Lawful notices for local anti-corruption
Some examples from Palnackie in Scotland that may inspire you to do likewise
What is a pirate? After all, the acts of firing ammunition at another vessel, boarding a ship, and taking command of its people and cargo are ordinary parts of naval activity. That there is damage or death is not itself an indication of piracy. The answer, it would seem, lies in the rule of law — be it maritime law or the laws of war. A pirate is someone who puts themselves above and outside the law; hence, by definition, they are criminals. However they might justify their actions to themselves, it is still a crime.
On this theme, Grok tells us the following as the legal definition of piracy on the seas:
The legal definition of piracy can vary slightly depending on the jurisdiction, but it generally refers to the act of robbery or criminal violence committed by the crew or passengers of a private ship on the high seas, directed against another ship or its passengers, crew, or cargo. Piracy can also include acts such as hijacking a ship or its cargo for ransom or other illegal purposes.
The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) defines piracy as "any illegal acts of violence or detention, or any act of depredation, committed for private ends by the crew or the passengers of a private ship or a private aircraft, and directed on the high seas against another ship or aircraft, or against persons or property on board such ship or aircraft."
In the United States, the legal definition of piracy is outlined in Title 18, Section 1651 of the United States Code, which states that whoever, on the high seas, commits the crime of piracy as defined by the law of nations, and is afterwards brought into or found in the United States, shall be imprisoned for life.
The takeaway is simple: where there is a dispute, the reference has to be made to both the facts and the law. The question of whether acts are legitimate use of authority or are criminal are decided through a framework that keeps the peace, not via public opinion or personal vendetta. That means we, the public, have to master the law if we are to have a say in public assets and how they are managed. This article shares with you some examples of common law notices so you can adapt them to your own local anti-corruption efforts, and hopefully will inspire you to take up your authority and power to act.
Readers will be familiar with the ongoing saga with the Pirates of Palnackie, and the underhand theft of public land via a mix of fraud and a fake charity. The perpetrators are land pirates, and are committing very serious criminal acts, but are painting themselves as being upstanding members of the community. This is the classic kind of narcissism we see all around our society, where the perpetrators deny their wrongdoing, accuse those who hold them to account of being persecutory, and swap over the roles of victim and offender.
In the case of public affairs, this is frequently done with the assistance of the press. In the case of Palnackie, the Dumfries & Galloway News, part of the Daily Record group, helps the establishment powers to paint a false picture. The March article “Vital repair works at Palnackie harbour finally begin” states:
The work followed damage last year by a third party carrying out works in the harbour which put the Scottish Water waste water asset at risk… The bund will stabilise the worst section of the failed wall and banking which has been subsiding – posing a threat to the integrity of Palnackie’s main sewer and waste water treatment works.
This is an attempt to push blame onto the users of the harbour who cleared away silt, and the harbour wall fell down afterwards. The lie by omission is to fail to report that Scottish Water cut the retaining ties to the wall, destroying its structural integrity, when they installed the sewage tanks — which should never have been put next to a working harbour in the first place.
Note how the “third party” is never named, in an attempt to avoid libel laws. Yet everyone in the village and surrounding area will know exactly who this refers to. It is both duplicitous and cowardly; arguably the journalist Stephen Norris is acting as an accessory to organised crime, and also should be held to account.
It continues…
Our delivery partners, George Leslie, have attempted to start these works on a number of occasions but have faced a number of challenges.
Again, it looks like some local hoodlums are getting in the way of honest work by Scottish Water and their engineering contractor, but the reality is more complex. They have failed to comply with maritime law in order to lawfully close the port to boats, and blocked the harbour endangering river traffic, resulting in the arrest of ones of their staff. Some harbour users have not had timely agreements with the contractors for compensation for relocation costs, and in one instance a meeting was deceptively scheduled to draw attention away from the harbour so the contractor could take action behind the users’ backs.
The current and lawful Board of Urr Navigation Trustees, appointed in compliance with the 1901 order from Parliament, have now issued the following notice to all relevant stakeholders (and the text is replicated below the images):
Public Notice: To all Community Stakeholders of the Urr Navigation from the present Board.
“Modernising Trust Ports - A Guide for Good Governance” published by Transport Scotland describes a Trust Port as ‘a valuable asset presently safeguarded by the existing board, whose duty it is to hand it on in the same or better condition to succeeding generations. This remains the ultimate responsibility of the board and future generations remain the ultimate stakeholder”.
We, The Present Board, hereby inform all interested parties within the Urr Navigation jurisdiction, which consists of the River Urr and its estuary between the most northerly point at which the river is crossed by the boundary of the Burgh of Dalbeattie and a straight line drawn from Castlehill Point across the river to Almorness Point and the Dalbeattie Burn or Dub of Hass from the Bridge crossing that Burn immediately above the Quay at Dalbeattie to its junction with the River Urr (Communities within the Urr Navigation include Dalbeattie, Palnackie and Kippford) of the following:
Wrongful Disposition of Land: Land owned by the Urr Navigation Trust (UNT) has been sold for the sum of one pound to the Buittle Quest Charity OSCR SC049978. Unfortunately false representation may have been made to gain signatories to the sale by previous Urr Navigation Trustees, implicating the Land Registry - Title No KRK13871.
Wrongful Transfer of Funds: As a result of the ‘wrongful disposition of land’ there has been a wrongful transfer of funds. On the 18/02/22 an associated reimbursement of legal fees (£3,156.06) was made to Buittle Quest by the UNT. Additionally, a ‘donation’ (£5,000) was made by the UNT to Buittle Quest on 10/10/22 - Buittle Quest Accounts for the period 14/01/2022 - 28/02/2023.
