130926(ex 25)-mr g. h. schorel-hlavka o.w.b. to mr tony abbott re debts - etc

7/29/2019 130926(Ex 25)-Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to Mr Tony Abbott Re Debts - Etc

1/16

p1 (ex 25)26-9-2013

INSPECTOR-RIKATI about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD

A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0

PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI series by making a reservation, See also

Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

Mr Tony Abbott (ex25) 26-9-2013

[email protected]

Ref: 130926(ex25)-Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to Mr Tony Abbott Re debts, etc

Tony,

I was going to email this letter at about 9.15 pm on 25 September 2013 but as usual with

10 Vodafone I had to spend about 3 hours, until well after midnight to try to get on the internet.

While I tried an old laptop, which seemed to freeze with a mere 1 MB of memory, never the less

after a short time I noticed a claimed 146MB download, and this just from having been logged in

to my email but not being able to open anything. the old laptop doesnt allow screen prints.However, I had a spade of problems with # (VHA) and provided the TIO with extensive screen

15 prints evidence that 3 (VHA) was double charging, etc. Charging more then 28 hours in a 24

hour day! Also 3 staff were concocting claims of usage which I was able to disprove. I also

proved that the counter showed it simply would jump in usage without actual usage. As such I

view a gigantic rip off. The TIO having received my complaint wrote back they would

investigate when they had time. subsequently I received a letter that unless I provided my details

20 as name and address they would not act. Moment, it already had written back to me and proving

they already had my details!

Anyhow, in the end it came to nothing and Senator Conroy then Minister for Communication

was dealing with it to some extent but is now out. the evidence I provided with the TIO was

extensive and yet it did as if it didnt exist, ignoring also the concocted claims of 3 staff as if they25 never made them, this even so it was in writing . I view the TIO is simply so to say railroading

genuine complaints. Despite 3 admitting it would refund certain monies it never did.

I made clear to the TIO then I view they were without credibility and as if they were in the

pocket of 3. 3 now seized operation but as Vodafone is the owner then clearly it still owns the

monies to me.

30 .

A point was that 3 staff technician claimed that he had obtained records from Microsoft that I

had downloaded as an update from Microsoft 320 MB, whereas the computer record showed it

was a mere about 800KB, as such not even 1 MB. clearly 3 (VHA) is making concocted claims

as to railroad genuine complaints and was caught out by me time and time again because I kept

35 screen prints of my computer screen, to proved the facts. The TIO also claimed not to have any

powers to investigate the rip of by 3 (VHA), which to me is absurd. As I provided evidence, and

not disputed by 3, that they were deceptive charging, etc, then I view the TIO should have

investigated this. if they overcharge on millions of customers in this manner, then they make

billions of dollars. To me no surprise the TIO refused to hold them accountable as after all he

40 appears to me to be on their side to avoid exposing the rot. At n o time did the TIO deal with the

deceptive claim of 320MB usage, where I provided undisputable evidence to the contrary.

Because generally customers have no way of knowing if their service provider is honestly

charging them, I view that my exposure proving they were clearly overcharging is a very serious

matter. to me it was theft!
http://c/Users/Olga/Documents/Http://www.schorel-hlavka.comhttp://c/Users/Olga/Documents/Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikatimailto:[email protected]://c/Users/Olga/Documents/Http://www.schorel-hlavka.comhttp://c/Users/Olga/Documents/Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikatimailto:[email protected]


2/16

p2 (ex 25)26-9-2013





In my view the federal government should address this and make sure that the TIO is not bias

towards the telecommunication companies and spending about 6 months basically doping

nothing to investigate a matter which 3 continues it rip off is in my view unacceptable.

In my view the TIO (Telecommunication Industry Ombudsman) should be investigated if it

5 actually is not deliberately railroad complaints as to protect Telecommunication companies from

certain exposure. Obviously the question is will Mr Malcolm Turnbull now take over from

Senator Conrroy, and ensure that my complaints are properly investigated? Again, if my

evidence is correct then clearly 3 (VHA) has been so to say as I view it cooking the books, and

overcharging, and then it should be investigated to what extent. How many Members of

10 Parliament may have been suffering this fate and the taxpayers paying for it?

Armed conflicts

QUOTE

http://intellihub.com/2013/09/24/australian-defense-minister-says-military-r

15 eady-deployment-syria-iran-pakistan/

END QUOTE

I understand that the Minister for Defence has been reportedly stating that armed conflict in the

Middle East area will continue involving Australian Troops. As I pointed out in the past, unless

and until, if ever at all, the Governor-General publish in the Gazette a DECLARATION OF

20 WARand naming the country or countries against which war is declared the Minister of Defence

had absolutely no authority to get involved in any armed conflict unless we in Australia are

actually under attack by a foreign nation. While Cabinet may decide to go to war in the end it has

no constitutional powers to interfere with the prerogative powers of the Governor-General:.

25 HANSARD 10-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National

Australasian Convention)

QUOTE Mr. BARTON (New South Wales).-

Then, again, there is the prerogative right to declare war and peace, an adjunct of which it is that the

Queen herself, or her representative, where Her Majesty is not present, holds that prerogative. No one

30 would ever dream of saying that the Queen would declare war or peace without the advice of aresponsible Minister.

END QUOTE

HANSARD 6-3-1891 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National

35 Australasian Convention)

QUOTE

Mr. DEAKIN: We can make an exception in favour of imperial interests. We have no desire to interfere

with the imperial prerogative in matters of war and peace!

END QUOTE

40 .

Whatever convention may have been used to go to war it cannot override the constitution! If theCommonwealth were to get involved in an armed conflict while not directly under physical

attack of a foreign nation and so without any DECLARATION OF WAR having been published

in the Gazette by the Governor-General then this I view would constitute TREASON and war

45 crimes, by this involved and authorising such armed conflict.

