You are on page 1of 24

1

Mr Brendan Facey Department of Justice 5 Infringement management & Enforcement Services


Brendan.Facey@justice.vic.gov.au Cc: 10

22-8-2013

Mr Robert Clark MP Attorney-General robert.clark@parliament.vic.gov.au


Ian Grey Chief Magistrate, Magistrates Court of Victoria 233 William Street Melbourne Vic 3000, C/o help@magistratescourt.vic.gov.au

15

M Hoyle, Quality and client support Coordinator Civic Compliance Victoria GPO Box 1916, Melbourne VIC 3001 Traffic_Inquiries@tenixsolutions.com Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka, MAY JUSTICE ALWAYS PREVAIL Email: mayJUSTICEalwaysPREVAIL@schorel-hlavka.com

20

Your Ref: BC/15766


130822-COMPLAINT Ref Brendan Facey Director IM&ES -Sheriff) OBL 1106575301-CONSTITUTIONAL issues etc 25

Sir, further to my previous correspondence, and in particular also my 12 August 2013 reference to the Agar v Dolheguy & Anor [2010] VSC 506 (11 November 2010) decision, I will some further and other matters. 30 What are judges about? Judges are these days lawyers who were so to say brainwashed during legal studies as to certain purported meanings of the constitution, this even so it was totally incorrect. Indeed, the Delegates to the Constitution Conventions themselves including many eminent lawyers expressed their concerns about lawyers and that the constitution:
35 . Hansard 19-4-1897 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE Mr. CARRUTHERS: This is a Constitution which the unlettered people of the community ought to be able to understand. 40 END QUOTE . Hansard 22-2-1898 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE Mr. SYMON (South Australia).45 That this is not like an Act of Parliament which we are passing. It is not in the position which Mr. Barton has described, of choosing or setting up a code of laws to interpret the common law of England. This Constitution we are framing is not yet passed. It has to be handed over not to a Convention similar to this, not to a small select body of legislators, but to the whole body of the people for their acceptance or rejection. It is the whole body of the people whose understanding you have to bring to bear upon it, and it is the whole body of the people, the more or less instructed body of the people, who have to 12-08-2013 Sheriffs Office Ref: COMPLAINT Your Ref: BC/15766 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, by fax 0011-61-3-94577209 or E-mail INSPECTOR-RIKATI@schorel-hlavka.com See also www.schorel-hlavka.com Free download of documents at blog Http://www.scribd.com/InspectorRikati p1

2
understand clearly everything in the Constitution, which affects them for weal or woe during the whole time of the existence of this Commonwealth. We cannot have on the platform, when this Constitution is commended to the people, lawyers on both sides, drawing subtle distinctions, which may or may not be appreciated by the people. 5 END QUOTE . Hansard 8-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National Australasian Convention) QUOTE Mr. ISAACS.10 We want a people's Constitution, not a lawyers' Constitution. END QUOTE Hansard 17-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE Mr. BARTON.Providing, as this Constitution does, for a free people to elect a free Parliament-giving that people through their Parliament the power of the purse-laying at their mercy from day to day the existence of any Ministry which dares by corruption, or drifts through ignorance into, the commission of any act which is unfavorable to the people having this security, it must in its very essence be a free Constitution. Whatever any one may say to the contrary that is secured in the very way in which the freedom of the British Constitution is secured. It is secured by vesting in the people, through their representatives, the power of the purse, and I venture [start page 2477] to say there is no other way of securing absolute freedom to a people than that, unless you make a different kind of Executive than that which we contemplate, and then overload your Constitution with legislative provisions to protect the citizen from interference. Under this Constitution he is saved from every kind of interference. Under this Constitution he has his voice not only in the, daily government of the country, but in the daily determination of the question of whom is the Government to consist. There is the guarantee of freedom in this Constitution. There is the guarantee which none of us have sought to remove, but every one has sought to strengthen. How we or our work can be accused of not providing for the popular liberty is something which I hope the critics will now venture to explain, and I think I have made their work difficult for them. 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, therefore, it can only act as the agents of the people. We have provided for a Judiciary, which will determine questions arising under this Constitution, and with all other questions which should be dealt with by a Federal Judiciary and it will also be a High Court of Appeal for all courts in the states that choose to resort to it. In doing these things, have we not provided, first, that our Constitution shall be free: next, that its government shall be by the will of the people, which is the just result of their freedom: thirdly, that the Constitution shall not, nor shall any of its provisions, be twisted or perverted, inasmuch as a court appointed by their own Executive, but acting independently, is to decide what is a perversion of its provisions? We can have every faith in the constitution of that tribunal. It is appointed as the arbiter of 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 degrees you may have that Constitution-if not altered in terms-so whittled away in operation that the guarantees 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 of the Commonwealth. Having provided for all these things, I think this Convention has done well. END QUOTE

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

From the above, it must be clear that lawyers (including judges) if anything are most 55 unsuitable as to explain the true meaning and application of the constitution but with a legal system now occupied by lawyers, and no longer one will have a non-lawyer becoming a judge, then we so to say threw out the baby with the wash water.
Agar v Dolheguy & Anor [2010] VSC 506 (11 November 2010) refers to: 12-08-2013 Sheriffs Office Ref: COMPLAINT Your Ref: BC/15766 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, by fax 0011-61-3-94577209 or E-mail INSPECTOR-RIKATI@schorel-hlavka.com See also www.schorel-hlavka.com Free download of documents at blog Http://www.scribd.com/InspectorRikati p2

3
QUOTE Agar v Dolheguy & Anor [2010] VSC 506 (11 November 2010) 52 I will not deal in detail with the provisions of that Act, but I will mention a few. The objects of the Act include to establish a national system of units and standards of measurement of physical quantities and to provide for the uniform use of them throughout Australia. Importantly, the Act does not apply to the exclusion of any State law except in the case of inconsistency (s 4). Thus, if a State has legislated on a matter of measurement, and it is not inconsistent with a provision of the Commonwealth Act, the State Act applies unaffected. END QUOTE Agar v Dolheguy & Anor [2010] VSC 506 (11 November 2010)

Let first concern ourselves with how many European countries accepted the European Union overruling legislative powers: The Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900 (UK) is a British Act and as such considering the decision of Aggregate Industries UK Ltd., R (on the application of) v English Nature and & Anor [2002] EWHC 908 (Admin) (24th April, 2002) and Judgments - Mark 15 (Respondent) v. Mark (Appellant), OPINIONS, OF THE LORDS OF APPEAL for judgment IN THE CAUSE, SESSION 2005-06 [2005] UKHL 42 on appeal from: [2003] EWCA Civ 168 It appears that the The European Convention for the protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (the ECHR) albeit not overriding constitutional law, is complimentary to British (constitution) law, as the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution 20 Act 1900 (UK) is.
10

The Court held in Aggregate Industries UK Ltd., R (on the application of) v English Nature and & Anor [2002] EWHC 908 (Admin) (24th April, 2002) that the European Union legislation overrode any British legislation in existence. It didnt argue if the subject master was any 25 particular kind of bird, merely the general application to whatever measurements was referred to. When we then look at s51 of the constitution then this is not a section that provides for legislative power for the States at all, as this is a grossly misconceived perception. It provides for the Commonwealth to exercise legislative powers, such as in s51(xxxvii) only upon matters 30 referred to by a State, but doesnt stipulate the states can do so on any particular subject matter. . S51 ordinary is held to be a concurrent legislative powers, but again this word concurrent must be understood in a unlettered persons understanding as intended by the Framers of the Constitution and not how a judge may like to twist its application, without even bothering to set 35 out in the judgment how he possibly came to his reasoning. Judges may include any weird statement but they must understand that their judgment must reflect the evidence before the Court and not fancy themselves to make declarations not based upon law or the evidence but based upon whatever twisted or perverted views the judge may have at the time. You have lawyers who call themselves constitutional lawyers, which is an oxymoron, like a humanitarian killer or a firebug fire fighter. Fancy a killer to claim in court having been a humanitarian, as he gave the victim the option to choose to die slowly by a bullet wound in the stomach, in agony, or a quick death by a bullet between the eyes. The same with judges, they make up all kind of reasoning to generally suit 45 their political masters as they are Business Unit 19 within the Victorian Government in blatant violation of the Chapter III of the constitution impartial courts with a separation of powers. If anything, I proved on 19 July 2006 in the County Court of Victoria how despite this general perception that one must vote and judges have been so to say brainwashed to enforce this I comprehensively in 2 appeals defeated the Commonwealth (AEC), that voting cannot be forced 50 as it is unconstitutional to do so. And this also is set out for example in one issue as is on the Australian Electoral Commission Facebook website published: p3 12-08-2013 Sheriffs Office Ref: COMPLAINT Your Ref: BC/15766
40 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, by fax 0011-61-3-94577209 or E-mail INSPECTOR-RIKATI@schorel-hlavka.com See also www.schorel-hlavka.com Free download of documents at blog Http://www.scribd.com/InspectorRikati

4
https://www.facebook.com/AustralianElectoralCommission/posts/510419275711079?comment_id=53976906&offset=0&total_comments=1 QUOTE (19-8-2013) Australian Electoral Commission Facebook Website On 19 July 2006 I comprehensively defeated the Commonwealth of Australia (AEC) in 2 appeals before the County 5 Court of Victoria. As a CONSTITUTIONALIST my ADDRESS TO THE COURT included the following, which was not challenged by the prosecution (nor any other about 50 constitutional issues I submitted to the court) QUOTE Part 1 of 3 of the 19 July 2006 ADDRESS TO THE COURT 10 As shown below in greater extend the question of the Defendants religion itself would be an invasion as to his rights. Further, there is no requirement to state any particular religion as the matter in U.S. Supreme Court. 116 Commonwealth not to legislate in respect of religion The Commonwealth shall not make any law for establishing any religion, or for imposing any religious observance, or for prohibiting the free exercise of any religion, and no religious test shall be required as a qualification for any office or public trust under the Commonwealth.

15

20 WELSH v. UNITED STATES, 398 U.S. 333 (1970), 398 U.S. 333, WELSH v. UNITED STATES, CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, No. 76., Argued January 20, 1970, Decided June 15, 1970 25 1. The language of 6 (j) cannot be construed (as it was in United States v. Seeger, supra, and as it is in the prevailing opinion) to exempt from military service all individuals who in good faith oppose all war, it being clear from both the legislative history and textual analysis of that provision that Congress used the words "by reason of religious training and belief" to limit religion to its theistic sense and to confine it to formal, organized worship or shared beliefs by a recognizable and cohesive group. Pp. 348-354. 2. The question of the constitutionality of 6 (j) cannot be avoided by a construction of that provision that is contrary to its intended meaning. Pp. 354-356. 3. Section 6 (j) contravenes the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment by exempting those whose conscientious objection claims are founded on a theistic belief while not exempting those whose claims are based on a secular belief. To comport with that clause an exemption must be "neutral" and include those whose belief emanates from a purely moral, ethical, or philosophical source. Pp. 356-361. 4. In view of the broad discretion conferred by the Act's severability clause and the longstanding policy of exempting religious conscientious objectors, the Court, rather than nullifying the exemption entirely, should extend its coverage to those like petitioner who have been unconstitutionally excluded from its coverage. Pp. 361-367.

30

35

40 And; http://www.vaccineinfo.net/exemptions/relexemptlet.shtml Hints for Religious Exemptions to Immunization 45 Please read the text below before you download, print, or use the sample religious exemption letter and support materials provided in the following link: Sample Religious Exemption Letter and Supporting Documentation 50 Refer to the statutes. The laws require that immunization must conflict with the tenets and practices of a recognized or organized religion of which you are an adherent or member. However, the law does not require you to name a religion at all. In fact, disclosing your religion could cause your religious exemption to be challenged. Some schools and daycares attempt to require you to give far more information than required by law. You are not required by law to fill out any form letters from a school or daycare. The law allows you to submit your own letter and the letter only needs to meet the bare requirements of the law. Keep it simple; do not feel you need to describe your religious beliefs here as that also is not required by law. 12-08-2013 Sheriffs Office Ref: COMPLAINT Your Ref: BC/15766 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, by fax 0011-61-3-94577209 or E-mail INSPECTOR-RIKATI@schorel-hlavka.com See also www.schorel-hlavka.com Free download of documents at blog Http://www.scribd.com/InspectorRikati p4

55 And

5
And Many times, when a school or day care questions your exemption, they are merely unfamiliar with the law or trying to coerce you to go against your beliefs by deliberately misrepresenting the law. They are betting on the fact that you don't know your rights. 5 What appears to be clear is that a religious objection is not qualified to a specific religion and neither can be as this would in fact offend Section 116 of the Constitution. Neither can it be associated with any particular religion as this would also interfere with Section 116 of the Constitution. Likewise, any person objecting under the religious objection Subsection 245(14) of the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918 neither can be required to be a religious 10 person as this would also offend Section 116 of the Constitution, as the equivalent in WELSH v. UNITED STATES, 398 U.S. 333 (1970), 398 U.S. 333 made clear that it (the religious objection applies as much to non religious persons as religious persons. Therefore, anyone objection for his/her personal reasons to vote clearly is entitled to do so regardless of having any specific religion mentioned. END QUOTE Part 1 of 3 of the 19 July 2006 ADDRESS TO THE COURT 15 So on that basis, the Court could never convict me for FAILING TO VOTE, because the electoral act had an exclusion for religious objection and that means I was entitled to a non-religious objection also, as otherwise it is unconstitutional END QUOTE (19-8-2013) Australian Electoral Commission Facebook Website 20

Clearly, every time an elector is fined/convicted for FAILING TO VOTE while clearly constitutionally or otherwise legally they have a right to refuse to do so, not needing any specific religious ground, then the imbecile judiciary underlines how totally incompetent it is to appropriately apply the true meaning of the constitution. 25 What kind of morons do we have who would tell me that because I am not a lawyer then I wouldnt understand the law and they do? After all if the Framers of the Constitution made clear:
(Again) Hansard 19-4-1897 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE 30 Mr. CARRUTHERS: This is a Constitution which the unlettered people of the community ought to be able to understand. END QUOTE

35

Then any legislation enacted within the legislative powers provided for within the constitution must be exercised to produce legislation that c an be understood by the unlettered person! We now have however that a judge cannot even understand the true meaning and application of the constitution!

In the following book I exposed within 076-Chapter 022A -failure of the case-etc how the High Court of Australia took out of context what the Framers of the Constitution stated in the WorkChoices case. INSPECTOR-RIKATI on IR WorkChoices legislation A book about the validity of the High Courts 14-11-2006 decision ISBN 978-0-9751760-6-1 (Book-CD), 45 978-0-9751760-7-8 (Book-B&W), 978-0-9751760-8-5 (Book-Colour)
40

Anyhow, what we are on about is a proper reading of the constitution! Judges may interpret the intentions of the Framers of the Constitution, but they cannot themselves amend the 50 constitution. So, what did the Framers of the Constitution state about the State legislative powers in regard of subject matters handed over by the Colonies to the federation?
. Hansard 20-4-1897 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE Mr. HIGGINS: 12-08-2013 Sheriffs Office Ref: COMPLAINT Your Ref: BC/15766 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, by fax 0011-61-3-94577209 or E-mail INSPECTOR-RIKATI@schorel-hlavka.com See also www.schorel-hlavka.com Free download of documents at blog Http://www.scribd.com/InspectorRikati p5

6
I think it is advisable that private people should not be put to the expense of having important questions of constitutional law decided out of their own pockets. END QUOTE . 5 Hansard 27-1-1898 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE Mr. BARTON (New South Wales).-If this is left as an exclusive power the laws of the states will nevertheless remain in force under clause 100. Mr. TRENWITH.-Would the states still proceed to make laws? 10 Mr. BARTON.-Not after this power of legislation comes into force. Their existing laws will, however, remain. If this is exclusive they can make no new laws, but the necessity of making these new laws will be all the more forced on the Commonwealth. END QUOTE

15 Hansard 27-1-1898 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE Mr. BARTON.-I was going to explain when I was interrupted that the moment the Commonwealth legislates on this subject the power will become exclusive. END QUOTE 20 Hansard 7-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE The Hon. J.H. HOWE: Is it to be the Premier of New South Wales or Mr. Barton who is going to introduce a measure for old-age pensions when he has the power to do so by the Constitution we give to the Federal Parliament?. I do not think it is necessary for me to say any more. The words I have quoted are better than any I could speak. My only desire is to give power to the Federal Parliament to achieve a scheme for old-age pensions if it be practicable, and if the people require it. No power would be taken away from the states. The sub-section would not interfere with the right of any state to act in the meantime until the Federal Parliament took the matter in hand

