Sunday, November 27, 2016

Uhuru to File Suit to stop force feeding and allow freedom of expression


 Uhuru was among the food refusal campaign planners and was moved from Waupun Prison to Columbia Correctional the day before the food refusal was to start. Many inmates joined this effort to stop  the endless torture that is solitary confinement . It was not many days into the campaign when the prison obtained a court order to force feed the inmates. This writer believes that there is one maybe two people still on the food refusal, still being tube fed. The prisoners believe the tube feeding was done as punishingly as was possible to break the strike and we all agree that tube feeding should be used only in extreme health emergencies which here was clearly not the case.
Uhuru has been preparing his case to the court- to stop the tube feeding and allow the free expression to continue.  Below is the link to the writ in PDF form and  below that is the entire writ pasted. Also We have a post where we have placed most of the references cited here and are adding more.
 
WISCONSIN COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
Ras Atum-Ra Uhuru Mutawakkil
In the Matter of : NORMAN  C GREEN JR



Petition no:

Colum Cty Cir. Crt.No#16 CV 201
(sub. case No. 2016 XX 2015)
 
Respondent-Petitioner
VS                                                                                    
Colum. Cty. Circuit Court
Judge Alan White
And Counsel Gloria J Thomas, Governor Scott Walker, DOC Secretary Jon Litscher, CCI Warden Michael Dittman, Dr S.U. Syed , D. Young , and Jane & John Doe Nurses 1-to 10
PETITION FOR SUPERVISORY WRIT AND RESTRAINING ORDER TO PREVENT TORTUROUS FORCE FEEDING
________________________________________________________________________________
1) PETITIONE: RAS ATUM-RA UHURU MUTAWAKKIL (Also known as Norman C Green JR)petitions the Wisconsin Court of Appeals TO exercise its authority  pursuant to WIS. STAT. 809.51 to accept this writ in the matter of : Norman C Green Jr.  Case  16 CV 201
(A) PETITIONE is now just able to file this writ do to obstruction, blockage, Harassment and complete denial of access to court by the petitioners- now respondents (CCI, et al).
(B.) Some of these obstructive tactics have already been explained to the court , in a motion filed to court asking for time extension to file this write ( see appendix A) Denial of motion dated Sept. 15th 2-16. 2016 XX1215.
(C) These obstructive tactics have not stopped. The respondents refused to turn over portions of this writ that was typed up on the institution law library word processor. Thus, further  the delay in execution of this Writ.
STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES
2)Judge Alan J White of Colum Cty Cir Crt ABUSED ITS JUDICIAL DISCRETION when he “JOINED” in collusion with the other respondents to deprive petitioner his 1st Amendment (1ST Amd Rgt)Rights of (A) EXPRESSION, (B) SPEECH, (C) RELIGION, and (D) REDRESS/ ACCESS TO COURT.  And Wisconsin Constitution (Wis. Const Art. ) Articles 1, sections (1),(3), (4). (5), (9), (11), (18),(21-sub (2)) And in Violation of his HUMAN RIGHTS (HR’S) In the No-food Fast and dissent activity. DK #27-30 (mot. Resp. para. 4-6, Page1-4 Appendix 21-24)
3)Judge Alan J White ABUSED ITS JUDICIAL DISCRETION when he JOINED IN COLLUSION with the other respondents to INFLICT PAIN, SUFFERING AND TORTUROUS ACTIVITY , In violation of Mutawakkil’s 8th Amendment Right( US Const.) ART.6 of WI-Const., Human Rights Treaties and Conventions/Covenants Against Torture and Other Cruel , Inhuman and Degrading Treatment / and punishment ( UN )-CAT, CERD, ICCPR,  UDHR,  IHCHR) (See Human Rights (HR’S) Site sheet Appendix (B) ( fronts & Back of page)When Judge Alan White, NOT ONLY ALLOWED the respondents to engage in Torturous Inhuman, degrading /cruel treatment and punishment but ISSUED an order, helping and allowing them to further engage in torturous, cruel and degrading activity over the protective conduct and Rights of Mutawwakil DK#27-30 & 34-35; appendix 21-25& 28-35
4)Judge Alan J White ABUSED ITS DISCRETION when he JOINED IN COLLUSION with the other respondents when he deprived Mutawakkil EQUAL TREATMENT and EQUAL ACCESS to the court , and Deprived Mutawakkil DUE PROCESS in granting the FORCE FEED (FFPO) PETITION ORDER before allowing him to be heard as PRE-DEPRIVATION Remedy, then after the petition was order, as POST-DEPRIVATION REMEDY refusing to address Mutawakkil filings to court  (DK #27-30 & 24-38) Appendix 21-25&-28-35 In TORTURUS FORCE FEEDING proceedings in Colum, Cty. Cir. Crt Id. Case 16CV201 And Violation of Mutawwakkil’s Human Rights UDHRS Art. (6) (7) and (12) and CERD (6) And ICCPR (2)(3)(4)(5) (7) (10)-sub-(13), (14),(17), (19)(21)(22); U.N, Mandela Rules:43 (1) (A) (b)and (e).IHCHR Principle XXII ( appendix:2-4,91)
5. Judge Alan J White ABUSED ITS JUDICIAL DISCRETION when he joined in Collusion, with the other respondents by failing to issue the restraining order filed by Mutawwakil to STOP the BULLYING INTIMIDATIONS, THREATS, TORTURE being issued by the other respondent ,using the force feed order/authority granted by Judge Alan White Without restraint or holding a Hearing , to set appropriate standards and limitations that Due Process affords subjects of force feeding orders and IHL’s ( international Humanitarian Laws). Providing essentially carte Blanche Authority for Torturous Activity. In violation of Mutawakkil’s Human Rights. (U.N. CAT Art.(2) (16), ICCPR Art.(5) and IHCHR Principle XXII(22); Mandela Rule 43(1) (A)(b) & (e) DK# 24 Appendix 27-36 & 911.
6)Judge Allen J White ABUSED ITS JUDICIAL DISCRETION when he JOINED IN COLLUSION to deprive Mutawakkil his HUMAN RIGHTS, state and Federal Rights to EQUAL TREATMENT & EQUAL ACCESS to the court by refusing to,  ADDRESS  SANCTION Motion brought against colluding respondents for violating Mutawakkil’s Due Process. UDHR Art 6, 7, & 12: ICERD art: 6; ICCPR, ART ;(2) (3)(4)(5)(7), (10-sub-(3)(14)(17)(19) (21)(22); DK#8-10, 19,Mot, resp., P.4 para. 7; Appendix (21-26, 57)
(7) Judge Alan J White ABUSED ITS JUDICIAL DISCRETION when he JOINED IN COLLUSION with other respondents in their malicious infliction of torture by nasal force feeding (NFF) when Judge White REFUSED to hold a hearing to address alternative means of feeding. For example, Mutawakkil agreed to consume nutrient boost by mouth but CCI respondents refused the alternative means , thus, demanding he eat regular meals or be torturously and violently force fed by nasal tubing. In violation of Mutawakkil’s HUMAN & CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS of FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION, SPEECH, PETITION. And Refuse unwarranted, uneeded medical practice DK #19  P.4 para. 8 and DK# 24 p.5 para 16-17, & 23-26; (appendix 21-26 ; (appendix 21-26 &28-36)