Other issues:

As a CONSTITUTIONALIST, I understand that the Framers of the Constitution specifically

50 provided
http://c/Users/Olga/Documents/Http://www.schorel-hlavka.comhttp://c/Users/Olga/Documents/Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikatihttp://intellihub.com/2013/09/24/australian-defense-minister-says-military-rhttp://c/Users/Olga/Documents/Http://www.schorel-hlavka.comhttp://c/Users/Olga/Documents/Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikatihttp://intellihub.com/2013/09/24/australian-defense-minister-says-military-r


3/16

p3 (ex 25)26-9-2013





The Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900 (UK)

QUOTE

44 DisqualificationAny person who:

5 (i) is under any acknowledgment of allegiance, obedience, or

adherence to a foreign power, or is a subject or a citizen or

entitled to the rights or privileges of a subject or a citizen of aforeign power; or

END QUOTE

10 AndThe Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900 (UK)

QUOTE

shall be incapable of being chosen or of sitting as a senator or a

member of the House of Representatives.15 But subsection (iv) does not apply to the office of any of the

Queens Ministers of State for the Commonwealth, or of any of the

Queens Ministers for a State, or to the receipt of pay, half pay, or

a pension, by any person as an officer or member of the Queensnavy or army, or to the receipt of pay as an officer or member of

20 the naval or military forces of the Commonwealth by any person

whose services are not wholly employed by the Commonwealth.

END QUOTE

I yesterday became aware of the webslink

25 http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/805157/000134100410001939/ex-g.htm which included documents

allegedly filed by the Commonwealth of Australia on this and other links.

I noted:http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/805157/000134100410001939/ex-g.htm

QUOTE

30 EX-99 4 ex-g.htm EXHIBIT G -- SUPPLEMENT TO AGREEMENT FOR OFFERING

STATE/TERRITORY DEBT SECURITIES

EXHIBIT G

EXECUTION COPY

SUPPLEMENT TO AGREEMENT FOR OFFERING STATE/TERRITORY

35 DEBT SECURITIES IN CONNECTION WITH THE AUSTRALIAN

GOVERNMENT GUARANTEE OF STATE AND TERRITORY BORROWING

END QUOTE

And40 http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/805157/000134100410001939/ex-g.htm

QUOTE

The Commonwealth and the New Dealers hereby agree as follows:

1. Defined Terms. All capitalized terms used but not defined in this Supplement have the meanings assignedthereto in the Offering Agreement.

45 2. Joinder of New Dealers. Each of the New Dealers hereby joins in and agrees to become a party to the

Offering Agreement with all right, title and interest as a Dealer thereunder and subject to all of the

terms and conditions thereof as if each New Dealer were an original party and signatory thereto.

3. Notice. The New Dealers notice addresses for the purposes of the Offering Agreement are as follows:

Barclays Capital Inc.

50 745 Seventh Avenue

New York, NY 10019

United States of America

Attn: Syndicate Registration
http://c/Users/Olga/Documents/Http://www.schorel-hlavka.comhttp://c/Users/Olga/Documents/Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikatihttp://c/Users/Olga/Documents/Http://www.schorel-hlavka.comhttp://c/Users/Olga/Documents/Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati


4/16

p4 (ex 25)26-9-2013





Telephone: +1-212-526-0015

Facsimile: +1-646-834-8133

Email: [email protected]

Barclays Bank PLC

5 5 The North Colonnade

Canary Wharf

London E14 4BB

United Kingdom

Attn: MTN Dealers

10 Telephone: +44-20-7773-9090

Facsimile: +44-20-7516-7548

Email: [email protected]

Merrill Lynch International (Australia) Ltd

15 Level 38

Governor Phillip Tower

1 Farrer Place

Sydney

NSW 2000

20 Australia

Attn: Debt Capital Markets

Telephone: +612-9225-6773

Facsimile: +612-9225-6551

Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Incorporated

25 One Bryant Park

New York, NY 10036

United States of America

Attn: High Grade Transaction Management / Legal

Facsimile: +1-646-855-5958

30 END QUOTE

Andhttp://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/805157/000134100410001939/ex-g.htmQUOTE

QUEENSLAND TREASURY CORPORATION

By: /s/ Neil Castles

Name: Neil Castles

Title: Acting Chief Executive

35 THE TREASURER ON BEHALF OF THE GOVERNMENT OF QUEENSLAND

By: /s/ Andrew Fraser

Name: Andrew Fraser

Title: Treasurer


5/16

p5 (ex 25)26-9-2013





END QUOTE

As a CONSTITUTIONALIST I understand that the Framers of the Constitution during the

Constitution Convention Debates sought to implement a version of s96, of which debates I

5 recently quoted in a correspondence to you, but it was rejected and subsequently the referendum

in the colonies failed, after which at the premiers conference they inserted what is now known as

s96, so in case a State was in badly need of financial support then this could be provided by the

Commonwealth and it could borrow monies for the State and then set the conditions for the State

as to repay it. This,, as the funding of a State cannot be ordinary from Consolidated Revenue10 Funds as it is not a uniform expenditure. Only the Inter-State Commission (s101) can allocate

funding not uniform throughout the Commonwealth of Australia.

.

It is my view therefore, that the Commonwealth cannot allow a State to borrow monies in its own

right, as now seems to occur as this would defeat the very purpose of s96 of the constitution.

15 .

I noticed the considerable detailed set out provided for this in the various documents, and to me

this is unauthorised internal government disclosure that could aid any potential enemy to

undermine the Australian security and economy.

If I were to desire this kind of details I may b e charge a fortune in fees under FOI, and face

20 numerous exemptions, whereas here the Commonwealth provides it all to a foreign nation.Hansard 1-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National AustralasianConvention)

QUOTE

Mr. HIGGINS.-Suppose the sentry is asleep, or is in the swim with the other power?

