of the UK Members of Parliament, who had been helping us, summarized this failure to obtain justice, writing –

“Government [UK] have not been at all helpful in all the enquiries made on our behalf”

 (John Leech MP, March 13, 2007). 

In Canada:

Complaint against CSIS

After returning to Canada I again made strenuous efforts to get this stuff – intimidation, harassment, threats, intrusive surveillance – honestly investigated. These efforts are described in Section M of the “Russell Zersetzen” Report.

I made a formal complaint against the CSIS (Canada’s Intelligence Agency) to its oversight body the SIRC. The SIRC dismissed my complaint – without interviewing myself or a single witness. Indeed, the SIRC’s then Chair and Chief Executive, Dr. Arthur Porter, stated on the radio that the CSIS would not do such things.

Integrity of the CSIS & SIRC questioned

Frankly there is a history of illegal abuses by the CSIS that goes back over 20 years.

There is a borderline between the operations of a legitimate intelligence agency and a nasty secret police. Canada and its corrupt CSIS are well over that line.

The SIRC’s and CSIS’s integrity can well be judged by the subsequent history of its former Chair Dr. Arthur Porter. The following year Dr. Porter had to resign from the SIRC as he faced yet another scandal.. A few years later Canada’s intelligence oversight chief, Dr. Porter, would die in prison in Panama, fighting extradition back to Canada to avoid facing charges that included bribe taking, money laundering and conspiracy.

Hardly surprising that, with their history of criminality like this, one would question the integrity of both CSIS and the SIRC. The SIRC is little more than CSIS’s rubber stamp.

Decades ago there was the well publicized scandal surrounding CSIS operative and Agent Provocateur Grant Bristow.

More recently (31\8\22) There was an article published by the National Post and headlined “Canada’s Spy Agency accused of nabbing British children and trafficking them to Islamic State”. The headline says it all.

Denial of Justice-CoveR UP- Spy agencies involveD  

look at the degree of the cover up - to deny justice - in my own case, that is outlined in the narrative on Segments L and M. of the “Russell Zersetzen Report” (see Section 2).

Governments / Authorities don't cover-up to protect crime of this nature carried out by criminals; they cover-up to protect themselves or crime carried out by their own security services.

In the Segments headed “Cover-up” (L and M), there is substantial evidentiary proof that the Authorities, who should be protecting and investigating, are covering this up to pervert justice and protect the powerful. I would argue that a cover-up in itself is an admission of guilt. As often is the case it’s not just the act, it’s the cover-up that pins them.

That this horrible persecution has in fact taken place is beyond a reasonable doubt. The evidence provided to the Authorities is overwhelming. The proof that there has been "a failure to investigate" and a "denial of justice" by the Authorities in the UK and Canada is also overwhelming

Denial of Justice-Cover Up

I have made every attempt to have this matter honestly investigated by the Authorities. It has been reported to the Police themselves in three jurisdictions on many occasions. It has been reported in the UK to the Public Prosecutor, IPCC and Parliaments Intelligence Services Review Committees, and through a Member of Parliament to Politicians of Cabinet Rank. Many investigations were started but they were all stopped at high establishment levels

In the Section headed “Cover-up”, there is substantial evidentiary proof that the Authorities in both the UK and Canada who should be protecting and investigating, are covering this up to pervert justice. They are scared as to where an honest investigation might lead

I would argue that the cover-up in itself is an admission of guilt. As often is the case it’s not just the act, it’s the cover-up that pins them.

DENIAL of JUSTICE-Absence of Law

It is a great mistake to pretend that what is a human rights and a Civil Liberties issue, a systemic failure of justice after all, can be dealt with adequately by the legal system of the country where the abuses have taken place.

As my own experience shows it is clear that the legal system in the UK and Canada cannot deal effectively with abuses by institutions that are part of the Five Eyes such as Canada’s CSIS or the UK’s MI5, MI6 and GCHQ. As has been said – “Eye-witnesses to such things may hence find themselves targeted.” That’s exactly it? Not just witnesses, also Lawyers, Police, Politicians, Judiciary, Journalists etc. For example: one of my sons getting (recorded) death threats because he is a witness, and having shots fired at him for the same reason, and so much more. Not to mention the cover-up to pervert justice.

But it goes beyond eye-witnesses. A Medical Doctor and Author who was supporting my comments on a blog suddenly came under cyber-attack.

The one consistency has been - a constant failure by the Authorities to investigate.