8)Judge Allen J. White ABUSED ITS DISCRETION when he JOINED IN COLLUSION with the other respondents to violate Mutawwakil’s right to ACCESS the court, EQUAL TREATMENT and EQUAL ACCESS by REFUSING to acknowledging Mutawakkil’s filings to the Colum , Cty. Cir. Crt. DK# ( 19 & 24) and COLLUDING TO MAKE Mutawakkil  believe in Difference to CCI, that CCI destroyed, held or never mailed the legal papers out creating an HOPELESS TORTURE STATE OF MIND and DISCOURAGING ,BY EFFECT ,Mutawakkil  rights to EXPRESSION,SPEECH, PETITION, RELIGION IN FASTING AND NO-FOOD DISSENT!
Wherefore, courts are required to acknowledge a pro se litigators filings that are Properly filed. The court further ABUSED ITS DISCRETION and COLLUDED where, Mutawakkil write two inquiries to the court about the motion in response to FFO and Restraint order (DK#19 and 24) as to whether they were received by the court and will be addressed.(DK#1, 4, & 5& 6) (Appendix 52, 53-55). The court REFUSED to even address them as well, completely Blacking Mutawakkil out and brashly colluding with the other respondents. Violating Mutawakkil’s Human Rights, UDHR ART :6-7 &12.ICERD Art.  6; ICCPR ART:2-5,7,10(3), 14, 17,19,21-22;U.S. Const.1st amend.WIS .CONST. ART. ` Sect. 1,3-5,9,11,18,21(2).
(9) Judge Alan J White ABUSED  IT’S DISCRETION when he JOINED IN COLLUSION with the other respondents to deprive Mutawakkil  DUE PROCESS , EQUAL ACCESS and Rights to PETITION & REDRESS REMEDY OF WRONG, When it accepted and ordered termination of respondents petition, aiding/colluding with the petitioners-now respondents in circumventing Mutawakkils litigations efforts which they maliciously frustrated, delayed, Blocked and denied or thwarted ALL in the game of preventing access to court and a due process right for Mutawakkil’s motions to be heard , addressed and decided per Constitution and International Law.
(A) Counsel Thomas, who provided the legal deprivation guidance and aware of Mutawakkil ‘s filings to the court ,abused her judicial responsibility, as officer of the court, to speak out, object and not partake in the Judicial Abuse and unethical difference being shown or obstruction, blockage, thwarting of Mutawakkil’s access to court by CCI respondents.
B) instead, Counsel Thomas filed the PREPARED order for TERMINATION, sent it to the court and told the court  misleading information and informed the Court Mutawakkil WAS NOT receiving Due process Notice of the termination circumvention motion(DK#10), Appendix 57) In further due process post-deprivation and telling court a hearing is Not Necessary, fully aware Mutawakkil told CCI in his filings and inquiries to court, was trying to get a hearing and was only stopping the fast/no food dissent until the hearing was held. Id. DK#1-6,& 12-15(Correspondence between Counsel Thomas &the court, Never provided to Mutawakkil DK#15).Violating Mutawakkil’s Human Rights UDHR:6-7, 12, ICCPR: 2-5,7,10(3), 14, 17, 21-22; US Const, 1st, 5th, 14th Amend.; Wis-const Art .1, sections :1, 3-to 5, 7, 11, 21 (2).
STATEMENT OF FACTS
10) Petitioner of this writ Ras Atum-Ra Uhuru Mutawakkil  (a.k.a. Green Jr) has been IMPRISONED in the state of Wisconsin (WI OR WIS) since 1991. Over twenty-six Years. Appendix 1-6.
11) Mutawakkil has been in Solitary confinement/AC (S.C./AC) for 18 years, ad – continuum going on19 years (appendix1-6)CONCURRENTLY. Which consist of segregation status of AC and Allege non-punitive status and DS, disciplinary Segregation/ Separation which is a punitive status and limited to 360 days at a time. However, the two are essentially so identical that the differences are more nominal. (DK#18 Attachment1), Notice of Human Rights Violations to Gov. Walker by Human/Prisoners Rights group Cir. Jan.4th, 2016 Appendix 1-6, and Appendix A Source of S. C. Literature, Experts, UN Reports. etc  also see
US Supreme Court Justice Kennedy on the torturous effects of S.C. Appendix 110-119.[note: after each DS-time ended, Mutawakkil would be placed right into AC. Never released to G.P.]
12) Circa January 4th 2016 to March 6th 2016 Human/Prisoners Rights group notified Gov Scott Walker  office of the Human Rights Violations by WI –DOC in its protracted/prolonged usage/abuse of S.C./A.C. particularly of Mutawakkil’s 18 years in solitary confinement(S.C./A.C..Id. Appendix 1-6) Stating that it violated the UN CAT 7,  IHCHR Principle 22 (XXII)and Mandela Rule 43 A(b) & (e) ( appendix 2-4 and 91 Prohibition Against Torture and other Cruel , Inhuman, and Degrading Treatment or Punishment. Id. para.71, 95, 108-128 of MEMORANDUM of LAW INFRA)
13) After the gov’s Office Refused to stop the torturous solitary Confinement of Mutawakkil (see appendix 6-A) Human Rights groups and other concerned citizens started a “STOP THE TORTURE CAMPAIGN” and an online petitions to governor Walker (see DK#17 (filed 7 1 16) attachment 2, to mot. by Mutawaikkil to Colum Cty Cir. Crt. Appendix 1-10.
14) Mutawakkil made the final act and ONLY other available remedy, to go on a “NO-FOOD / NO –WATER DISSENT to object to and shine public light on the ABUSIVE - nearly two decades he’s been in torturous, cruel , inhuman and degrading Treatment/Punishment-Solitary/Administrative Confinement (S.C./AC), in violation of U.N. HRS CAT Art.1-3(2)4,13,16 NDHRS, Art.1-10,12,18 to 21(2),27-29 and, Mandela Rules of U.N.:1-3,5,37-D-39,43,44-45,48, (A)(B),54(B),56-57(3),65-66,71 (1)(2)and IHCHRS Principles XXII, and WIS, Const, Art,1, Sec.6; and U.S.Const.  8th Amendment.
(A)The Contaminated and Rusty water he was compelled to drink in Waupun HSU/Re-named RHU building
(B) PLASTIC  PEELING and Basing/contaminating the food from old ragged food trays ( DK#22-23 Appendix 6-B & 6-C, 37-44(DK#22-23 Attachment 4-6 )
15) In Response to this PROTECTED and NON- VIOLENT/NON-DISRUPTIVE, HUMAN RIGHTS CONSTITUTIONAL ACTIVITY of EXPRESSION / SPEECH , PETITION, ASSOCIATION,  Gov. Walker, DOC Secretary, WCI (Waupun Prison) and CCI (Colum. Corr. Inst) Colluded in RETALIATORY fashion to SUPPRESS and SQUASH Mutawakkil’s EXPRESSION , & SPEECH, PETITIONING/ ASSOCIATION, by transferring him to CCI as S.C./AC transfer-perfected on May 27th 2016, A day before the DYING TO LIVE: NO FOOD  FAST/DISSENT was to begin.(Appendix 6: B & C, 37-44, DK #22-33.
