Brian Pead issues a SECOND Official Complaint under Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights

Theresa May

10 Downing Street




Dear Prime Minister

An Open Letter re second Official Complaint under Article 3 of the ECHR

Sent To Be Signed For

Issued under Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights



On 4th February 2019 investigative author Brian Pead was forced to issue a SECOND Official Complaint under Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights against HM Government for your government’s refusal to address the FIRST Official Complaint dated 31 December 2013.

The persecution of me and vicariously my family and the abuse of my then 12-year-old granddaughter in 2011 have still not been addressed and have, in fact, been increased. You and your government are in breach of European Law.

I reserve ALL of my rights against you personally and HM Government, jointly and severally.

My Member of Parliament, Sir Henry Bellingham, has been sent a copy of this letter as well as the Home Secretary, Sajid David, who is evidently presiding over unlawful police and judicial action against me and my family and doing nothing to prevent it. The Reasonable Person as defined by the courts would therefore be driven to conclude that he is complicit in the inhumane treatment of me and my family.


‘No one shall be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.’

Article 3 is an absolute right; there are no possible derogations (exceptions). There is no possible excuse or justification for a breach of Article 3. When a complaint has been made, the Government has a duty of care to act and it must:

  • undertake a positive obligation to protect people from inhuman and degrading treatment  (i.e. not just a negative obligation not to inflict inhuman and degrading treatment), including inhuman and degrading treatment by state officials and private persons (i.e. people who are not state officials);
  • carry out effective and independent (in practical terms) official investigations into allegations or indications of such treatment;
  • carry out such investigations in response to complaints or where no complaint is made but where there are sufficiently clear indications of inhuman and degrading treatment;
  • carry out such investigations with promptness and reasonable expedition;
  • carry out investigations that are capable of identifying and punishing those responsible (i.e. an official investigation which is not allowed to allocate blame – a common tactic used by the police, judiciary, local authorities and the Government itself – does not fulfil the Government’s legal obligations under Article 3);
  • allow the victim to participate effectively in the investigation in one form or another.

Article 3 of the Convention gives rise to a positive obligation to conduct an official investigation (see Assenov and Others v. Bulgaria, judgment of 28 October 1998, Reports 1998-VIII, p. 3290, § 102). The authorities have an obligation to take action as soon as an official complaint has been lodged.

A requirement of promptness and reasonable expedition is essential in maintaining public confidence in their maintenance of the rule of law and in preventing any appearance of collusion in or tolerance of unlawful acts. Tolerance by the authorities towards such acts cannot but undermine public confidence in the principle of lawfulness and the State’s maintenance of the rule of law.  

Yours sincerely

Brian Pead, B.Ed (Hons), Flat 2, 66 Goodwins Road, King’s Lynn, Norfolk, PE30 5PD

Investigative author

Humanistic integrative counsellor

In: Latest news

Still quiet

Leave a Response