Alex Crosbie

To @ECHR_CEDH, @PACE_LegalHR, @coe, @EUCouncilPress, @CoE_CPT, @alain_berset, @BlackLawyersUK, @nationalbar, @Telegraph, @PACE_President, in view of my previous applications which were erroneously declared inadmissible, due to the deliberate exclusion of the merits in the applications, and with regards to the six current applications against the United Kingdom (for breaches of Articles 2, 3, 6 (1), 8, and 13 of the Convention), filed by Mr Atole Timothy Enaholo (Applicants’ Representative) on the 10/08/2026 at the European Court of Human Rights, I wish to draw the attention of the President & Registrar of the Court, that a failure to disclose and regulate the use of microwave radiation devices with through the wall sensor in policing (see the harmful and torture device below), is a failure to prevent @metpoliceuk from using the radiation devices to expose 800,000 targeted persons in UK watchlist database, to sexual molestation (dubbed - electronic rape), by using the radiation devices to target and torture their private organs, as evident in paragraph 45 or 44 of the Additional Statement of expansion, and as validated by Lead Appellant’s Request for Internal Review from the Home Office (page 13-14), covered in page 10, under ‘‘Applicant's Reasons for Requesting for the Disclosure of Microwave Radiation Device with Through the Wall Sensor’’ in all the six applications, and a failure of Duty of Precautionary Principle, which violates Articles 3 and 8 of the European Convention, covered in pages 8 and 9 of the application forms, which is supported by the Court in paragraph 244 (line 8-22) in the case between Vilnes and Others -v- Norway [2014], Applications number: 52806/09 and 22703/10, and the eighteenth reason why the six applications filed by Applicants’ Representative (Mr Atole Timothy Enaholo), at the European Court of Human Rights, on the 10/08/2026, should be declared admissible.

To @ECHR_CEDH @CoE_CPT, @coe, @EUCouncilPress, @PACE_LegalHR, @alain_berset, @BlackLawyersUK, @nationalbar, @Telegraph, @BBCNews @PACE_President, in view of my previous applications which were erroneously declared inadmissible, due to the deliberate exclusion of the merits in the applications, and with regards to the six current applications against the United Kingdom (for breaches of Articles 2, 3, 6 (1), 8, and 13 of the Convention), filed by Mr Atole Timothy Enaholo (Applicants’ Representative) on the 10/08/2026 at the European Court of Human Rights, I wish to draw the attention of the President & Registrar of the Court, that a failure to disclose and regulate the use of microwave radiation devices with through the wall sensor in policing (see the harmful and torture device below), is a failure to prevent @metpoliceuk from using the radiation devices to expose 800,000 innocent targeted persons in UK to risk of suicide, due to their exposure to the psychological and fear effects of microwave radiation, as evident in paragraph 44 or 43 of the Additional Statement of Expansion, and as validated by McRee D. I. Journal Publication on Environmental Aspect of Microwave Radiation, covered in page 10, under “Applicant’s Reason for Requesting for the Disclosure of Microwave Radiation Device with Through the Wall Sensor “ in all the six applications, and a failure of “Duty of Positive Obligation” by the United Kingdom to take all appropriate steps to safeguard life, explained by the Court in paragraph 220 in the case between Vilnes and Others -v- Norway [2014], application numbers: 52806/09 and 22703/10, covered under Article 2 of the statement of violations of the convention, in page 8 of the application forms, and the seventeenth reason why the six applications filed by Applications’ Representative (Mr Atole Timothy Enaholo) at the European Court of Human Rights on the 10/08/2026, should be declared admissible.

To @ECHR_CEDH @CoE_CPT, @coe, @EUCouncilPress, @PACE_LegalHR, @alain_berset, @BlackLawyersUK, @nationalbar, @EUCouncilPress, @Telegraph, @PACE_President, in view of my previous applications which were erroneously declared inadmissible, due to the deliberate exclusion of the merits in the applications, and with regards to the six current applications against the United Kingdom (for breaches of Articles 2, 3, 6 (1), 8, and 13 of the Convention), filed by Mr Atole Timothy Enaholo (Applicants’ Representative) on the 10/08/2026 at the European Court of Human Rights, I wish to draw the attention of the President & Registrar of the Court, that a failure to disclose and regulate the use of microwave radiation devices with through the wall sensor in policing (see the harmful and torture device below), is a failure to prevent @metpoliceuk from using the radiation devices to expose 800,000 innocent targeted persons in UK to risk of death via heart attack, heart failure, and stroke etc., by using the radiation to continuously stimulate tachycardia (speedy and irregular heart beat), as evident in paragraph 43 or 42 of the Additional Statement of Expansion, and as validated by Canadian BCCDC publication on 'Symptoms of Radiofrequency Radiation, covered in page 10, under ‘‘Applicants Reasons for Requesting for the Disclosure of Microwave Radiation Device with Through the Wall Sensor’’ in all the six applications, and a failure of Duty of Positive Obligation by the United Kingdom to take all appropriate steps to safeguard life, explained by the Court in paragraph 220 in the case between Vilnes and Others -v- Norway [2014], Applications number: 52806/09 and 22703/10, and the sixteenth reason why the six applications filed by Applicants' Representative (Mr Atole Timothy Enaholo), at the European Court of Human Rights, on the 10th of Aug., 2026, should be declared admissible.