16) On June 22nd 2016, Respondents had DOC-Counsel Gloria Thomas file a SECRET petition Electronically for a INVOLUNTARY Force feeding and Hydration order to the Columbia Cty. Crt. Court Judge Alan J White, as the 2nd Retaliatory  measure to SUPPRESS and SQUASH  Mutawakkil Human/Constitutional Rights to EXPRESSION/ SPEECH/ PETITION/ ASSOCIATION. In the matter of Norman C. Green Jr #228971 16 CV 201 Providing no-predeprivation/due process Notice to Mutawakkil (see Appendix 11-13)(DK#28 &30-31).
17) Counsel G.J. Thomas told the Colum. Cty. Cir. Court her interest in petitioning for the F.F.O. was as a public servant and attorney for respondents Dittman ( and those who ordered/directed from behind the scene r.e., Gov. Walker, DOC-Secrt. Litscher) (to suppress and squash the matter) See appendix 6-B &C and 12, DK #30.
18) RELYING soley on a medical report prepared by DOC physician, DR Salem U Syed, counsel G.J. Thomas told the Colum Cty. Cir. Crt. Alan White, that Mutawakkil (Green) was malnourished and moderately dehydrated (id. Appendix 14-16, DK #29)
19) Counsel G.J. Thomas requested that the Colum. Cty. Crt. Judge Alan White make 1) “appropriate findings” and 2) Issue Authority to CCI, et. Al. to  OVER-RIDE   Mutawakkil’s Human /Constitutional Right and Dignity to force feed him and that, that authority last long enough so that the Colum. Cty. Cir. Crt. can “Conduct a hearing on the petition.” in which NO DATE for a hearing was ever proposed nor discussed nor eventually set. (DK #5. 6 and 8-10, 27-31)Appendix 11-18).
20) In the only relied upon evidence by Dr. Syed, the petition physician report stated: “patient fully comprehend his intentions and decision, He got some issues with (the) Administration” i.d. ( Dr Syed rept.p.3, PARA. 15, DK#29 ( Appendix 14-16.)
21) Dr Syed report also showed the Mutawakkil was drinking water to break his Ramadhan Fast.(Dr Syed rept.p.4, PARA. 1, DK#28)(Appendix 14-16)
22) Without conducting a hearing or notice to Mutawakkil.(Green) nor an opportunity to be heard ,(the petitioners filing and gave notice would have partially suffice, allowing a window of 24 to 48 hour notice) the Colum. Cty. Crt. Granted the petition for Involuntary force Feeding and Hydration stressing in particular that: “ any..person acting under ( a Licensed Physician’s)Direction and control may Involuntarily evaluate, treat, include feeding & hydrate, which in their medical judgment (deign) necessary..”to (Green) Mutawakkil regardless of his consent. DK#27 (Appendix 17-18 )
23)And “the order ( Authority)is effective for long as reasonably necessary to allow the court to conduct a hearing on Petition. (see DK #27 appendix 18 ,) No Hearing was ever scheduled.
24) The Colum. Cty. Cir. Crt. Also ordered that the petitioners- Now –Respondents, serve notice ( of ALL documents) upon Mutawakkil (Green) of the petition and determination and (the court’s) order.(Which also included the physician’s report) DK#27 ( appendix 18).
25) The petitioners of the force feed order  DID NOT follow the court’s order to serve Mutawakkil (Green) with the petition and physician’s report. i.d. ( also DK#19 Appendix 21-16) They waited a day after they executed the FORCE FFEDING VIOLENCE) Id.
26) Instead Nurse De Young came to Mutawwakil’s door and FLASHED what she “claimed was a Force Feeding order” ( only). When Mutawakkil asked to read  (and for a copy of it) the allege order . DeYoung walked away and called Whiteshirt (a lieutenant or captain), LYING, saying Mutawakkil had refused to come out, cooperate, thus creating the stage for a violent assault. (DK #19 Appendix 21-26)
27) After being ordered by the White Shirt, Capt. Bougery and Sgt.Royce, to provide Mutawakkil with a copy of the court’s order (only ), Nurse De Young retaliated and used the force feed order to squash the No –food fast and  Dissent, as she was directed to do by Warden and DOC officials in Madison. i.e. Governor Walker, Secretary Litscher et al. id.DK#17, 21-24. Appendix 7-10, &37-38, 41-42, 44-48, 44-46, 48-51.
28) Mutawakkil was hand cuffed behind the back and paraded into the dayroom so everyone could view this punishment put on display to discourage, intimidate and humiliate Mutawakkil. DK#19 & 24, appendix 19-20 &28-.36.
29) to MALICIOUSLY Inflict pain and Torture. Nurse De Young placed the nasal tube up the Right nostril. Upon BREAKING THE NASAL SEAL, DeYoung maliciously yanked it out claiming she needed to go to, and through the left nostril. To inflict additional pain and suffering (torture) was the intention.DK #24 appendix 28-30.
All requests to record these proceedings were intentionally ignored to conceal this torture and abuse.
30) ,Thereupon, sticking the nasal tube up the Left nostril without pre-lubrication, DeYoung FORCED the tube up the left nostril with SO MUCH FORCE that an air bubble created a popping sound in Mutawakkil’s head when the left nasal seal burst immediately creating a feeling as if an explosive device went off in Mutawwakil’s head. i.d. (Appendix at 22,23-30 DK at 19 mot page 2, PARA p.4; para (8) , and see:DK#24, R.O.mot.p.2-3, para..3-4,Appenidx 29, 30
31) DeYoung did not provide Mutawakkil with a cup of water to drink “to close the valves that keep food and liquid from going into the lungs or causing him to choke.” DeYoung withheld this technique maliciously so that the experience would be all that more painful so to discourage the SPEECH AND EXPRESSION involved. (Appendix 29-30)(DKH#24)In violation of U.N.CAT ART 1,2 &7; Principle XXII of IHCHR.US Const.8th Amend, WI-const. Art.1, sec 6
32) After putting all the liquids into the tube, DeYoung then again yanked the feeding tube out Mutawakkil’s nostril which was bleeding. Left Mutawakkil sitting in the chair with his hands still cuffed behind his back bleeding. In which only one staff would provide a towel to allow him to clean his nose Id.
33) Mutawakkil requested pain meds and DeYoung refused to provide some. She knew beforehand it would be painful and maliciously withheld ‘aspirin’ or ‘Tylenol.’And ALL other staff told  Mutawakkil to talk to DeYoung who was intentionally not providing any.(DK 24,p.2.PARA.5)appendix 29.
34) On June 23rd 2016, Mutawakkil filed a motion to Columbia Cty Court judge Alan White captioned as “Respondent’s Motion” Dk#19-20 and 21-26 (appendix: 19-26)