And that's a denial of justice by the Authorities

CSIS Denies my REQUEST FOR INFORMATION (ATIA)

Using Canada’s Access to Information Act (ATIA) I requested that the CSIS (Canada’s Spy Agency) disclose any records that they have that relate to me

CSIS rejected my request for information by letter, the 1st refusal letter dated July 4, 2014 (see CSIS letter 2014), in which the CSIS refused to either “confirm or deny “whether such records existed.

Five years later in response to my request for a Judicial Review of CSIS’s refusal, the CSIS issued a 2nd refusal letter (CSIS letter 2019) where their reasons for rejecting my request were entirely different from those in their 1st refusal letter to me – albeit equally untruthful. Just place both letters from the CSIS side by side to see the difference between them for yourself.

CSIS had changed the goalposts yet again. In their 2nd refusal letter, the CSIS completely changed their reasons for refusal without any explanation for the change.  CSIS were now inferring a straight accusation under sections 15(1) and 15(2) of the Act that the requested records are exempt because they relate to “detecting, preventing or suppressing subversive or hostile activities”. “subversive or hostile” activities is defined by the act for this purpose to include espionage, sabotage, etc.. Its serious stuff and absolute bloody nonsense.

All that was happening is that I was getting the run around since in my opinion the Canadian Authorities are petrified as to where an honest investigation might lead,

So, I made application under the (Canadian) Access to Information Act requiring that the CSIS, “Canada’s Spy Agency” disclose records relating to me.

JUDICIAL REVIEW

Open the Judge’s “Judgement and Reasons” Document ( Open RR Notes Judicial Review ) where he lays out the reasons for his decision, together with comments and notes of mine itemized on a point-by-point basis where in my opinion my comment is appropriate.

Five Eyes, CSIS & Perjury

The Judge’s Judgement was based at least in part on secret evidence presented to the Court by the Attorney General. Clearly this secret evidence was an important factor in the Judge’s decision as the following two statements by the Court in the “Judgment and Reasons” document would suggest.

In paragraph 17 the Judge refers to:” the clear and unambiguous evidence" given by CSIS” in the secret affidavit”. In paragraph 31, the Judge says: “Having reviewed the public and secret evidence filed by CSIS in this application, I am satisfied that the actual or hypothetical records in question were correctly found by CSIS to be exempt from disclosure. This is a significant finding”

SECRET HEARINGS ARE UNJUST

There were Orders surrounding these proceedings in Canada’s Federal Court that had the effect of creating SECRET PROCEEDINGS – The Attorney General of Canada was allowed to introduce to the Court sworn testimony / Affidavits and oral argument that was kept secret from me the Applicant.

The following are comments on matters referred to in the Judge’s “Judgement and Reasons” document that in my opinion should raise some concern:

Secret Evidence Approval was obtained for the Attorney General to present much of their evidence in secret. This is fundamentally unjust, particularly the denial of my right to cross examination in cases like this one where the honesty and integrity of the CSIS itself was being challenged.

Five Eyes, CSIS & Perjury In his Judgement and Reasons document the Judge places emphasis on “the clear and unambiguous evidence contained in the [CSISs] secret affidavit”.  Since I do know that there is no honest evidence that can link me with legitimate matters of interest to the intelligence community, I have to conclude that in their presentation to the Judge, the CSIS has committed perjury

Sworn Affidavits from five independent Affiants was filed with the Court. Yet none of these Sworn Affidavits, that provide considerable corroborative evidence in support of the Applicant’s written case, was challenged, discussed or cross examined in or by the Court.

Jurisdictional Issues – Knackered the Project -- by prohibiting Judicial Review of the OICs 851 Report. This decision meant that the Judge couldn’t hear the case on half the project which in turn knackered the entire case. I was not aware that there was an unresolved jurisdictional issue until I read the Judge’s “Judgement and Reasons Document”, for the first time, when it was issued after the hearings were over.

 CSIS switches the goalposts  – So a large part of my case had been dismissed on a minor legal technicality relating to the dates I filed a document with the OIC on, yet CSIS and the OIC sat on my case for 5 years doing nothing without any legal sanction against them. Furthermore, CSIS quite out of the blue, after 4 years substantially changed their entire case against me (one day before the deadline for filing) again without any sanction.

There is nothing in my background that could relate me to the activities inferred to by CSIS in their refusal letters to me and whomever swore any such evidence before the Court has committed perjury.

This SITE has 10 sections. To navigate between them, click on the Hamburger Sign.