25 Mr. GORDON.-There will be more than one sentry. In the case of a federal law, every memberof a state Parliament will be a sentry, and, every constituent of a state Parliament will be a

sentry. As regards a law passed by a state, every man in the Federal Parliament will be a

sentry, and the whole constituency behind the Federal Parliament will be a sentry.

END QUOTE

30

HANSARD 17-3-1898 Constitution Convention DebatesQUOTE

Mr. BARTON.- Having provided in that way for a free Constitution, we have provided for an

Executive which is charged with the duty of maintaining the provisions of that Constitution; and,

35 therefore, it can only act as the agents of the people.END QUOTE

Where the government acts as an agent for the grantor (the people) then it must provide and

disclose all details to the grantors and as such I request that the most updated information is

40 provided to me, without any further charges or other cost because as a Sentry I have to be able

to check what the Federal government is up to.

It would undermine my constitutional right to check the doing of the Government if it were to

deny full and proper disclosure and access to all information available. As the Government usesConsolidated Revenue Funds already, it cannot charge cost which it already draws from

45 Consolidated Revenue Funds.

I noticed from other documentation that this kind of dealings commenced in 2002, under the

Howard led government.

At the time I challenged the validity of the 2001 federal election and in the end on 19 July 29006

50 the commonwealth lawyers didnt oppose my submissions which included that the 2001 federal

election and the 2004 federal elections were invalid.

As such, at the time as I did submit to the Court any person purportedly elected was not formally

elected at all and no Minister who depended upon the validity of the 2001 election was therefore


6/16

p6 (ex 25)26-9-2013





a Member of Parliament, and any Minister appointed as Minister following the purported 2001

federal election was no longer a Minister (including Prime minister) after the 3 months referred

to in s64 of the constitution had passed.

5 INSPECTOR-RIKATI & There is no Government to go to war

A book on CD About Legal Issues Confronting Australia(ISBN 0-9580569-5-1 prior to 1-1-2007) ISBN 978-0-9580569-5-3

10 QUOTE

WITHOUT PREJUDICE

Dear Reader, 1-2-

2003

15 The INSPECTOR-RIKATI & There is no government to go to war deals with matter already stated or

in additional to other matters has been set out in considerable way on my websites www.schorel-hlavka.com,

www.inspector-rikati.com & www.rikati.com, and as such, I will not include it all on this CD (Albeit there isample of space for it.). However, in principle the issue is, that governments no longer apply the rule of law

(so the provisions of the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution), but are misusing and abusing their

20 powers.

On 20 December 2002, the newly elected member for the Seat of Ivanhoe Lidia Argondizzo, then commentedthat if it was done already for so long then why change it? People really wouldn t be interested to change it

even if it was in breach of legal provisions.

25 To me that was a serious issue, as here we have a person being a Member of Parliament advocating that toignore the law and continual breach it is some kind of justification to leave it as such. What then is she doing

in parliament, if anyone can willy nilly ignore it?

It is my view, that Victorians have a RIGHT to have competent Members of Parliament, who at the very30 least show some understanding as to what the purpose of legislation is and that it must be complied with.

To do otherwise makes a mockery of having any Parliament at all, as anyone can then make up their own

laws and take the law into their own hands as they please.

35 Then again Lidia Argondizzo also claimed (to me) that there is no such thing as State citizenship! Well, that

may indicate her level of understanding, being a Member of Parliament, about what is legally applicable, and

obviously, she didnt know, how then a Victorian elector got the political rights!

With, at time of writing, a possible war with Iraq, one then must ask, should the lives of Australians be

40 needlessly jeopardized for some political game played by some people who have power in a purported

Government, or should we pursue that the Courts act appropriately against those who violate ourconstitutional rights! Being it that they are called Howard Government, or by what other title, it makes

ultimately no difference. If they act in breach of constitutional provisions, then they must be held

accountable. The writer pursue the avoidance of a needles war.

45 By G. H. SCHOREL-HLAVKA

353 Deaths, of which 146 children REPUBLICEND QUOTE

50 As the Framers of the Constitution stated;
http://c/Users/Olga/Documents/Http://www.schorel-hlavka.comhttp://c/Users/Olga/Documents/Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikatihttp://c/Users/Olga/Documents/Http://www.schorel-hlavka.comhttp://www.inspector-rikati.com/http://www.rikati.com/http://c/Users/Olga/Documents/Http://www.schorel-hlavka.comhttp://c/Users/Olga/Documents/Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikatihttp://c/Users/Olga/Documents/Http://www.schorel-hlavka.comhttp://www.inspector-rikati.com/http://www.rikati.com/


7/16

p7 (ex 25)26-9-2013





Hansard 1-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the NationalAustralasian Convention)

QUOTE5 Mr. WISE.-If the Federal Parliament chose to legislate upon, say, the education question-and the

Constitution gives it no power to legislate in regard to that question-the Ministers for the time being in each

state might say-"We are favorable to this law, because we shall get 100,000 a year, or so much a year, from

the Federal Government as a subsidy for our schools," and thus they might wink at a violation of the

Constitution, while no one could complain. If this is to be allowed, why should we have these elaborate

10 provisions for the amendment of the Constitution? Why should we not say that the Constitution may beamended in any way that the Ministries of the several colonies may unanimously agree? Why have this

provision for a referendum? Why consult the people at all? Why not leave this matter to the Ministers

of the day? But the proposal has a more serious aspect, and for that reason only I will ask permission to

occupy a few minutes in discussing it.

15 END QUOTE

.

AndHansard 8-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates

QUOTE

20 Sir JOHN DOWNER.-Now it is coming out. The Constitution is made for the people and the states on

terms that are just to both.

Mr. DEAKIN.-It is made for the lawyers under this clause.