35) In the cover letter accompanying the motion, Mutawakkil stressed it was 1) a motion in response to the order issued June 22nd and the force feeding that occurred. 2) That it was ( the motion)being filed due to the “imminent threat of(further) violent force feeding.” Etc (DK. At 19-20 Appendix at 19-20).
36) In his motion to the Columbia Cty Court Mutawakkil stressed TEN things that can be summarized as: (Appendix 21-26)(DK#24)
(1) Movement to counter sue were the petitioners, those named and those not named, i.e. Jon Litscher and Gov. Walker, whom Counsel Thomas and CCI Warden-working in concert with and upon their directives.(see attachments one and two, DK17-18 Appendix 1-10 notice to Gov. Walker)(see 6-A lawyer from Walker office)
(2) movement to order Columbia Cty Cir Court petitioners-now respondents to allow Mutawakkil access to law library to litigate this action. i.d.appendix 21-22 Mot. para. 1-2)page 2(DK 19).
(3) Movement to order Mutawakkil gain access to legal materials necessary to prosecute this action . (id.mot. p 2,PARA3,dk19)Appendix 22.
(4) Movement to stop the violent use of bloody and painful nose feeding by DeYoung.(DK at 19, mot p.2, para 4, appendix 22.)
(5) Movement that force feeding comply with Mutawakkil Ramadhan/spiritual(fasting protocols(i.d. Paragraph five. )
(6) Movement for an order SETTING A HEARING DATE because Mutawakkil’s legal posture was that the force feed petition was being sought in bad faith and to promote and continue his illegal and torturous solitary confinement. i.d. DK19 Mot.p3 para (6) appendix 23) and violation of Mutawakkil’s human and state and federal constitutional rights.
(7) Movement for SANCTIONs against Columbia County cty cir. Court petitioners violating Mutawakkil’s due process Rights and not serving the petition and physician report as ordered to by the court. (i.d.DK # 19 Mot.p.4 para 7, appendix 24-25
(8) Movement for an order that force feeding petitioners use an alternative means/method other than painful nasal tube (which is used maliciously & intentionally to inflict pain,)Like a throat tube (i.d.DK 19mot p4.5 PARA 8, appendix.at 24-25)
(9)Movement enjoining the force feeding petitioners from any further and future retaliation against Mutawakkil (PARA 5,P5.mot, DK 19 appendix 25.
(10) an order for the Clerk of Courts to modify and correct the caption of the action to reflect both Mutawakkil’s names. I.D.(DK19 mot.p.5 ,para 10,appendix 25.
37)Respondents at CCI maliciously frustrated  the mailing of Mutwakkil’s motion, held it so that it was allegedly not received by the courts till July 1,2016.(see DK 19 and 20)
38)On June 27th 2016 after a visit, DeYoung and Anderson sought to intimidate and discourage Mutawakkil from exercising his rights to speech and expression, by threatening violent force feeding and to illegally punish him for said expression using the force feed order as instrument of this terror. (DK at 21-25, R.O. motP3-6 para 8-21 appendix 30-
39)Despite having eaten regular meals for about five to six days straight, after Mutawakkil declined two meals, DeYoung and Anderson wanted to violently force feed him as a means of punishment, stating she has the “power to force feed any time she wants and that any time Mutawakkil does not eat two meals consecutively she will force feed him even if there is not an imminent danger.”id. DK24,p.3-5,para.9-17. R.O.mot. appendix 30-32
40)Mutawakkil told DeYoung and Anderson that he would consume the nutrient boost mix and water that they plan to use in the tube. DeYoung told Mutawakkil that either he eat regular meals when scheduled or suffer the consequences of being “force fed through the nasal tube.”Mutawakkil requested to see a supervisor stating De Young and Anderson was trying to punish him and retaliate against him for fasting and to discourage the fast that have created a lot of public attention-and prison reform.( see attachments2,and4 to 7; DK17,23-25, appendix at 31,37-51,para 14 RO mot DK 24)
41) Which would have required staff violently restraining Mutawakkil in a chair, then violently force feeding, then the violent use of a tube in the private area to get urine even though Mutawakkil was not refusing to supply it.
42) Mutawakkil told De Young and Anderson that he still had a meal that has not been served yet. They both stated it does not matter because two meals had already been missed. (i.d. p.5-6,Para 16-20 R.O. mot.DK 24 appendix 32-33)
43) The Actions of DeYoung and Anderson were done to inflict pain and suffering based on the knowledge they had from mail censors of the motion Mutawakkil had filed to court and pressure from Madison  Who were receiving pressure from citizen protesting at the capitol and DOC H.Q.  (i.d. attachments 4-7 appendix 33-34,37 -51;DK 21-24,RO mot p6-7,para 21-23.)
44) Mutawakkil has requested at ALL times, that these exchanges be recorded.  DeYoung et al including C.O.s escorting Mutawakkil refuse to record. I.d.p 6,para. 19,DK 21, appendix 33
45)The Columbia Cty Cir. Court order did not authorize force feeding as an instrument for punishing and discouraging Mutawwakil from protesting his conditions of confinement. The use of the order, authority for those means were illegal and outside the scope of authority. The Columbia Cty Cir.Court was obligated to correct and restrain its use. (Lilly Restraint)
46) The grant of force feeding was only to preserve life.( i.d.DK 37-38 appendix 17-18.)
47) Mutawakkil stressed to the Columbia Cty Cir Crt in the restraining order (Ro.), that CCI and DOC were using force feed order to retaliate for media publicity quieting and to discourage the fast dissent against solitary confinement which merited a hearing to discuss legalities. I.D. DK 24, p .b-7 para.21-23 filed 6-30-26, appendix 33-34.
48) Mutawakkil requested asked icp in the r.o.mot. DK 24 p 7-8, para 24-26) for the following
      1) An immediate hearing to be held on the motions filed to the court.
      2) Restraining order enjoining the petitions-now respondents from
                  (A) retaliation
                   (b)torture and illegal punishment
                   (c) prohibit intimidation/threats being used to discourage him from fasting/dissenting in protest against solitary confinement conditions.
                   (d)That if Mutawakkil consume the nutrient mixture, that the prison cannot force feed as a method of punishment.
 
