LETTER TO HER MAJESTY, QUEEN ELIZABETH II, SUPREME GOVERNOR OF THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND 7 JUNE 04
Her Majesty, Queen Elizabeth II
Supreme Governor of the Church of England
Buckingham Palace
London
SW1A 1AA
Your Gracious Majesty
THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND'S LINK TO EVIL HAKLUYT/MI6 SPY FIRM
I am an 87 year old partly disabled war pensioner. I had the privilege of sitting a few rows away from you in the stands at Newmarket Races in 1945 when you were a teenage Princess. I was in the section set aside for convalescing soldiers from the White Lodge Army Hospital. I had just returned from the Burma Campaign after 12 years in the Royal Corp of Signals. It did us all wonders to see you so closely – a real tonic if I may respectfully say so.
I am writing to Your Majesty, in your capacity as The Supreme Governor of the Church of England. I am deeply concerned to discover that the tentacles of an evil and shadowy private spy firm, Hakluyt & Company Limited, reach right into the very heart of the British establishment, the Church of England. I refer to Sir Anthony Hammond KCB QC. Sir Anthony is Standing Counsel to the General Synod of the Church of England. He is also a director and shareholder in a very shady enterprise, the Hakluyt shadowy private spy firm which many MP’s believe is in fact the commercial arm of MI6.
Hakluyt’s stock in trade is deception, trickery, betrayal, fabrication, fraud and infiltration by its undercover agents - indeed the full range of the black arts; not at all in keeping with the ethical policies of the Church of England.
Before writing further about Hakluyt it will help if you are first aware of the overall background circumstances.
On 20 May 04 I wrote to the Lord Chancellor, Lord Falconer, concerning litigation and associated acrimony which my family and I have been involved in for over a decade with the Royal Dutch Shell Group. A copy of that letter is enclosed.
Shell settled our first three High Courts Actions against them in our favour for a sum of £260,000 plus costs. The litigation was in respect of breach of confidence and breach of contract.
I am a long term Shell shareholder and had a mutually successful business relationship with Shell stretching back to 1957. It was therefore a matter of great regret that we had to resort to litigation and a multifaceted legal and peaceful campaign against a multinational giant.
Unfortunately we subsequently found it necessary to sue Shell for a fourth time. Shell was determined this time to resist our new claim at all costs.
They resorted to using undercover agents as part of a deliberate counter-offensive against us. Our key witnesses, our solicitor and my family were besieged and intimidated by undercover operatives. By coincidence or otherwise the residences of our most important witness, plus our solicitors home and our own home, were all burgled. Privileged documents were interfered with and examined. Thus the integrity of our documents was compromised.
It is against the overall backdrop I have described that our legal actions and campaigning activities were, I believe, perceived by Shell as putting us alongside the likes of Greenpeace and The Body Shop in terms of concern about damage being inflicted on Shell’s reputation. Shell has admitted using Hakluyt to try to protect its reputation.
Shell Legal Director Richard Wiseman and Shell’s solicitors Kendall Freeman admitted in writing that undercover agents had been used against us after one was caught red-handed illegally checking mail at our offices. The Police carried out inquiries at Shell-Mex House. They suspected a criminal conspiracy but did not have any success in gathering evidence to support a prosecution. Mr Wiseman and Kendall Freeman have denied any knowledge of the burglaries.
I have only recently discovered to my horror that at the very time the Police were investigating, Shell had an undisclosed close association with a shadowy organisation called Hakluyt which specialises in precisely the type of espionage activity to which we had been subjected during the course of preparing our case for trial. Many MP’s believe that Hakluyt is the commercial arm of MI6. It was founded by ex senior officers of MI6. The formation of Hakluyt was blessed by the then head of MI6, Sir David Spedding
Furthermore, titled directors/shareholders of Shell Transport were simultaneously directors/shareholders in Hakluyt. We actually wrote to the relevant Shell directors to bring to their attention the sleazy undercover tactics being used against us. I could never have imagined in a million years that the same gentleman, Sir William Purves, and the late Sir Peter Holmes, were the Chairman and President of Hakluyt. I enclose a self-explanatory letter dated 7 June 04 to the then Chairman of Shell Transport, Sir Mark Moody Stuart.
Two articles about the scandalous activities of Hakluyt are enclosed – one published by The Sunday Times on 17 June 2001 and the other by The Scotsman on 20 January 2003. There are many other such articles.