Sir JOHN DOWNER.-I do not think so. If you say "Trust the Parliament," no Constitution is required

at all; it can simply be provided that a certain number of gentlemen shall be elected, and meet together, and,25 without limitation, do what they like. Victoria would not agree to that. But there is a desire to draw the very

life-blood of the Constitution, so far as the states are concerned, by this insidious amendment, which wouldgive the Houses authority from time to time to put different constructions on this most important part

of the Constitution. I hope we will do as we have done in many instances before, in matters that have beenmuch debated-adhere to the decision we have already arrived at.

30 END QUOTE

HANSARD 17-3-1898 Constitution Convention DebatesQUOTE

Mr. BARTON.- We can have every faith in the constitution of that tribunal. It is appointed as the arbiter of35 the Constitution. . It is appointed not to be above the Constitution, for no citizen is above it, but under

it; but it is appointed for the purpose of saying that those who are the instruments of the Constitution-

the Government and the Parliament of the day-shall not become the masters of those whom, as to the

Constitution, they are bound to serve. What I mean is this: That if you, after making a Constitution of

this kind, enable any Government or any Parliament to twist or infringe its provisions , then by slow

40 degrees you may have that Constitution-if not altered in terms-so whittled away in operation that theguarantees of freedom which it gives your people will not be maintained; and so, in the highest sense, the

court you are creating here, which is to be the final interpreter of that Constitution, will be such a tribunal as

will preserve the popular liberty in all these regards, and will prevent, under any pretext of

constitutional action, the Commonwealth from dominating the states, or the states from usurping the sphere

45 of the Commonwealth.

END QUOTE

We haved a constitution and Ministers and Members of Parliament do have to conform to this.

Again:50 The Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900 (UK)

QUOTE

44 DisqualificationAny person who:

(i) is under any acknowledgment of allegiance, obedience, or

55 adherence to a foreign power, or is a subject or a citizen or

entitled to the rights or privileges of a subject or a citizen of a

foreign power; or

END QUOTE


8/16

p8 (ex 25)26-9-2013





Clearly the registration with the District of Columbia is resulting that Members of the Parliament

and any Minister are subject to the obedience required by the District of Columbia s legislative

provisions, etc. We saw Westpac for example being able to borrow monies because of the

5 Commonwealth registration.

.

In my view the registration was unbecoming to be a Minister of the Crown, in that it violated the

constitutional limitations upon the Commonwealth, and as such must be seen as TREASON

against the People,

10 In my view, Mr George Brandis no longer c an claim to be a Senator because his seat became

automatically vacant when he offended s44 of the constitution by being a Minister of the Crown

involved in a Commonwealth of Australia registered entity with the District of Columbia, and

any Minister who contemplated to take a seat in the House of Representatives when the writs are

returned may have to make up his/her mind to either do so within the Commonwealth of

15 Australia as the corporation Commonwealth of Australia would automatically cause the seats to

be vacated, and then the Minister by s64 of the constitution cannot be longer a Minister then 3

months.

Actually as is clear from the Boilermakers

Case, Citation: (1956) 94 CLR 254. .R v Kirby; Ex20 parte Boilermakers' Society of Australia. The High Court Of Australia ruled that a statutory

body that is not a court has no judicial authority and cannot act judicially.

HANSARD 12-4-1897Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National

Australasian Convention)

25 QUOTE Mr. BARTON:

It is provided that instead of, as before, the Parliament having power to constitute a judiciary, there

shall be a Supreme Court, to be called the High Court of Australia, as a part of the Constitution-that I

believe to be an improvement-and other courts which the Parliament may from time to time create or

invest with federal jurisdiction.

30 END QUOTE

The High Court of Australia cannot for its authority in judicial matters be subject to the

Parliament or the Government of the Day as the constitution provides for its judicial powers and

limitations. However, the Parliament may provide additional powers not ordinary provided.

35 Therefore the Parliament cannot remove the constitutional judicial powers of the High Court of

Australia, as it is a totally independent body under the constitution, and is NOT the 3rd arm of

government as judges themselves often claim.

.

During the Constitution Convention Debates the Framers of the Constitution were debating the

40 issue of taxation, etc, and held that the Commonwealth could not tax a state without its consent

and visa versa on its government. They did however make clear that where the State of Victoria

purchased rails for railways then this was ordinary taxable, or subject to customs and duties, asany ordinary business would. As such the governing by the States could not be taxed, but its

operations for business profits would fall under ordinary taxation legislation. In my view the

45 Commonwealth requirement for Governments Department, not being business entities, to be

registered with an ABN or ACN taxation registration is unconstitutional, as it would allow the

Commonwealth to influence the state Government and could allow it to be a tyrant to a State that

if it didnt comply with what it desired then it should act in a certain manner in taxation. Indeed,

we see this kind of tyranny played out between the Commonwealth and the State time and time

50 again, such as in Education matters.

What we now have is that the Department of Justice (Victoria) operates under an ABN number

which I view is unconstitutional.


9/16

p9 (ex 25)26-9-2013





Worse is that as I exposed during the 19 July 2006 litigation before the County Court of Victoria

that the (Kable) principle of Chapter III court of the constitution demands independence, but is

no longer existing where the Courts have the same ABN numbers as the Department of Justice

(Victoria). Hence, we do not have any Chapter III courts in Victoria. And where the High Court

5 of Australia has a ABN/ACN taxation number then it too no longer is a Chapter III court. It

should be made clear that the Commonwealth didnt oppose my submissions but held that it was

NOT in the public interest to challenge my appeals (so its submissions). As such the

Commonwealth just be deemed to have conceded the submission I made on constitutional

grounds were correct. No of the Attorney-Generals served with my 78B NOTICE OF

10 CONSTITUTIONAL MATTERS sought to oppose my submissions either and as such all are

deemed to have accepted that my submissions were correct. None of them ever again could

litigate the same matters against me! I am entitled to the benefits of the Courts ruling to

uphold both appeals.

.