49)In collusion with the petitioner , respondents, the Columbia Cty cir crt. Judge Alan White refused to Acknowledge and address Mutawakkil’s motion.
50)On July 8th 2016 Mutawakkil wrote the Columbia Cty Cir Court  asking the court for acknowledgement and confirmation that the motions filed to court (DK19 &24) have been received and will be reviewed.DK#6 Appendix 52.
51)The Columbia Cty Cir Court refused to respond or even acknowledge Mutawakkil’s inquiries on July 8th  in collusion with the petitioners-now respondents abusing its discretion(secret moves at DK#14-15)for undisclosed communications.
52) Circa July 2016 Roxanne Engstrom sent an exparte letter to the court on behalf of Mutawakkil, do to facts of him not hearing from the court, he thought the prison was destroying all his legal mail and complained to supporters that the court was not receiving his mail (DK #4)
53) On July 13th 2016, Mutawakkil once again wrote a letter to the Columbia Cty. cir. Crt. Re: the electronic filing notice and status on the motions filed to the court.DK#5 (Appendix 54)
54) Once again, in collusion with the petitioners-now respondents, the Columbia cty cit crt/Judge Alan White abused its discretion by refusing to acknowledge and address the inquiry and the motions (DK4,5, 6 and 19 &24)
55 ) It shall be noted: Mutawakkil only suspended his fast/food dissent until the court hearing on his motions & R.O. request.(DK#19 &24)were heard.
56) ON July 12th 2016, in a move to permanently circumvent and deprive Mutawakkil his due process and chance to establish force feeding protacel. The DOC/CCI by counsel Thomas electronically filed for termination of the force feeding order, fully aware that Mutawakkil was only eating regular trays until the court had addressed the motions filed seeking protection from illegal and abusive use of the order. DK#8-10 Appendix 57-58.
57) On July 12th,the Columbia Cir. Court once again joined in collusion with the petitioners-now respondents to deprive Mutawakkil due process and a chance to be heard. When it granted the circumvention termination order filed by DOC/CCI to stop him establishment of protections protocol for future fasting/no food dissent force feeding procedures.i.d.DK #7 appendix 51-57.
Relief Sought
58) An injunction prohibiting DOC/CCI or any other prison from force feeding Mutawakkil until this court and Columbia Cty Cir Court address Mutawakkil’s motions.
59) Find that the Columbia Court abused its discretion by not holding a fact finding hearing and for refusing to acknowledge and address all of Mutawakkil’s filings and acting in collusion with DOC/CCI officials.
60) That any future encounters regarding force feeding Mutawakkil be diligently recorded and saved and made available to the court and public.
61) Direct that Columbia cty. Cir. crt . hold a hearing immediately and to address the facts and merits of Mutawakkil’s motions.
62) expound on the legalities of Mutawakkil’s rights of free speech and expression, finding that the force feed orders be specific in their text and not used as instrument to punish and discourage first amendment/human Rights protected expressions and that International Humanitarian Law Rule 90 (IHL)  is applicable to Mutawakkil and other international instruments , such as: UDHR; UNCAT, CCPR.; U.N.Mandela Rules;  ICERO (See appendix B and C).
Reason Why Writ Should Be Issued
 63). Mutawakkil NEVER ENDED HIS FAST/ NO FOOD DISSENT, He only suspended it until the court held its hearing. So the termination order was tactical manipulation of the court . The issues stressed and raised in Mutawakkil’s motions are still matters waiting and needing to be addressed. And never were addressed because no hearing was ever scheduled nor properly held or intended to be held. DK#27 appendix 17-18) (See also Appendix A)
64). At the time of the mailing and filing of this supervisory writ , Mutawakkil is fasting and exposed to the same kind of threat, violence, abuse and mental and physical intimidation sited in this writ from CCI/DOC respondents and agents acting in concert or at their direction or behest.
Memorandum of Law and Other Authorities [And Brief history for context]
65). It is an undisputed fact, supervisor petitioner Mutawakkil (Green hereafter Mutawakkil ) , has been in solitary confinement/administrative Confinement (S.C./AC) in Wisconsin DOC for over 18 years ad continuum, concurrently ( appendix 1-6)
66.) It is undisputed fact that the most often stated reason for this, almost two decade confinement, is Mutawakkil’s spiritual disposition IN DIVUS VIDERE LATUS MULTUS (cf :Mutawakkil –vs-Huibregtse et.al. 735 F.3d 524, at 525-26 (7thCir. 2013), U.S. Ap. Lexis 17493; and Green-vs- Litscher, 691 N.W. 26 926, 278 Wis 2d 811(Wis App.2004)(see paras 9,13,and 15context)See also: Green-vs Berge,2009 Wis. App. 77(retaliation over Green-vs- Litscher case)DK# 19mot.p.2-3 para 5;appendix 22-23; “If you build it, they will come: the threat of over classification in Wisconsin’s Supermax Prison” 2001 Wis.L.Rev.207, 245 (2001).
67).Fifteen and a half years was in the Supermax prison in Wisconsin now guised as WSPF which for the first 12 years was perhaps the most oppressive prison in the nation ( CF: Gillis-vs-Litscher 468 F.3d 488,18489(7h Cir 2006)(7th circuit noting conditions described at WI Supermax sounded like a Soviet gulag of the 1930’s); Maddox-vs-Berge, 473 F Supp.2d.888 (W.D.Wis.2007); Scarver-vs-Litscher, 371 F. supp.2d 986(W.D.Wis.2005);Jones-El-vs-Berge 164 F.Supp.2d 1096(W.D. Wis.2001) Appendix 59-64.
68) It’s deprivations cruel and unusual .CF: Jones-El-vs- Berge, 164Supp.2d 1096,At.1117-1118/ Appendix 59-64
69). Mutawakkil ‘s  recent WCI  and current CCI solitary confinement continuum is an extension of the Supermax torture (see :notice to Governor Walker..Re Human Rights Violations ( appendix 1-6)& 6-A
70) The current force feeding order ( FFO)at bar, a manifestation of Mutawakkil’s no food protest and fast of that S.C./AC. is also an extension of Supermax continuum of torture. (DK#19, mot. P.3-4, Para.6; Appendix 23-24 & 59-60) See Gillis at 489
 
