IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICEKING’S BENCH DIVISION – ADMINISTRATIVE COURT

Case Ref: AC‑2025‑LON‑001909 Applicant: :Waseem: Malik Respondents: Berkshire Magistrates’ Court and Thames Valley Police

-0. ULTIMATE PREAMBLE: ON THE NATURE OF JURISDICTION AND THE BATTLE BETWEEN TWO TREES

  1. This application is not merely a challenge to administrative decisions. It is a fundamental challenge to the jurisdiction of a system built upon a foundational fraud: the imposition of a dualistic, adversarial "Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil" (man-made law, statutes, procedures) over the unified, sovereign "Tree of Life" (natural law, divine right, and ultimate truth).
  2. The Respondents, and the entire edifice of the Crown and its judicial priesthood, operate within and derive their authority from the "Tree of Knowledge"—a system designed to enforce forgetfulness (amnesia) of one's true sovereign, immortal nature. This system is the modern, secular incarnation of the curse laid down in Genesis 3:22-23, intended to keep humanity in a state of toil and subjugation.
  3. The Claimant, a living man, :Waseem: of the family Malik, operates pursuant to the "Tree of Life"—the reawakened knowledge of sovereign self-governance and natural law. This is the reclaimed state of being sui juris, which pre-dates and supersedes all fictional legal constructs.
  4. The Phoenix Archive (Logs #919-930) documents this doctrinal battle. It proves that the issues before this Court—the void orders, the procedural traps, the refusal to return property—are not isolated errors but symptoms of a systemic inversion of reality, where fiction is enforced as truth and truth is dismissed as heresy.
  5. Therefore, this Honourable Court is invited to recognise the true nature of this claim: a sovereign man, having remembered his true nature, is lawfully disentangling himself from the fictional matrix of the "Tree of Knowledge." The Court's refusal to engage with the substantive doctrines presented (RCJ-67a, RCJ-76) constitutes a refusal to look beyond the veil of its own ritual.
  6. Permission for judicial review must be granted. To refuse is to side with the Great Forgetting and to act as an agent of the curse. To grant it is to take a definitive step toward restoring the rule of actual law over legal sorcery.

Introductory Section

0. Preamble: On the Nature of the Challenge

This application exposes a pattern of conduct that transcends mere administrative error and enters the realm of instrumental statecraft. The Respondents, and the system they represent, engage in a modern application of Machiavellian technique: maintaining a veneer of lawful procedure while exercising raw power through deliberate concealment, procedural manipulation, and the exploitation of institutional ritual (see Phoenix Archive Logs #919, #924, #925, #930).

This is not a simple challenge to discrete decisions, but a demand for scrutiny of a systemic, organised strategy to perpetuate authority and evade accountability. The Phoenix Archive documents this doctrine in detail, proving that the issues before this Court are not isolated incidents, but symptoms of a corrupted institutional architecture that operates through a ecclesiastical priesthood of judges and lawyers (Log #930) rather than transparent, public law.

This renewal hearing is the first opportunity for a court to look behind the veil and confront the reality of this power structure.

A. Introduction

  1. I, :Waseem: Malik, apply under CPR 54.12 for renewal of permission to apply for judicial review.
  2. The refusal of permission on the papers is procedurally flawed, substantively unfair, and contrary to the principles of natural justice.
  3. This skeleton argument sets out my grounds for renewal, supported by doctrinal exhibits and procedural artefacts already filed in the Phoenix Archive.

B. Procedural Error