15 For this, I view that as long as the High Court of Australia operates under a ABN/ACN taxation

file it cannot be deemed to be a constitutional valid court.Hansard 1-2-1898 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National

Australasian Convention),

QUOTE Mr. OCONNER(New South Wales).-

20 Because, as has been said before, it is [start page 357] necessary not only that the administration ofjustice should be pure and above suspicion, but that it should be beyond the possibility of suspicion;

END QUOTE

.

Hansard 8-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates

25 QUOTE

Sir JOHN DOWNER.-Now it is coming out. The Constitution is made for the people and the states on

terms that are just to both.

END QUOTE

.

30 As I indicated in past correspondence, the Victorian courts such as the Supreme Court of

Victoria are now listed as Business Unit 19 and this then violates the principle of separation of

powers between the judiciary and the executives.Court must not act as a business unit, as they are there to provide JUSTICE no matter what the

financial cost might be to the state.

35 it is the State which decide who shall become Chief Justice of a particular court and the State

then must accept if they appoint some idiot who cannot appropriately organise the administration

of the court. The Chief Justice is ultimately responsible for the overall cost associated with the

running of the Court. If he sent out judges on perks of overseas trips, etc, instead of dealing with

internal Stated matters then that is the Chief Justice decision, and the State can always remove

40 him if he is guilty of misconduct as such. However, one cannot subject the Chief Justice to

demand such as to provide yearly audits for attracting a level of funding, because this is the

courts internal responsibility as much as the Court can not demand the Government of the Day to

disclosed to it how it financial manage its affairs. Fancy, the government funding the judiciary onbasis of the rate of conviction it achieves, this would imply that it dictates to the court it must

45 make a certain percentage of convictions, no matter what.

As I exposed in my recent 23 September 2013 correspondence to the Chief Commissioner of the

Victorian Police we have a so called Infringement Court that is part of the Chapter III of the

constitution court of the Magistrates Court of Victoria that is operated by a private company

accessing the Magistrates Court of Victoria data base and issuing purported court orders and

50 warrants without any proper hearings, at a rate of issuing warrants at 13 minutes or about

.QUOTE23-9-2013 CORRESPONDENCE


10/16

p10 (ex 25)26-9-2013





The point is when did the police check if the advise on the infringement Notice to make a payment to Civic

Compliance Victoria was actually lawful? Politicians all over the world are creating systems that they rip of

taxpayers, and this one seems to be to me one of them.

Why is the Victorian Police advising to make a payment to a bank account purportedly being Civic5 Compliance Victoria when in fact the Westpac bank has it as Civic Compliance Vic not being the same as

the trademark? Is this a deliberate different version so that monies are not at all paid into an account of Civic

Compliance Victoria but in another account known as Civic Compliance Vic in a similar manner as Julia

Gillard and her then boyfriend Wilson set up a bank account purporting to be a Trade Union account, but wasnot?

10 Why indeed did Westpac allow the registration of a bank account in the name of

Civic Compliance Vic

when to my knowledge there is no such registered business operating?

END QUOTE 23-9-2013 CORRESPONDENCE

QUOTE 23-9-2013 CORRESPONDENCE

15 http://www.northernweekly.com.au/story/1736859/joint-operation-to-clean-up-a-fine-

mess/QUOTE

The Sheriffs Office arrested more than 2000 people and took action over more than 1.1 million

warrants last year up more than 27 per cent on the previous year.

20 END QUOTE

IF WE TAKE IT THAT 1.1 MILLION WARRANTS ARE ISSUED IN A YEAR FOR NON

PAYMENTS, THIS MEANS THAT THERE ARE ABOUT 1.1 MILLION COURT HEARINGS BYTHE REGISTRAR OF THE INFRINGEMENT COURT TO HEAR AND DETERMINE

ACCORDING TO LAW IF A WARRANT SHOULD OR SHOULDNT BE ISSUED.

25 .

Again, you will not find this number of warrants issued listed by the Magistrates Court of Victoria, this even

so where the Infringement Court uses the letterhead of the Magistrates Court of Victoria then its

orders/warrants should be included in yearly reporting.So, about 1,100,000 warrants issued in a year. if we take the extreme that the Infringement Court Registrar

30 works on a 52 week basis without taking holidays or taking time of during the festivities then this will come

to about 1,100,000 : 52 = 21,153.84615 warrants a week

Calculated this on a daily basis would be 1.100.000 : 365 = 3013.69863 warrants a day, not taking any time

of for holidays, weekends. etc.

35 But if we are more realistic and consider there are usually 48 working weeks and 10 sick days (apart ofequipment break down, etc.) and ordinary a court may sit on average 6 hours a day then we would have:1,100,000 : {(48 x 5-10) x 6} = 1,100,000: {230 x 6} = 1,100,000 : 1380=797,1014492 warrants an hour or

about 13,28502415 warrants a minute.

(For the record I used to work in production planning, and subsequently when promoted to manage a factory

40 had to do my own production planning also, hence I can easily understand that the figures so to say do notadd up, when it comes to the purported Infringement Court orders/warrants. And again, I referred to the

calculations of the warrants but if you add the number of other coiurt orders then it be likely less then a

second for every order/warrant. One must be absolutely brain dead not to realise there is something wrong in

this all!)45 END QUOTE 23-9-2013 CORRESPONDENCE

.QUOTE 23-9-2013 CORRESPONDENCE

Obviously the question is in which court room were the cases heard and determined? after all there must be a

court room for it. Why do Magistrates complain about their workload and can only do a few cases a day

50 when a registrar can do cases after case every minute of the day if not in a few seconds?

.Obviously one must be a humbug and/or a moron to accept that this is actually eventuating in a court room.

No one is in his right mind is going to accept that the police actually were under oath giving evidence in

criminal cases (as that is what they are effectively) of a rate of about 13 cases every minute to obtain

55 warrants.As such, common sense alone should have warned you that this Infringement Court cannot be operating to

the standards of an open courtas required for the Magistrates Court of Victoria.