71) HUMAN RIGHTS OF MUTAWAKKIL THAT TRIGGERED WCI/CCI/DOC RETALIATORY ACTIONS AND FIRST AMENDMENT SUPPRESSIONS,  DUE PROCESS DEPRIVATION IN FORCE FEEDING PETITION. (F.F.P )
72) The United States Supreme Court (S.Ct or US.S.Ct.) stated that our constitution is constantly evolving and the standard bearer of what constitutes torture (cruel and unusual treatment) is based on, in great respect, the contemporary standards of decency ( Estelle- vs-Gamble, 429 U.S.97 at 102-104(1976)
73) And the light of contemporary knowledge, Robinson -vs – California. 370 U.S. 660(1962)”
74)  S.C., itself is not unconstitutional. But 18 plus years for one’s spiritual disposition turns on the principles of 8th amendment protection. Id. Robinson, 370 U.S.660 and Wilkinson- vs-Austin 545 U.S.209, at 223-224(2005). It is the length that becomes cruel and unusual. Id.370 U.S.660,(2962),CF.Simmon-vs-Russell,352F.Supp.572,577 (M.D.P.A.1972)
75) The evolving standard of our modern and “enlightened” ( Robinson 570 U.S.660) society states that the current “evolving standard of decency” call 18 years of S.C. torture and cruel and unusual degrading and mental abuse.CF:TROP-vs-Dulles356 U.S.86, At. 100-101(1958).Mandela Rule 1,2,3 ,41 (1)(A)(b)&(e) CAT Article 1,6,7.And ICCPR Article7,8,10 appendix 82,89,91.
76) In Roper –vs- Simmons, 543 U.S. 551(2005) the U.S. S.Ct.  recognized that our evolving standards of decency is a mark of our progress of a maturing society. comes from treaties and relations with other standards across the world i.d. ( opinions of the world community…provides (perspective) to our conclusions id.)
77) In Graham- vs -Florida the S Crt states “the overwhelming weight of international opinion provides the court with modern standards. 560 U.S.-at.23 (2010)
78) And that “ the court has treated the laws and practices of other nations and international agreements as relevant to 8th amendment evolving standards; because of the judgment of the world’s nations that a particular—practice is inconsistent with basic principles of decency.(Are Persuasive Standards that comply the Principle of Jus Cogens)
79) “because the standards of what constitutes cruel and unusual, based on the prospective doctrine in 1910.the court expected the standards to evolve as social conditions did” Weems-vs- United States 217 U.S.349at 378 (1910). Holly Boyer,comment, Home Sweet Hell: analysis of 8th amendment’s cruel and unusual punishment clause as applied to Supermax prisons” 32SW U.L.Rev.317, at 319(2003)
80) That the scope of the standard is not static TROP,356 U.S., at 101(2003)
81)The court recognize mental anguish of ever increasing (and )distress, was equivalent ,if not worse than, torture i.d102
82) It has been an American standard of practice to look to the world  community for contemporary principals of decency and defining what is decent. CF.Justice Jay’s proclamation in Chisolm- vs- Georgia.”the United States by taking a place among the nations of the earth (have become) amenable to the laws of nations! 2U.S.419at 474(1793).Ware-vs-Hylton 3 U.s.199at 281(1796)( explaining that, in declaring independence, the US was bound by the law of nations)
83) see: also, filartiga-vs-Pena-Irala,630 F 22 876, at 877-78(2nd cirt 1980)explaining that upon ratification of the constitution the thirteen former colonies were fused into one nation and were bound to observe and to conform and to construe  international law. Also, see: Greer. Martin A.; Human Rights and Wrongs in Our Own Back Yard:13 Harv, Hum.Rts. J.71, 107 (2000).(quoting from restatement(third)of the foreign Relations Law of United States 702(1987).
Mutawakkil has a Human Right and Constitutional Right to Fast and No-Food Dissent Protest
84) What does these standards have to do with the FFO and abuse of discretion of the Columbia Cty Cir Crt. Judge Alan J White.? They establish that the fasting and no-food dissent the FFO suppressed and squashed was constitutionally and H.R. protected conduct both under Federal and state constitutions and International and human right principles and standards of human decency. That the DOC/CCI petitions to the Columbia  Cty Cit Ct. was in bad faith, retaliation and suppression ,and afterwards, used in bad faith for further cruel torture.
State constitutional Rights and Procedural Abuse
85) Under Wis. Const.(Wisconsin Constitution)Art ( article)1. Sec.21 “the rights of suitors”and sec 9 Remedy of Wrongs and Art.IV. Sec 27 Suits against State. Mutawakkil had a right to “access the court” once the petition to Colum. Cty. Cir. Ct. was filed by Petitioners-respondents; in regards to Mutawakkil’s counter-suit motion (DK#19)( appendix 21-25)
86) At the Time the DOC/Gov Walker, Secretary of DOC Jon Litscher had moved Mutawakkil to CCI, the 1st act of retaliation and suppression of Mutawakkil’s rights occurred. ( appendix 1-6 & 6-A; DK#17&18)
(A) Art1, Sec( 1)Equality of Rights(B)Art 1, Sec(3): FREE SPEECH; Sec (4) Right to ASSEMBLE and PETITION( The Gov’ Walker, Notice to Sue for Human Rights Violation over 18 years S.C./A.C.)—Jan.19th 2016)(appendix 1-6)(Dk#18) (and the no-food dissent/fast)( Appendix D)
(C)ART.I, Sec. 5: Verdict (A Decision)In Civil cases.(Right for the court to address the motions filed by Mutawakkil);Trial by jury in the counter-suit (motion and decision) DK# 17 &24, Appendix 2,21 & 28)and ART I, Sec (8) Due Process (Right to Notice and to be heard)
(D) ART. 1,Sec.(6):”Cruel Punishment”.(At the time of the force feed order(F.F.O.), Mutawakkil was protesting the 18 plus years continuum of torturous solitary confinement/administrative Confinement(S.C./A.C.) respectfully & peacefully.
(D-1) The F.F.O. was maliciously obtained to further that torture, by quieting his speech/expression to cut off the assembly of protestors outside the prison, who supported the no food dissent .who assembled at the DOC headquarters and Capitol Building, and the online petitions(DK#17, 21-24) Appendix 7-10, & 37-38, 41-42, 44-46 & 48-51)
(D2)When CCI got the F.F.O., they then used that FFO to inflict more/further cruel and unusual punishment and torture by the method of F.F. and the “intentional infliction by jamming  it Up Mutawakkil’s nose!-pulling it out and then jamming it up the other nasal cavity,(Right to left)(see:DK#24 , p.2 -3, para3-7 ,appendix 29-30
E) Art.1, sec.11: seizure of Mutawakkil’s body  r.e., Intrusive/invasive medical procedure to suppress speech and expression)
F).Art. 1.sec.18:Freedom of Worship and Liberty of Conscience: the Fulcrum of ALL these violations of Mutawakkil’s rights evolve around his spiritual tenet/disposition. (see:DK#18 and 19.p.1,2-3.para.5;5Appendix 1; 22,23(And at the time of F.F., he was fasting RAMADHAN, which the force feeders knew(see. DK#29. P.1  DR.Syed Report. (Appendix 14) Also CF: Mutawakkil –vs-Huibregtse et al. 735F.3d 524 , At.525-56 (7th Cir.2013)(Show how this is a continuum of spiritual persecution)Also see: Green-vs-Litscher-et all, 691 N.W. 2d 926, 278 Wis.2d 811 (Wis app. 2004); Green –vs- Berge, 2009 Wis.App.77 (retaliation). These cases show a pattern of DOC harassment of Mutawakkil(DK#19, mot,p.2-3 para.5; Appendix 22-23)(Mandela Rule 65-68& 104)Appendix 96-7,105-6.
87)ART.1,sec.18 of Wis.Const.offers: “The right of every person to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of his conscience shall never be infringed….Nor-Shall any control of or interference with, the rights of conscience be permitted.
88) This FREE CONSCIENCE clause provides greater protection, consistent in some respects with the Human Rights guaranteed by the Universal Declaration and Covenant Against Religious Persecution. See Infra para 95,104,107-108, 123) CF State-vs-Miller, 202 Wis 2d.56, at. 63, 549 NW.22, 235(1996); Peace Lutheran Church and ACAD-vs- Sussex, 2001 WI .App. 139, Para 14, 246, WI 22 502, 631 NW 2d, 229.
89) Art XIV. Sec.13 Common Laws: Mutawakkil’s right to self determination is explicit and implicitly executed in his right of food dissent against his torturers 18 plus years of solitary confinement/ Administrative confinement (S.C./A.C.) and spiritual disposition with Divus Videre Latus Multus (see Mutawakkil-vs-Huibriegtse et al 735 F.3d at525-26, (7th Cir.2013); Green-Vs-Litscher,691 N..W.2d 926 (Para 9,13,and15) Mandella Rules 55-65)Appendix 96.
 
