Liberal Democrat MP John Hemming has tabled an “Early Day Motion”, or EDM, on the need to include the Crown Dependencies in the overarching UK child-abuse inquiry. This is the last day of parliament before it begins its summer recess, so this particular EDM is unlikely to gain much attention, but it still places on-the-record the key issues concerning the proper investigation of child-abuse issues in the Crown Dependencies such as Jersey.

As Jersey has sadly shown, these small quasi-self-governing enclaves simply do not have effective checks and balances, or meaningful separations of power. In Jersey, rather than each of the relevant authorities holding each-other to account, they close-ranks against the vulnerable, the weak and against the public interest in order to protected “The Jersey Way” from scrutiny and protect the ruling oligarchy from “damage to its reputation”.

When the UK parliament resumes in September, more sophisticated procedures will be used to raise these issues and campaign for the proper rule of law and real child-protection in Jersey.



  • Session: 2014-15
  • Date tabled: 21.07.2014
  • Primary sponsor: Hemming, John
  • Sponsors:

That this House, being conscious of the numerous cases of previously concealed child abuse in which individuals have been able to use their status as public figures to deter victims and to prevent or disrupt investigations of their crimes, and being conscious that in some cases abusers, and those who have concealed abuse, have been able to use their positions in public office and the institutions of the state such as Parliament and Government to shield them and their wrongdoing from proper, lawful scrutiny, recognises that the dangers of such cover-ups occurring are even greater in small, quasi-self-governing communities than at national level, where, even though checks and balances are more extensive, child abuse and cover-ups by the well-connected have still occurred; notes that a local public inquiry in Jersey into child abuse, the Independent Jersey Care Inquiry, has not gained the confidence of all victims and witnesses; and calls on the relevant UK authorities, the Secretary of State for Justice, the Crown and the Privy Council, in exercise of their responsibilities and powers to ensure good governance, the rule of law and proper administration of justice in the Crown Dependencies, to empower the overarching UK inquiry into child abuse to include the Crown Dependencies.


  1. Anon

    The overarching Uk Inquiry won’t be worth a t0ss if it doesn’t include the Jersey cover up Thank you very much John Hemming for keeping the pressure on the UK to hold the filthy cesspit Jersey to account and thank you Mr. Syvret for continuing the fight.

  2. VFC


    From John Hemming MP’s EDM.

    “calls on the relevant UK authorities, the Secretary of State for Justice, the Crown and the Privy Council, in exercise of their responsibilities and powers to ensure good governance, the rule of law and proper administration of justice in the Crown Dependencies”

    The proper administration of “JUSTICE.”

    The UK Child Sexual Abuse Inquiry on the mainland HAS to include Jersey to gain any credibility.

  3. Anonymous

    can you inform us of any recent dealings or correspondence you have had with the COI?

    1. Stuart Syvret

      I applied to the “public inquiry” for legal representation funding – in accordance with the “Salmon Principles” – and with Article 6 of the ECHR.

      The “public inquiry” told me to fuck off.

      So – that’s that.


  4. Leigh LaFon


    The fact that you’ve been denied representation is outrageous and inexplicable from any logical angle apparent in the Terms of Reference and COI PR as published. It couldn’t be compliant with ECHR standards, could it? It seems to me denying you council is partially for the purpose of spin, so the state media can depict you as uncooperative. I would think, however, that any legal representative for your participation in the Inquiry would be further challenged by the fact that assistance to you would almost certainly result in massive oligarchy retaliation against your council, if that person or law firm was connected in any way to Jersey.


    1. Stuart Syvret

      Even the Jersey oligarchy had to concede that Jersey lawyers would be crippled – and could not be looked to as being capable of providing objective representation – which is why they agreed external lawyers could be used in the child-abuse cover-up scandal case.

      And that’s a position they could hardly have resisted, given there are certain letters and affidavits on the record by Jersey lawyers admitting as much.

      And yes, in plain fact – that this “public inquiry” has refused to give key witnesses like me legal representation is as indicative of their incompetence as it is of their bias.