.


11/16

p11 (ex 25)26-9-2013





Did you as Chief Commissioner ever bother to attend to an Infringement Court hearing, after all they are

criminal matters arent day to discover why a 100% success rate in getting warrants issues is a little

suspicious?

END QUOTE 23-9-2013 CORRESPONDENCE

5

In my view, the conduct of the Magistrates Court of Victoria to operate as Infringement Court,

but failing to provide for an open court only for the State Government to make money as an

outlawed STAR CHAMBER COURT, in the absenteeism of the accused, requires the

Commonwealth to strip the Magistrates Court of Victoria of any federal judicial powers.10

For principles ofopen court see also:

http://www.judcom.nsw.gov.au/publications/benchbks/criminal/non-publication_and_suppression_orders.html

15

http://www.criminallawsurvivalkit.com.au/Crime.html PART A- CRIMINAL LAW IN NEW SOUTH

WALES-open court

Brennan v Brennan [1953] HCA 28- (1953) 89 CLR 129 (18 May 1953)

20

K-Generation Pty Limited v Liquor Licensing Court [2009] HCA 4 (2 February 2009)

South Australia v Totani[2010] HCA 39

25 Wainohu v New South Wales [2011] HCA 24

Assistant Commissioner Michael James Condon v Pompano Pty Ltd [2013] HCA 7 (14 March 2013)

The Kable decision by the High Court of Australia is a clarification that the government cannot

30 interfere with the judiciary. Yet, the Victorian Government entered a deed with a private

company to allow it access to the courts facilities and use computers to issue purported court

orders/warrants under the letterhead of the Magistrates Court of Victoria at an estimated rate of

warrant of about 13 every minute, but considering orders also being issued, then this is aboutevery second an order/warrant. No one could in his right mind accept that any Registrar could

35 hear sworn evidence from the prosecutor, and consider the details in less then a second, and so

all ex parte.

What we have therefore is that governments at state and federal levels have committed

TREASON against the people to pervert the course of JUSTICE and to refrain from acting as a

40 Sentry. Instead participating in an elaborate deception upon the People.

Another matter that must be considered, is that the Treasurer can only provide for the

Appropriation Bills for one year, and so cannot commit the nation to expenditure in the future

with liabilities to be carried by those who come long after us. The Framers of the Constitution45 made clear that appropriation and taxation was going together. Hence, if the Parliament were to

refuse certain taxation to be enacted then the Appropriation Bills would have to be reduced in

expenditure to match the lower taxation income.

Not that I likely can expect this government to charge the former treasurers with acting in

blatant violation of the constitution is like expecting this government to charge all Minister

50 who participated in the unconstitutional invasion into Iraq, and have them charged for

collectively committing mass murder, crimes against humanity, war crimes, conspiracy,

etc.

As I quoted above:


12/16

p12 (ex 25)26-9-2013





QUOTE

On 20 December 2002, the newly elected member for the Seat of Ivanhoe Lidia Argondizzo, then commented

that if it was done already for so long then why change it? People really wouldn t be interested to change it

even if it was in breach of legal provisions.5

To me that was a serious issue, as here we have a person being a Member of Parliament advocating that to

ignore the law and continual breach it is some kind of justification to leave it as such. What then is she doing

in parliament, if anyone can willy nilly ignore it?END QUOTE

10Well, we either have a constitution or we dont! If any successful candidate expect to be entitled

to the benefits of being a Member of Parliament then that person must also conform to the true

meaning and application of the constitution. There is no alternative but otherwise not to become

a Member of Parliament.

15

And I like now to underline the statement in LIBERTY NEWSLETTER - SEPTEMBER

2013QUOTE

LETTER TO MEMBERS?SEPTEMBER 2013

20 EXTRACT FROM

THE DAILY TELEGRAPHNEWSPAPER

Excited Monarchists toasting the

birth of the Royal Baby25

THE LEAGUE CONGRATULATES

THE DUKE & DUCHESS OF

CAMBRIDGE ON THE BIRTH

OF THEIR SON, PRINCE GEORGE

30

John Kenneth Galbraith, the Canadian economist, once wrote: ?Nothing is so admirable in politics as a short35 memory. ? Perhaps this is why this election campaign has seemed to be so interminable ? but I rather suspect

that it is more because almost every step of the campaign has been stage-managed as though it is anAmerican presidential style type performance but without the razzmatazz.

Not so many nowadays would remember the old-style campaigns; long before politicians had been

40 transmogrified into television performers for the evening news. Those days when candidates would step uponto a soap box and would put forward their case for election unhampered by microphones or iPads.

A time when they behaved like human beings and were not programmed to robotically recite that which their

advisers have designed for them to say. When they would banter back and forth with the crowd. Like the time45 a heckler shouted to Menzies: "I wouldn?t vote for you if you were the Archangel Gabriel" to which Menzies

coolly replied "If I were the Archangel Gabriel, I?m afraid you wouldn't be in my constituency. "

The new prime minister, whom we congratulate on his election, has always been a friend to the AustralianMonarchist League and has been attending our functions over many years. Tony Abbott is a monarchist and

50 whatever else may happen, we are unlikely to see any move towards a republic under his administration. We

can only hope that republicans within the parliament never gain ascendancy.

We don?t know what the attitude of the non-aligned incoming Senators will be, but it is to be hoped that the

Coalition will make full use of the opportunity the people have given them to restore the standards! and

55 ethics of the Menzies era and put an end to the atrocious and child-like behaviour we have seen in the

parliament over recent years and make it once again a ?House of the People? that the people can be proud of.

Whilst policies must always adjust with changing times, principles and good governance for the people must

never be put aside. Our structure of constitutional government under the Crown is a parliamentary democratic


13/16

p13 (ex 25)26-9-2013





system and must always stand for the freedom and the wellbeing of the individual.