  WHAT IS THE CONTEMPORARY STANDARD OF TORTURE
90) In 2006, the Committee on the Convention Against Torture and other Cruel , Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or punishment ( Here after just CAT or Committee Against Torture) reported that the US prisons (state and federal)were  not up to the human rights standards in the use of supermax prisons, SHU-Units and similar total lockdown solitary units. Prolong Isolation.( see Committee Against Torture, 36th sess.,1-19 may 2006, Conclusions and Recommendations of the Committee against Torture: United States of America ,Para 36, U.N. DOC. Cat/C/USA/Co/2 (July 25,2006).
91)This report called out the conditions in Wisconsin Supermax Prison, where Mutawakkil was from 1999 Dec 2nd, to May 3rd, 2013 in solitary confinement(S.C.) concurrently. (Also  Gillis at 489; Jones –El at117 + 118).
92) Article 1 of CAT defines torture as:”any act by which severe pain or suffering whether physical or mental is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purpose as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of  having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, When such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity.” Appendix 8, online petition to stop torture of Uhuru (Mutawwakil)
93)Article 2 of CAT: Requires that all party signatures “Shall take effective legislative, administrative , judicial or other measures to prevent acts of torture in any territory under its jurisdiction.”  ID.CF: appendixs 126-127.
94)CAT has been interpreted by U.N. Officials as affording special protections for vulnerable populations and to uphold principles for non-discrimination”. See: interim rept. of the special Rapporteur of Human Rights Council on Torture and Other Cruel , inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.(aug.2013) Para.67) Appendix 120-146)
The U.N. Special Rapporteur—Human Rights..on Torture against  cruel , inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
95) U.N. special Rapporteur of the Human Right Council on torture and other cruel , inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.(hereafter special Rapporteur H.R.) found that the prolonged solitary confinement( as practiced in the US and state of WI supermax prison) was in violation of article 1 of the International Covenant on civil and political rights.( ICCPR) and article 1 of CAT.(see appendix 59-64 (emphasis on 61&62 (p2-3))Juan Mendez, Sept 13,2011 letter to the USA on WI Supermax tortures, Cruel , inhuman etc interalia,* Special Rapporteur H.R. Appendix 120-146.
96)Special Rapporteur H.R. declared that states/nations that use solitary confinement for years or decades are in violation of Humans Rights and are committing torture.(see: anything in excess of 15 days ,is constituted as torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment punishment..) Interim rept. of the special Rappoteur of the Human Rights Council on Torture and other Cruel, inhuman or degrading Treatment or punishment ( Aug. 2011)(appendix 59-64, 127-8, 135-6, 138-9 and 140-142 and 145-46).
97) The Rapporteur also called on the International community to agree to such standards and to impose absolute prohibition on solitary confinement exceeding 15 consecutive days. Id. & Mandela Rule 43(1)(A)(b)and (e), Appendix 74-109 (emphasis is on Appendix’s 82, 89-91)
98)In which many states and president Obama embraced (see appendix 65-73) articles: Washington Post:”Obama: why we must rethink solitary confinement”. Jan 25, 2016; White House Fact Sheet Department of Justice Review of Solitary Confinement, Jan 25, 2016 (front and back of page)Obama Must do better on prison reform by Goldie Taylor. Daily Beast. Jan 26. 2016
99) In its 2014 concluding observations on the compliance of the US with the obligations previously pointed out to be in non-compliance with the International Covenant on Civil and Political rights(JCCPR) the UN Human Rights Committee made the following observations:“The committee is concerned about the continued practice of holding persons deprived of their liberty, including under certain circumstances, […] in prolonged solitary confinement […]” (articles 7,9,10,17 and 24)(See: Human Rights Comm. concluding observations on fourth periodic report of the United States of America, Para.20, UN. Doc. CCPR/C/USA/CO/4 (Apr. 23, 2014). Also CF: Appendix 121, 126-7, 128-9).
100) U.N. Special Rapporteur of the Human Rights Council on Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment has recommended that these rules should further prohibit the use of indefinite or prolong solitary confinement…” and mentioned the use of S.C. in state of Wis. as one state of concern, particularity supermax and SHU units. (See interim report of Special Rapporteur of Human Rights Council on the torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, para 61, U.N. Doc. A/68/275 (Aug. 8, 2013).  Appendix 59-64 & 91. Mandela Rules; R. 43 (1) (A) & (b)
101) Contemporary Standards of International Law are appropriate for these types of conditions
--as one court found. In Sterling vs. Cupp. 625 F2d 123, at. 131 N 21 (or. 1781). Holding that the International covenant on civil and political rights standards were guiding in deciding searches of prisoners by guards of the opposite sex and violated their rights under the 8th amendment based on the international standard guidance. Id.
 