  5. anon

    Home Office whistle blower Tim Hulbert who was told to back off claims he was told the Paedophile Information Exchange (PIE) was being funded at the request of Special Branch [police] !!!


  6. mike freeman

    I keep posting in the wrong place! -sorry .Just wanted to say well done and keep going
    best wishes Mike

  7. anon

    do you know when Leah Mcgraff Goodman is publishing her next article on Jersey,or is she waiting till closer to the elections to release it for maximum effect?

  8. A. Non

    The Treasurer of the States, Laura Rowley, resigned; so who at the States Treasury is now acting on behalf of the Treasurer to instruct the Royal Court to claim back legal costs of £68,000?

    Who at the Treasury, and Why now?

    Is the Treasury Minister, Senator Philip Ozouf involved in this? Is the timing politically motivated to prevent Mr. Syvret from re-entering Jersey politics via the St Helier seats?

    Is this a Politically motivated move by the establishment, re-using the feudal mace of politicised judiciary to stop Mr. Syvret from re-entering Jersey politics during a time when the establishment is most vulnerable (at a time it is being investigated by the COI for “historic” child abuse), is this the same political-tool that was used by the establishment to remove the Pitman’s from Jersey politics?

  9. tdf

    Anyone know of anything interesting about Stopford Road, St Helier.

    Apart from the obvious that is Freemasons’ Hall on it.

    Answers on a postcard please.

  10. Anonymous

    Stuart, did you ever hear of anything about a “large house”, owned by a “very rich” person, close to Hautlieu that was apparently fitted up with manacles and steel shutters to close off areas of the house so the rich and well connected could have safe “parties” with victims procured by them by others. I wasn’t told when this was but apparently the house still exists. I heard this from a pretty credible source but have seen no mention of it anywhere else on the blogs. Any information you have to clarify this?

  11. No reason for treason

    Dear Mr Syvret, Why is it, do you think, that Jersey now has a new law of treason?

    I, and I am sure, many other readers of your blog have wondered about this new treason law; what are the circumstances that have prompted it, and who is the Crown trying to protect itself from with such a barbaric law?

    After so centuries, why do we have this law now; are we the people of Jersey no longer trusted by the Crown?

  12. The reason of treason

    After so many centuries, why do we have this law now?

    Yes, why indeed do we suddenly have this new law of treason passed now?

    By this new law, the Monarchy is directly telling the people of Jersey it no longer trusts us!

    And of course, treason can mean anything the feudal Jersey judiciary want it to mean…

    This barbaric law of treason passed in the States is an insult to the people of Jersey!

  13. Andrew Pants-on-fire

    Vote failed PR shyster. Vote Andrew Lewis,3658.msg55328.html
    Did Andrew Lewis Lie to fellow politicians, if not why the secrecy ?

    That brings us to the question whether, in an “in camera” session of the States, Deputy Lewis was being “economical with the truth”. Certainly what he appears to have said contradicts what he later told Brian Napier. It relates to the “Interim Met. Report” which was in the possession of David Warcup:

    The Napier Report states that:

    As previously has been noted, neither Mr [Andrew] Lewis nor Mr Ogley saw the Interim Report. Neither did they seek to see it. The reason given was the nature of the information that was contained therein. It was, said Mr Ogley, a police document and it was inappropriate that he (or anyone else) should have access to it.

    But the “in camera” minutes, as leaked, have him saying say this:

    “As far as the accusation you raise about the Metropolitan Police, when I saw the preliminary report I was astounded. So much so that my actions, I believe, are fully justified. If the preliminary report is that damning, Lord knows what the main report will reveal. So my successor will have an interesting time. The report that I was shown gave me no doubt at all.”

    Luckily the truth (and lies) can be read here:

    Not a little white lie. This is government by “the usual suspects”

    The government which you may, or may not, deserve.

    If you don’t like cover-up, child abuse and the hijack of the island institutions like the island’s police force ……… then don’t vote for it !


Leave a Reply to VFC Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published.