As Alfred, Lord Tennyson waxed lyrically in his poem ?You Ask Me, Why?

5 It is the land that freemen till,

That sober-suited Freedom chose,

The land, where girt with friends or foes

A man may speak the thing he will;

10 A land of settled government,A land of just and old renown,

Where Freedom slowly broadens downFrom precedent to precedent.

15 One of the great problems of this modern age is the manner in which politicians have corrupted our ?settled

government?, our federation and even the Westminster system itself as well as diminishing the age oldfreedoms and liberties we inherited under the Crown.

It is also to be hoped that the incoming government will use the trust the people have reposed in them wisely.

20 That, amongst so many things that need to be done, they will curtail the socialist/republican driven agendasof taxpayer-funded broadcasters and make sweeping and long overdue changes to the Electoral Act.

Modern Liberals talk about following the Menzies philosophy, but most would not really know what theyactually mean by this. The Menzies era was fundamentally one of God, King and Country, of decency and

25 honour. Menzies believed in the British Empire but then so did most Australians of the time. In fact many

older Australians still consider themselves to be ?British?, because that is what they were born to be. Like his

peers, Menzies was an Anglophile, but he never allowed this to interfere with what he considered to be hisdut! y to the Australian people. He never put himself first and both he and his family suffered as a

consequence. He thought only of Australia and what he could do for the Australian people. He explains his

30 thinking in this regard in his book ?Measure of the Years?

?I cannot go anywhere in Australia without being remnded of our British inheritance; our system of

responsible government and Parliamentary institutions, our adherence to the rule of law and, indeed, our

systems of law themselves; our traditions of integrity in high places and of incorruptibility in our Civil

35 Service. We derived all these things from Westminster. Our language comes to us from Britain and so does

the bulk of our literature. To have no love for a relatively small community in the North Sea which createdand handed on these vital matters would be, to my mind, a miserable act of ingratitude. The fact that in

Australia we have received all these things, and have made all our own notable contributions to their

development, not only fills me with pride but strengthens my affection.?

40

His era was fundamentally moral and decent. Of course the media was not as vociferous as it is nowadays

and even they had standards. In those days they reported fact and did not sensationalise everything for

momentary coverage.

45 Today, the time of politicians is spent more on performing for media grabs than on their duty as servants of

the people. This must change if our country is to get back on track. Also, what must be brought back are the

standards of parliament. It is not the House of the slanging match but the House of the Representatives of thepeople and those honoured to be elected should act at all times with decorum and not as though they are on

some foul-mouthed soap box.50

How many times have we seen politicians brandishing millions of dollars in an endeavour to buy votes? Thegovernment must accept that all monies collected are not theirs but held for the benefit of the people. As

such, should not ministers be! subjected to higher standards than directors of companies?

55 Should not the Ombudsmen have constitutional powers to protect the interests of the people against thesquandering of taxpayer?s monies by those in government?

This new government has a mandate to put right what is wrong with our governance but it is not enough to

merely wait for them to do something. Rather it is up to us all to work towards that aim.60

You may say, what has this got to do with the Australian Monarchist League? Our monarchy, our


14/16

p14 (ex 25)26-9-2013





constitution and our system of government are all interlinked. If one fails, then the other links are

endangered. It is therefore up to organisations like ours to stand up for that which is right and not sit back and

allow our governance to sink into the mire of political intrigue.

5 There are those who have criticised the League for supporting monarchist candidates and for protecting our

Constitution and more recently for opposing the local government referendum - something to be expected as

we have always stood up for that which we consider to be the right thing to do. As Winston Churchill is

reputed to have said: ?You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime inyour life.?

10In the first instance, why shouldn?t we look after our own? Besides the more monarchist members of the

parliament, the more our interests are served. Secondly, are not the Crown and the Constitution interlinked?Both should be protected and defended to our utmost and, as far as the referendum was concerned, our

campaign resulted from an overwhelming vote of our members, for are we not the largest democratic and

15 member-based monarchist organisation in the country?

There are several Royal events taking place in the foreseeable future. Next month will see the christening of

Prince George and on the 14th November 2013 the Prince of Wales will celebrate his 65th birthday.

20 Next year we anticipate a visit by the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge together with Prince Georg! e. On the9th September 2015, The Queen will become the longest reigning British monarch ever when she surpasses

Queen Victoria's reign of 63 years, seven months and three days and a few months later, on the 21st April

2016 Her Majesty will celebrate her 90th birthday.

25 This year marks the twentieth year in my voluntary role as National Chair. It is similarly the anniversary of

the rebirth and rebadging of the League. To observe the occasion, the editors are including sanitised extracts

from my memoirs in this and future editions of the Liberty newsletter.

Members would be aware of the huge effort the League put into fighting the insidious referendum on local

30 government. Even though the parliament had decided to proceed, Kevin Rudd arbitrarily abandoned the

proposal. The government, organisations and local councils would have spent millions of dollars on thereferendum. All wasted at the whim of one person! Fortunately, the expenses of the League were not too

great.

35 We recognised that the campaign would be unlike any other. Not only was there a complete lack of interest

amongst the community but a lack of finances and manpower resources meant that our efforts would have tobe fought almost totally on the internet.

Australia has some 12 million regular Facebook users. During this election both Liberal and Labor parties40 have invested heavily in both Facebook and Twitter attracting hundreds of thousands of supporters or ?likes?

and potentially reaching millions with their messages.

The League is fortunate that it has a number of enthusiastic and talented young monarchists who are highlycompetent in the field of social media. To fight the referendum, we established an active website together

45 with a Facebook page and Twitter account and were considered to be the most numerical of the three groups

involved in opposing the referendum.

Rather than waste these resources, the National Council decided to reorganise our website, Facebook and

Twitter account into something the Lea! gue has been doing for many years and that to act as a ?watchdog?50 on the abuse of constitutional powers by the Commonwealth government, of which the proposed local

government referendum question was but one.