102) In Atkins vs. Virginia, 536 U.S. 304 (2002) the U.S. Supreme Court struck down the death penalty for the intellectually disabled, nothing that the practice was “overwhelmingly disapproved” in the world community.
 
Customary Law
103) Both the Wis.constitution and federal constitution embrace customary principles of law.
 
(A)   Under article VI, sec. 2 of U.S. Const. treaties are part of the “Supreme Law” of the Land.
(B)   Common-Law, under Wis. Const. provides for both treaties and customary law. Art.XIV. Sec. 13 (Art. 1, Sec. 1)
 
104) U.S. and State of Wisconsin has agreed with the International Community, in principle, if not practice, that Customary Law prohibits practices such as, “.. torture, arbitrary detention, systematic racial discrimination, religious/spiritual persecution, harassment or deprivation to practice as one’s conscience dictates…. and violations of generally accepted Human Rights standards. Restatement (third) of foreign relations. Law, Sec. 702 (1987).
105) State of Wisconsin and U.S. government and courts all agree that torture violates customary International Law. (See: Justice Kennedy Articles. Appendix 110-119).
106) The United States is a party to several treaties that explain how prisoners should be treated. Which Wisconsin is bounded to, as a member state of U.S.A., under doctrine of “Jus Cogens” (UDHR; U.N.CAT; ICERD; IACERD;I ACHR; ICCPR)
107) The U.S.A. (Wis. included) has ratified  three Human Rights treaties that address the Rights of Citizens in prison: A) the Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment; B) the International Covenant on civil and political rights; C) the International Convention of the Elimination of all forms of Racial discrimination. (See Appendix 124, 125, 126)(And Appendix: B & C, International  Law site sheet)
Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR)
108-) UDHR holds that ALL human beings have the following inherent rights:
(A)Right to life, Liberty and security of person (fast/no food dissents against intrusion); The right to be free from torture, (18 years in solitary confinement for his spiritual disposition… the right to fair and public hearing(the right to be heard in force feeding proceedings)( Articles: 1-3 , 5-8, 10, 12,”18”-21(2),22,24,‘28’)
CF; In matter of Jerry Saenz: WI Dept.of Corr’s , petitioner- respondents-vs-Jerry G Saenz Respondent-Appellant,728N W.2d ,765,770,772,776,299 Wis.26 486,at 496,500,507(Jan 25,2007)
Citing: Cruzan-vs- Missouri Dept. of Health 497 U.S. 261, 110 S.Ct 2841(1990) and Wis. Const. Art 1,  sec.(1) ;Saenz  728 N.W 2d at 772;229 Wis 2d at 500 )
(B)Right to Freedom of Opinion, Expression and Peaceful Assembly and Association(Rights Mutawakkil was exercising in his fast no food dissent at time F.F.O. was used to suppress based on collusion)Wis. Const. ART.1 Sec (1) (3) (4), UDHR Art.19
(C)The Wis. Constitution under Article 1 Section (1 )and Article XIV. Section 13 Allow these declarations of human rights to be litigated. In their Universal Standards(C.F. Again  ART. VI, Sec 2 U.S. Constitution.)
“JUS COGENS
109) It’s important to note that the term torture, in regards to Mutawakkil, is not loosely used. In using this term, it’s important to consider the length of time of  Mutawakkil’s S.C./A.C.(appendix 1-6)
110) Under international law obligations, there is an absolute BAN on ‘indefinite’ or ‘indeterminate” periods of isolation (S.C./A.C.))see: Special Rapporteur on Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment Report of Juan Mendez, UN Doc. A/66/268 (aug 5, 2011) and see Mandela Rule43 (1)(A) (b) Appendix 91 and 142.
111) International Law establishes an absolute prohibition on torture as well as on cruel , inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment (CITDTP) that cannot be derogated. This prohibition is JUS COGENS, Meaning that it is an imperative norm of international law that binds all states (i.e. USA/WI) and admits no repeal or exception by another treaty or custom emerging later. Appendix 133
112) The prohibition likewise does not recognize any emergency or other circumstances that could warrant a suspension.  The United States(which includes WI)is bound in all its governmental functions to abide by this prohibition, as a matter of JUS COGENS, obligation of customary –International Law and treaty Law since the United States is a party to the U.N. Convention Against Torture,(CAT), An Instrument that codifies this and several other customary International Law Norms. Appendix 128 & 133. (Also  Appendix B & C)
113) the U.S. (which includes the state of Wisconsin)has been a party to this multilateral treaty since 1994, after signature by the executive Branch and ratification by the US Senate on April 18th,1988, and October 21st 1994 respectively (see United Nations Human Rights Treaty Body Reporting Status for the United states of America available at: tbinternet.ohchr.org/layouts/Treatybodyexternal/countries. ASPX!CountryCode=USA &Lang=EN)
114) Even the U.S. Supreme Court Spoke of duration of S.C./A.C. as being able to be torture>CF: Hutto-vs-finne 437 US 678, At 686-87,78 S Crt 2656,57Led 22 522 (1978) Also see:7th cir Meriwether-vs-Faulkner, 821 F. 22 408,at.416(7th Cir 1986)Duration of time…whether the totality of condition of confinement (admin.seg/A.C..)Constitute cruel and unusual punishment.
115)CF: Also Rhodes 543 U.S. 589 & Hope 536 U.S. 536 US at 737.  18 years of S.C./A.C  is “ repugnant to the conscience of mankind.”Hudson-vs- McMillian, 503U.S.1 (1992)
116) “Incarceration is not an open door for unconstitutional cruelty or neglect. Against that kind of penal condition, the constitution and federal Courts, it is to be hoped together remain as an available bastion.”Rhodes at 369.
 Organization of American States(OAS) and American Declaration on the Rights and Duties of Man
117) the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights of the Organization of American States(IACHR) is a treaty body of the American Convention on Human Rights and a principal organ established by the charter of the OAS(a regional organization of which the U.S.A.-(WI) is a member)
118) Is considered a highly authoritative  organ on the interpretation of both treaty and customary norms in Western Hemisphere and it has had occasion to deal with prison conditions often since its creation in 1959.
119) In a document called: “Principals and Best Practices on the Protection of Persons Deprived of Liberty (prisoners) in the Americas”, approved by the Commission during 131st regular period of sessions
120) the IACHR state in relevant part: “solitary confinement shall only be permitted as a disposition of last resort and for a strictly limited time, when it is evident that it is necessary to ensure legitimate interests relating to the institution’s internal security and protect the fundamental rights, such as, right to life and integrity of persons- deprived of liberty or the personnel. Appendix 130-131.
121) In all cases, the disposition of solitary confinement shall be authorized by the competent authority and shall be subject to judicial control ; SINCE PROLONGED, INAPPROPRIATE OR UNNECESSARY USE WOULD AMOUNT TO ACTS OF TORTURE OR CRUEL INHUMAN, OR DEGRADING TREATMENT OR PUNISHMENT” (OEA/ser.L/V/II.121),Doc.38, Mar. 13, 2008.Also Mandela Rules 23(1)(A)(b)(e) ;UDHR:ART; U.N. CAT.ART 70-72,29-81,87;ICCPR(1),(2),(7),(14); UDHR:ART. (5)IHCHR: Principle XXII. (see:http://antitorture.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Parecer-J-Mendez-ENG-1.pdf)
122) authoritative Pronouncements by international and regional bodies also consistently indicate that prolonged or indefinite isolation (S.C./A.C.) are strictly prohibited because they breach the international legal prohibition against torture and/or CIDTP( see: e.g. Maritza Urruti-vs-Guatemala judgment of November 27th, 2003, Inter-Am.ct.H.R., (ser.c) no.103(2003)(restating the findings of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights that “prolonged Isolation (S.C./A.C .)and deprivation of communication are in themselves cruel and inhuman treatment, Bamaca Velazquez-vs Guatemala(nov.2 5,2000);harmful to the psychological and moral integrity of the person and a violation of the right of any detainee in respect for his inherent dignity as a human being”) Human Rights Committee, General comment 20(noting that prolonged solitary confinement of the detainee or imprisoned person may amount to acts prohibited by Article 7 of the ICCPR).(Appendix 129---130)
123)The International Law prohibition on the prolonged application of S.C./A.C for”status”( r.e.Mutawakkil’s spiritual/political and cultural disposition in Divus Videre Latus Multus) is also recognized as torture. Also see: Robinson-vs-California 370U.S.660, (1962 ) supra. Para.66-67,
124) even regimes of ”relative isolation” (i.e. w/use of mitigating factors),have been unambiguously declared to be improper when imposed indefinitely. (i.e.Mutawakkil’s 18 plus years)(see:Babar Ahmad and others-vs-UK ( April 10th, 2012) European Court of Human Rights (Euro.ct. HR) (stating that while the court has never specified a period of time beyond which solitary confinement will attain the minimum  level of severity required by article3(prohibition against torture and ill-treatment) “solitary confinement, even in cases entailing relative isolation cannot be imposed indefinitely on a prisoner. ( appendix 135).
                                                             Opinio Juris
125) The UN Human Rights Committee (HRC) has made it clear that the US and State of Wis. Are OPINIO JURIS” meaning has a legal obligation to incorporate, embrace  and adopt International standards and customs of the nonce (appendix 140-142)
126) The U.N. HRC also has made it clear that the constitutionality of a sentence or measure in a domestic jurisdiction is not sufficient to secure its non-compliance with the international law. (Id.appendix 140-142)
127) Accordingly, in cases (like Mutawakkil) where CIDTP ( cruel inhuman, degrading treatment or punishment)contrary to article 7of the ICCPR has been committed, the defense of “permissibility of a sentence under domestic law or a domestic jurisdiction doctrine of “difference to prison officials “cannot be invoked to justify the prohibited treatment.(re: torturous 18 plus  years of Mutawakkil’s S.C./A.C )
128)And the state (U.S./Wis) in question is “opinio Juris”, obliged to abide by the relevant international legal/customary standards. (see: George Osbourne-vs- Jamaica, communication No 759/1997, U.N.Doc.CCPR/C/68/D/759/1997.(2000)(finding the imposition of corporeal punishment, which was constitutional under domestic law, contrary to ICCPR article 7)
129) Because the petitioners-respondents petitioned the Columbia County Circuit Court for a force feeding order (F.F.O) to further their torturous (S.C./A.C) activity, and to squash and quiet Mutawakkil’s constitutional activity, the issuance of that order was abuse of discretion and the failure of the court to allow Mutawakkil his due process and equal rights brings the Columbia County Circuit Court into the throes of collusion and further abuse of discretion and it is for those reasons this Writ should be honored.
So stated and Put forth this_____  day of October, 2016
 
Signature____________________________________________________________
Ras Atum-Ra Uhuru Mutawakkil
Po Box 900, #228971
Portage, WI 53901
(Mr Norman Green Jr)
 
Statement of Monospace
I, Ras Atum-Ra Uhuru Mutawakkil hereby declare this petition was formatted using a monspace format and does not exceed the 35 page allotment per statute 809.51(1)
Signaure______________________________________________________________