A significant milestone has been reached in the big picture of campaign action by Karen and Neil. They have submitted their case to the ECHR to challenge the UK governments failure to operationalise their obligation to examine and reconcile site-specific public-health risks. For the case summary please read our BLOG here.
Gofundme link to support Karen and Neils efforts on UK legal challenges
Mast Applications
The LPA case report made by South Downs Local Authority in their refusal of a retrospective application for an already built 18m mast in the Southdowns National Park cited amongst other points: “5) Unacceptable health and safety implications for the adjoining school”.
The FCC has 30 days to explain why it hasn’t complied with a 2021 court order requiring the agency to reveal how it determined that current radiofrequency radiation exposure limits adequately protect people and the environment. The ruling stems from a petition Children’s Health Defense filed earlier this year to obtain the information.
The recent win against Apple in the Italian Supreme Court is interesting. Apple will be forced to give very visible health warnings about RFR on phone packaging as well as user safety instructions and if they don’t will have to pay compensation.
A series of judicial reviews has exposed critical gaps in how local and central government regulate EMF exposure. On 26th November 2025 a new case “REULA7” was lodged. It is a 60pp submission proving incompatibility between domestic law and retained EU obligations. The legal lever being used is the duty to align UK law with the European Electronic Communications Code (EECC), which requires local authorities to reconcile health risks before approving new wireless infrastructure.
Under EECC Annex I(3)(b) and Article 45(h), public health must be treated as imperative, and risk reconciliation must occur before deciding whether to impose a health condition. Yet both local authorities and courts have systematically avoided this obligation. See BLOG here.
Gofundme link to support Karen and Neils efforts on UK legal challenges
•New portal for Mast planning application comments – ‘Esthers list’ live since August 2024
The much disputed mast application in Cheltenham has just been resolved. Despite various legal challenges not resulting in an overturning of the prior approval ‘granted’, the Telco applicant has decided not to erect the mast anyway. A strong local campaign against the mast which included a building within the exclusion zone resulted in a weight of public feeling achieving a retreat.
In July 2025, for the first time, a UK Council (Castle Point in Essex) recognised the potential health effects of masts to vulnerable persons and the importance of exclusion zones in its proposed Local Plan policies. This is a significant crack in the dam to build upon, one that was on the back of Steven Thomas’ High Court success in Cheltenham.
The Castle Point policy is on page 154/155 here. It is a ‘submission version’, and has the status to be referenced by case officers.
The position they are taking can be highlighted to other Councils in the UK when they undertake their public consultations on their own Local Plans (as they are legally required to do). Councils are sheep-like, so if they see that another Council has made this first step, it makes it much easier for them to do the same, or even go further.
Wireless, Non-Ionizing Radiation And Children’s Health At School. A presentation was made in 2025 by Dr. Erica Mallery Blythe to a secondary school near London which has decided to hardwire internet. A few other schools have also now been inspired by this engagement. After a concerted push in 2020-2021 it is good to see some interest emerging.
Speaking to educators, parents, and policymakers, Dr. Mallery-Blythe explains that while society has long accepted wireless technology as harmless, modern research tells a very different story.
The talk is well worth listening to as a general refresher on the main issues, key scientific evidence and ways to mitigate ones exposure.
Gillian Jamison: My personal experience of EMF-induced health damage. The details in the article were submitted as part of an enquiry by her MP (Rishi Sunak) to the Department of Health and Social Care in the UK.
Is EMF Cooking Your Mitochondria? Naomi Wolf. Dr. Martha Herbert and activist Camilla Rees warn about a new set of proposed bills that would place 5G telecom towers every 750 feet, overturning local limitations on siting these dangerous structures.
Are you an animal lover, or a lover of plants? In their new paper, author B. Blake Levitt and team point out how man-made radiation is harming our plants and animals and how international standards aren’t addressing the problem. They also point out ways the problem can be addressed.
In the words of our campaigner Neil McDougall, working closely with Karen Churchill on the lateset REULA7 submission, which follows their Objectors Rights ‘RRR’ case. Also see Legal Update Blog,
“Legal outcomes which define public rights aren’t a narrative, they are acts of fact. The US Environmental Health Service are protecting the August 2021 Colombia Court ruling that the FCC are obliged to re-assess its emission guidelines against extensive evidence of RF harms that it hadn’t taken into account, and still refuses to do so.
The European Electronic Communications Code (EECC), agreed whilst the UK was an EU Member State, declared that public health was imperative to the rollout of telecommunication services, and mechanisms were designed into the provisions of the EECC to achieve that imperative purpose.
Public rights to health protection and participation in decision making on the installation of mast and small cell systems in the US, the UK and across remaining EU Members States are at stake if regulators fail to enact such provisions, and deny their legal obligations.”
Both the Environmental Health Service and the ICBE-EMF have raised the alarm re wireless deregulation, without much impact:
