LEGALLY QUALIFIED JUSTICE MINISTER

On the Mannin Line on Tuesday 9th September 2025 you responded to Chris Robertshaw concerns about the constitutional crisis highlighted by Tribunal Chair revelations in effect on HM AG Chambers unethical legal strategy and about the appointment of multiple HM AG Chambers employees to the Employment and Equality Tribunal.

Firstly, you explained the multiple HM AG Chambers employees had been appointed due to a shortage of legally qualified applicants but you reassured the audience that such employees are not allowed to act in public sector tribunal cases.

Sorry that is a factual error.  You were not aware because it was covered up in a tribunal judgment but I questioned the existence of an unknown third party in email threads in my public sector tribunal case in 2023.  I specifically objected to the entirely inappropriate involvement of a clearly conflicted tribunal employee and HM AG Chambers employee Philip Farrar but my objection was improperly dismissed.

Please confirm that the employees are able to attend tribunal cases with special leave without losing any HM AG Chambers income or holiday leave and amounts to a disguised pay rise to minimise further resignations by HM AG Chambers employees able to earn more in the private sector.

Please confirm that such a dual role is inherently incompatible with the separation of powers and amounted to unacceptable procedural unfairness and a breach of the right to a fair trial in the context of your policy statement.

The tribunal chair revelations reference to 20 months includes my reported concerns timeline yet the tribunal chair acted with cumulative personal animosity and extreme bias and wrongfully awarded an unprecedented 100 percent costs order over £100,000 against me to deliberately try to bankrupt me to silence me because I refused to allow HM AG Chambers to cover up corruption and refused to allow the tribunal to downplay uncovered new evidence of corruption that had been concealed.

HM AG Chambers had a professional duty to control, possess, review and disclose legally significant documents in a sealed archive box in the Public Records Office to comply with a specific disclosure court order.  No key documents were identified and disclosed by HM AG Chambers in the same way that no key documents were identified and disclosed in the old bus station redevelopment site scandal and legal proceedings to recover up to £90m in damages.  HM AG Chambers civil litigation cover ups are unjust and unaffordable to the taxpayer.
I uncovered the attached concealed key document with other legally significant concealed documents on the date the same sealed archive box was unsealed about 18 months later in the Public Records Office.

The document expressly states that it would be illegal to backdate secondary legislation to stop an existing increase to an allowance because it is specifically banned in the primary legislation yet the secondary legislation was backdated anyway and HM AG Chambers has the insulting audacity to claim it doesnt matter.  The equivalent UK secondary legislation was specifically forward dated to avoid any such illegality.

Secondly, you explained that a full-time employment law judge would be or had been employed.

The Isle of Man presently forces legally unrepresented public sector employees with compelling grounds to appeal to give up and accept an injustice life sentence because it is impossible to risk other party costs against an unethical legal strategy operated by HM AG Chambers with concealed evidence, false legal opinions and fabricated legal arguments and worse.

The UK Supreme Court R (UNISON) v Lord Chancellor ruling in 2017 could not have been any clearer. An employee is entitled to file a case with a tribunal and an employee is entitled to a free independent appeal mechanism.

The General Registry ludicrous recommended solution is that a legally unrepresented injustice victim already unable to pay unaffordable cumulative court fees due to the injustice should file an appeal despite the unaffordable cumulative court fees to legally challenge a court fees order worse than the UK court fees order already ruled illegal by the UK Supreme Court because any court fee below a high minimum fee is payable without a full fee waiver exception and that causes an additional unaffordable cumulative fees barrier to accessto justice.

Please clarify if the judge will sit in the High Court with the same court fees and the same other party costs risk access to justice barriers or introduce an overdue reform to operate as per the UK Employment Appeal Tribunal without tribunal fees and without other party costs risk.

The failure to publish judgments in line with the human right to open justice and with UK Lady Chief Justice policy means that ChatGPT is unable to analyse existing judgments to identify inconsistent judgments and errors in law and assist with new cases given the scale of the Isle of Man civil legal aid crisis.

The Office of the Information Commissioner had confirmed it was an offence to force someone to supply partner personal data without consent to the tribunal.  A High Court appeal judgment that the tribunal chair acted unlawfully is unpublished.  Why?

Please confirm that the Isle of Man Government no longer upholds key human rights in the European Convention on Human Rights.

If you want to help stop injustice contact us by email via tynwaldpapers@gmail.com in the first instance.

#StopTheFloutlaws