My enquiries have revealed that a large number of titled individuals are connected with Hakluyt (see enclosed email to Kendall Freeman Solicitors dated 14 April 2004) The list is in fact like a roll call of the establishment. However I was amazed to find that when I recently wrote to Mr Christopher James, one of the founders of Hakluyt (a former MI6 senior officer), I received a response from a lawyer at the Church of England, Mr Mike Webster. I have enclosed copies of the relevant self-explanatory email relating to Sir Anthony Hammond KCB QC who in addition to being Standing Counsel to the General Synod of the Church of England is also a Director and shareholder in Hakluyt & Company Limited, as confirmed in their Annual Accounts filed some months ago.
Sir Anthony Hammond and the other titled directors/shareholders in Hakluyt, must be aware of numerous of the dubious activities of Hakluyt as exposed in the aforementioned Sunday Times report, yet have remained part of the organisation, presumably because it is a highly profitable venture.
Hakluyt/Shell has been involved in some very dubious activity on an international basis. For example, according to the Mail on Sunday article on 4 April 2004, headlined: “Shell Chief had a private army”, the recently disgraced and sacked Group Chairman of Shell Sir Philip Watts helped to organise and pay for a 1400 strong private army of Police spies in Nigeria in collusion with the murderous Nigerian regime then in power. One of Hakluyt’s undercover agents, a serving German Secret Service officer, was active on Shell’s behalf in the Nigerian matters. Using a false cover story he interviewed friends of Ken Saro-Wiwa, the Nobel Prize nominee, who was hanged by the military regime after leading a campaign against Shell’s oil exploration.
My question to you in your capacity as its Supreme Governor is to ask if it right that an important official/adviser to The Church of England should also be associated with such a dubious organisation as Hakluyt. Is it proper that the resources of the Church of England (its offices, fax machine, stationary etc) should be exploited by such a sinister allegedly privately owned intelligence firm? Bearing in mind the ethical policies of the Church of England as set out on its website, should it have any connection/association with Hakluyt, particularly at such a senior level?
At the end of May I sent emails to hundreds of MP’s seeking their support for an inquiry into the circumstances of my families’ litigation with Shell and in particular the use of corporate sponsored undercover agents. Copy enclosed.
I have recently heard from the Intelligence and Security Committee that its Chairman, the Rt. Hon. Ann Taylor MP, will be bringing my questions about Hakluyt/MI6 to the attention of the other members of the Committee. Letters to the Clerk of the Committee are enclosed.
I am well aware that I am dealing with powerful and dangerous people and I have to confess that this is one of the reasons why I wrote to MP’s and to you Your Majesty. I now feel much safer, particularly that the Intelligence and Security Committee has taken an interest in these sinister matters.
As you may be aware Shell’s reputation has now in any event been completely destroyed by the oil reserves scandal due to the deeply ingrained corporate culture of cover-up and deceit at the highest levels of Shell which I have been complaining about for several years. I did in fact write in 1999 to Her Gracious Majesty, Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands warning her about the serious ethical shortcomings of the Royal Dutch Shell Group in which Her Majesty Queen Beatrix is a major shareholder. A copy of the relevant correspondence is posted on my website shell2004.com.
I have supplied some salient self-explanatory documents below and trust that you will ask the relevant Church of England authorities to look into this situation as a matter of urgency.
I have the honour to remain, Your Majesty’s faithful subject,
Alfred Donovan
Encl:
1. Letter to Lord Falconer, the Lord Chancellor dated 20 May 04
2. The Scotsman article dated 20 January 03
3. Sunday Times article dated 17 June 01
4. Email dated 14 April 2004 to Kendall Freeman (entitled “SHELL TRANSPORT & HAKLUYT MI6 SPY FIRM – ONE AND THE SAME?”
5. Email correspondence with Church of England solicitor, Mr Mike Webster
6. Email to MP’s 27/28 May 04
7. Letters to the Intelligence and Security Committee
8. Letter to Sir Mark Moody-Stuart dated 7 June 04
9. Letter to Her Majesty Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands dated 21 April 04
Cc
The Archbishop of Canterbury, The Most Reverend And Rt. Hon. Dr Rowan Williams
The Archbishop of York, The Most Reverend And Rt. Hon. Dr David Hope, KCVO
Click here for ShellNews.net HOME PAGE