Over the years our methods of lobbying have changed. Twenty years ago we used mail which would reach

hundreds ? or more if we had the funds. Today, our lobbying campaigns are based on both email and social

55 media which can reach tens of thousands if not millions with proper funding.

Thus our fight continues well into the future. As William Wordsworth wrote:

Enough, if something from our hands have power

To live, and act, and serve the future hour.

60 END QUOTE


15/16

p15 (ex 25)26-9-2013





And also the following part:QUOTE

AUSTRALIAN MONARCHIST LEAGUE CONFERENCE ON ABUSE OF POWERS

Saturday, 17 August 2013, Sydney

5

Summary of Session 1: The Referendum & the Abuse of Constitutional Powers

10

THE REFERENDUM AND AGENDA 21

League Patron and constitutional lawyer, Dr David Mitchell, opened the conference by, in his own words,

casting a few pearls before us.15

Dr Mitchell had presented a paper on constitutional recognition of local councils to a previous national

conference of the League. There are only 2 tiers of government in Australia: Federal and State. Local

councils are a way the States discharge the States? duties. The proposed constitutional amendment to allowthe Commonwealth to fund local councils directly, on such conditions as the Commonwealth sees fit, would

20 fundamentally alter the balance of power in the Federation.

Dr Mitchell raised the possibility that this amendment had been inspired by the United Nation?s 1989?Agenda 21?, a program for global social equality. Much of the implementation of Agenda 21 could only be

achieved through local councils backed with the financial clout of the Commonwealth.

25

Many Australians are not aware how influential the United Nations is in Australian public life. Althoughmost of us might never interact with the UN, for some people, such as human rights lawyers and

environmental conservationists, UN agencies and conferences are incredibly important in shaping mind sets

and agendas. This is not to suggest that there is a global conspiracy - the UN?s workings in these fields are

30 generally well documented and publicly accessible - rather, the public ignores them.

Dr Mitchell discussed the recent constitutional decisions of Pape and Williams. He focused particularly on

the Commonwealth?s response: the Financial Framework Legislation Amendment Act (No. 3) 2012. This

legislation involved the Parliament approving 427 spending programs en bloc, and allowing the executive, by

35 regulation, to approve more in the future. The law was rushed through the Parliament with startlingly little c!onsideration, abetted by the Coalition. Philip Benwell compared this to the way European Union law is

implemented into the domestic law of European countries with little, if any, consideration by the countries?legislatures.

40 THE USE AND ABUSES OF THE COMMONWEALTH FINANCE POWER AND THE EXTERNAL

AFFAIRS POWER

Mr Bryan Pape, a NSW barrister and constitutional litigant, presented a paper on what he termed

?constitutional avoidance? by the main players in Australian political life.

45Democratic politics drives the Federal Government towards involving itself more and more in the day-to-day

lives of Australians, rather than the major national matters the Federal Government was established to handle,

such as defence and foreign relations. This pork barrelling and vote buying (which Mr Pape described asresulting in a cargo cult among the Australian community) is extremely difficult to correct, given how

50 alluring it is to the recipients of the Commonwealth?s largesse and to the politicians receiving the resulting

political good will.

Ironically, the external affairs power was increasingly enabling the Commonwealth to carry on down thispath (a trend that came to significant prominence with the enactment of the legislation challenged in the

55 Tasmanian Dams case). As international treaties deal more and more with local matters, the

Commonwealth?s legislative power expands to cover those matters. Mr Pape cited as an example the

Australian Sports Anti-Doping legislation, which regulates aspects of local sporting competitions as an?external affair?, sport not being mentioned in the Constitution.

60 This Commonwealth?s mindset was shown in its response to the Pape and Williams decisions. Although


16/16

p16 (ex 25)26-9-2013





these decisions significantly curtailed the powers of the Commonwealth legislature and executive

respectively to spend money, the Commonwealth?s response to the decisions was to try to get around them,

such as with the enactment of the Financial Framework Act mentioned by Dr Mitchell.

5 Mr Pa! pe suggested that one of the great hurdles to using legal processes to challenge this flouting of

constitutional limitations was restrictions on standing: those who receive unconstitutional funding are

unlikely to challenge it (except in the rare case of the likes of Mr Pape himself), and taxpayers and others

concerned by the flouting of the Constitution?s requirements cannot challenge the matter in the courtswithout some closer connection to the spending. Mr Pape recommended a constitutional amendment to

10 establish an independent constitutional ?censor? with the duty and standing to seek declarations in the HighCourt as to the constitutional validity of legislation.

COMPETITIVE FEDERALISM

15 Mr Pape also presented a shorter paper on some of the benefits of having different regulatory systems

throughout a federation. He presented some very interesting figures on productivity, per person and per hourworked, in each State. We should aim to have all the country as productive as Western Australia, rather than

being satisfied with having lower national productivity but uniformity.

20 Mr Pape also cited the abolition of death duties as the classic Australian example of tax competition.

Showing quite clearly how far the Commonwealth-State financial balance has changed since the World Wars,

Mr Pape reminded the conference that 80% of Australian taxes are now imposed and collected by theCommonwealth. The States, however, have acquiesced in their own financial emasculation: channelling

25 Teddy Roosevelt, Mr Pape described the State Governments as having had (with very few exceptions) spines

like chocolate ?clairs.

Matthew Sait

Chairman?AML ACT & Region Branch

30 END QUOTE

I am obviously not alone seeking a real and proper governance of the Commonwealth of

Australia. the question is can you deliver?

35 For this I expect that you and others will ensure that before the return of the writs every conductthat is unconstitutional is appropriately addressed and rectified.

Awaiting your response, G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. (Friends call me Gerrit)

40 MAY JUSTICE ALWAYS PREVAIL

(Our name is our motto!)