To @ECHR_CEDH, @PACE_LegalHR, @coe, @EUCouncilPress, @CoE_CPT, @alain_berset, @BlackLawyersUK, @nationalbar, @Telegraph, @EUCouncilPress, @PACE_President, in view of my previous applications which were erroneously declared inadmissible, due to the deliberate exclusion of the merits in the applications, and with regards to the six current applications against the United Kingdom (for breaches of Articles 2, 3, 6 (1), 8, and 13 of the Convention), filed by Mr Atole Timothy Enaholo (Applicants’ Representative) on the 10/08/2026 at the European Court of Human Rights, I wish to draw the attention of the President & Registrar of the Court, that a failure to disclose and regulate the use of microwave radiation devices with through the wall sensor in policing (see the harmful and torture device below), is a failure to prevent @metpoliceuk from using the radiation devices to target and cause severe skin burn injuries to at least 800,000 innocent persons estimated to be in the UK watchlist database, as evident in paragraph 41 or 40 of the Additional Statement of Expansion, and as validated by McRee D.I. (1972) journal publication on environmental aspect of microwave radiation, covered in page 10, under ‘‘Applicant's Reasons for Requesting for the Disclosure of Microwave Radiation Device with Through the Wall Sensor’’ in all the six applications, and a failure of Duty of Precautionary Principle, which was explained by the Court in paragraph 244 (line 8-22) in the case between Vilnes and Others -v- Norway [2014], Applications number: 52806/09 and 22703/10, and the fourteenth reason why the six applications filed by Applicants' Representative (Mr Atole Timothy Enaholo), at the European Court of Human Rights, on the 10th of Aug., 2026, should be declared admissible.

To @ECHR_CEDH, @PACE_LegalHR, @coe, @EUCouncilPress, @PACE_LegalHR, @alain_berset, @BlackLawyersUK, @nationalbar, @EUCouncilPress, @Telegraph, @PACE_President, in view of my previous applications which were erroneously declared inadmissible, due to the deliberate exclusion of the merits in the applications, and with regards to the six current applications against the United Kingdom (for breaches of Articles 2, 3, 6 (1), 8, and 13 of the Convention), filed by Mr Atole Timothy Enaholo (Applicants’ Representative) on the 10/08/2026 at the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), I wish to draw the attention of the President & Registrar of the Court, that a failure to disclose and regulate the use of microwave radiation devices with through the wall sensor in policing (see the harmful and torture device below), is a failure to prevent @metpoliceuk from using the radiation devices to target, torture, and expose at least 800,000 innocent persons estimated to be in the UK watchlist database, to risk of organ (kidney, heart and pancreas) failure, as evident in paragraph 40 or 39 of the Additional Statement of Expansion, and as validated by McRee D.I. (1972) journal publication on environmental aspect of microwave radiation, covered in page 10, under ‘‘Applicants Reasons for Requesting for the Disclosure of Microwave Radiation Device with Through the Wall Sensor’’ in all the six applications, and a failure of Duty of Precautionary Principle, which was explained by the Court in paragraph 220 in the case between Vilnes v Norway [2014], Applications number: 52806/09 and 22703/10, and one of the reasons why the six applications filed by Applicants' Representative (Mr Atole Timothy Enaholo), at the European Court of Human Rights, on the 10th of Aug., 2026, should be declared admissible.

To @ECHR_CEDH, @PACE_LegalHR, @coe, @EUCouncilPress, @PACE_LegalHR, @alain_berset, @BlackLawyersUK, @nationalbar, @EUCouncilPress, @Telegraph, @PACE_President, in view of my previous applications which were erroneously declared inadmissible, due to the deliberate exclusion of the merits in the applications, and with regards to the six current applications against the United Kingdom (for breaches of Articles 2, 3, 6 (1), 8, and 13 of the Convention), filed by Mr Atole Timothy Enaholo (Applicants’ Representative) on the 10/08/2026 at the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), I wish to draw the attention of the President & Registrar of the Court, that a failure to disclose and regulate the use of microwave radiation devices with through the wall sensor in policing (see the harmful, torture and lethal device below), is a failure to prevent @metpoliceuk from using the radiation devices to target, torture, and expose at least 800,000 innocent persons estimated to be in the UK watchlist database, to risk of blindness (through microwave radiation induced eye cataract etc.,), as evident in paragraph 39 or 38 of the Additional Statement of Expansion, and as validated by Kues and Monahan (1992) journal publication on the effect of microwave radiation on the eyes, covered in page 10, under ‘‘Applicants Reasons for Requesting for the Disclosure of Microwave Radiation Device with Through the Wall Sensor’’ in all the six applications, and a failure of Duty of Precautionary Principle, which was explained by the Court in paragraph 220 in the case between Vilnes v Norway [2014], Applications number: 52806/09 and 22703/10, and one of the reasons why the six applications filed by Applicants' Representative (Mr Atole Timothy Enaholo), at the European Court of Human Rights, on the 10th of Aug., 2026, should be declared admissible.