Collection of Mooring Fees: A membership organisation was established called the Kippford and Rockliffe Moorings Association (KARMA) Fees were moved from the UNT to KARMA which removed income from the UNT. This may have resulted in false representation being made in the Marine License Application - 05337/14/1.
Blocking Public Access: The removal of retaining ties to the Palnackie Harbour Wall when Scottish Water Ltd installed its works on the south side of the harbour has resulted over time in the collapse of that section of the harbour wall. This has been falsely blamed on harbour users and present trustees, resulting in the unnecessary blocking of public access by Scottish Water Ltd, via both land and water and the resulting endangerment of river traffic.
Breach of Fiduciary Duty: Previous trustees have not been properly appointed by the beneficiaries of the trust, this has been publicly acknowledged and may have contributed to the issues outlined above as conflicts of interest may have arisen. The Minister referred to in Section 5 of the Ports Act 1991 for ports in Scotland would be the Scottish Government Minister for Transport, which is Fiona Hyslop MSP. Transport Scotland have no record of consent being requested under section 5 for the disposal of assets of the Urr Navigation Trust between 2000 and 2023. Transport Scotland do not hold any records on this prior to the year 2000.
Role of Stakeholders: “A Trust Port is held to account for its performance and actions by its Stakeholders including the wider community it serves”
We urge the public to stay informed and engaged as public assets are being removed into de facto private control.
For further information and access to supporting evidence, please contact the current Urr Navigation Trustees via trustees@urrnavigationtrust.co.uk or mail to address above.
Should you have any additional information on the above matters, we ask you to please get in touch.
By and on behalf of
Urr Navigation Trustees as established by the Urr Navigation Order 1901.
Common law notices are powerful, as they help to establish fact in law. If those who receive the notice do not rebut it, then they have acquiesced to it being truth. If they fail to take action in accordance with their own duty of care, then they are liable for damages that result from such negligence. It is the way of the “anti-pirate” to apply the law. Ironically, those committing the acts of piracy like to refer to the current Board as pirates! It is all standard narcissistic abuse to self-justify misdeeds.
There is an underlying social and political struggle to establish legitimacy and authority, as the former Board as well as local parish Council are loathe to acknowledge the current Board, since they are waist-deep in wrongdoing. The whole parochial structure of incumbent power is held together by a tacit agreement not to rock the boat or hold anyone to account. As part of this endeavour to curry favour and pursue selfish interests, the following has appeared on social media, as well as an anonymous poster at the harbour:
Now, it all looks so innocent, but turning up at a lawfully operating live harbour and just moving stuff around is “problematic”, to say the least. This is really about pushing on the boundaries of the harbour users to goad a reaction, as well as establish (unlawful) territorial control over one side of the harbour where the fraudulent land deal took place. The transparent and ultimate goal is to evict all the harbour users, charge unlawful fees to the public (which are not owed to the parish council or its fake charity), and deny the beneficiaries their rights under the 1901 order. The (false) hope is that all these accountability and legal issues go away.
So, it is time for another common law notice, this time to the parish council (with text below):
The Secretary: Buittle Parish Community Council
Saturday Club 22nd June 2024 Tidy Up of North Side of Palnackie Harbour
To Whom it may concern
On behalf of all Harbour Stakeholders and the wider community we welcome the commitment by the public to assist in a clean up of Palnackie Harbour on the 22nd of June 2024 at 10am. It is good news to see folk taking a positive interest in the Harbour at Palnackie.
With this in mind we have concerns from Harbour Users at Palnackie whom have reported seeing an anonymous Notice Posted at the Harbour site and on Social Media that states “Any items that look like they belong to someone will be put together at the entrance of the north side for later collection or disposal” Could you please clarify the intension of removing such private possessions for collection or disposal?
We understand that a clean up of “obvious signs of litter and weeds” is in the spirit of collective husbandry of Palnackie Harbour, however the removal of private belongings without consent is warranted only under certain circumstances given by the authority of the Harbours, Docks and Piers Clauses Act 1847 granted to the statutory authority.
With this in mind we welcome dialogue with your community council harbour representative so that no breach of understanding occurs, we wish to foster a positive working relationship with the various stakeholder groups, The way forward is working together in balance to achieve our mutual goals.
On the day of the 22nd June 2024 at 10am we shall provide representatives from the Urr Navigation Trustees to assist the Saturday Club.
By and on behalf of the Urr Navigation Trustees
It is appropriately constructive, while also holding those who may be planning such activities to the rule of law. How could they possibly object?
At the end of the day, a mixture of pride and foolishness is stopping certain people from admitting they have made an error, and backing out of it while seeking forgiveness. It would have been possible to spin the land deal as making the best of a bad job, and undone the damage. But now it has gone too far, and there is only doubling down, and no reversing out of the crimes being committed. Stealing public land, in the middle of a global corruption purge, in opposition to determined lawful stakeholders, while being documented by a highly visible anti-corruption activist to a large international audience — that is not a smart move.
The local press may be able to hoodwink some of the populace some of the time, but they cannot deceive everyone all the time, and independent citizen journalism has arrived to hold people to account who never expected to be exposed. This is done through lawful means, principally by documenting the processes of both common and statute law being followed. Police Scotland have been informed of the fraudulent land deal (on 5th June 2024 reference 0803). If they fail to engage, that’s just more people to hold to account. Short of an act of God sweeping Britain away in a tsunami, this matter will not go away. All of the piracy against the people has to stop, by the fullest force of law if necessary.