25

30 END QUOTE Hansard 27-1-1898 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE Mr. BARTON (New South Wales).-If this is left as an exclusive power the laws of the states will nevertheless remain in force under clause 100. Mr. TRENWITH.-Would the states still proceed to make laws? Mr. BARTON.-Not after this power of legislation comes into force. Their existing laws will, however, remain. If this is exclusive they can make no new laws, but the necessity of making these new laws will be all the more forced on the Commonwealth. 40 END QUOTE Hansard 28-1-1898 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE Sir JOHN DOWNER.-There must be some body which deems it necessary, and the only body to which 45 the words can refer is the Commonwealth Parliament. What very substantial difference does it make whether we leave the provision as it stands or put it into clause 52? True, if the provision is left where it stands, the Federal Parliament will have exclusive power in connexion with this matter; but that body will only have exclusive power when it chooses to exercise it. It is only when the Federal Parliament has passed legislation dealing with the people about whom regulations are to be made that this exclusive power 50 will have arisen. END QUOTE 12-08-2013 Sheriffs Office Ref: COMPLAINT Your Ref: BC/15766 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, by fax 0011-61-3-94577209 or E-mail INSPECTOR-RIKATI@schorel-hlavka.com See also www.schorel-hlavka.com Free download of documents at blog Http://www.scribd.com/InspectorRikati p6

35

7
Hansard 28-1-1898 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE Mr. GLYNN (South Australia).-I desire to call the attention of the leader of the Convention to an apparent vagueness in the word "exclusive," to which reference has not yet been made. The word "exclusive," no matter at what time the power arises, whether on the coming into being of the Commonwealth, or the exercise of the power by the Federal Parliament, may mean, and I believe does mean, that the power of the state to legislate ceases. On the question of whether the exclusive power under this provision comes into being with the establishment of the Commonwealth, I would call the attention of the leader of the Convention to clause 84. That clause seems to indicate that this exclusive power arises the moment an Act is passed. It speaks of the exclusive power of enforcing customs duties being vested in the Federal Parliament, but the second paragraph saysBut this exclusive power shall not come into force until uniform duties of customs have been imposed by the Parliament. It would appear that without that limitation the exclusive power would come into force at once, and the position would be as stated by the Victorian representatives. If you pass this clause as it [start page 255] stands the state could no longer legislate with regard to Chinese. Mr. BARTON.-If the exclusive power is given without any restriction, I think it would arise immediately on the establishment of the Commonwealth. END QUOTE 20 Hansard 28-1-1898 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE Mr. GLYNN.-There seems to be some doubt as to whether the exclusive power arises upon the establishment of the Commonwealth or on the exercise of the power of legislation. The doubt seems to be removed by clause 84. It is said that if we put this provision in clause 52 the exclusive power may be postponed until legislation takes place. But may you not then have a concurrent power, and may not the competence of the local Legislature to legislate in the matter be continued as long as the legislation is not in contradiction of federal legislation? Mr. DEAKIN.-That is the point. 30 Mr. GLYNN.-Yes, and there is still a vagueness in the word "exclusive." If it is doubtful whether the exclusive power commences with the foundation of the Commonwealth, and if it is possible that it may only come into being on the passing of legislation, may it not still be said that on the passing of exclusive legislation the power of the local Parliaments to legislate is extinguished, but that on the passing of concurrent legislation that power does not cease? Mr. REID (New South Wales).-I think that enough has now been said on this subject by honorable members both sides of the chamber, and I have only a very few remarks to offer. It appears that if the sub-section remains where it is state laws will be valid until federal legislation, but the states will not be able to alter or improve those laws during the possibly long interval between federation and federal legislation. Under these circumstances, as we leave to the states for an indefinite time the power of maintaining the laws they have, we should grant to them the power of improving those laws. It would recommend the Constitution more to a large number of persons if we put the sub-section in clause 52, thus enabling each state to legislate on this matter until the Federal Parliament comes in and legislates for all.

10

15

25

35

40

END QUOTE 45 . Hansard 22-9-1897 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE The Hon. R.E. O'CONNOR (New South Wales)[3.18]: The moment the commonwealth exercises the power, the states must retire from that field of legislation. 12-08-2013 Sheriffs Office Ref: COMPLAINT Your Ref: BC/15766 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, by fax 0011-61-3-94577209 or E-mail INSPECTOR-RIKATI@schorel-hlavka.com See also www.schorel-hlavka.com Free download of documents at blog Http://www.scribd.com/InspectorRikati p7

8
END QUOTE . Hansard 30-3-1897 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE Mr. REID: We must make it clear that the moment the Federal Parliament legislates on one of those points enumerated in clause 52, that instant the whole State law on the subject is dead. There cannot be two laws, one Federal and one State, on the same subject. But that I merely mention as almost a verbal criticism, because there is no doubt, whatever that the intention of the framers was not to propose any complication of the kind. END QUOTE . Hansard 30-3-1897 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE The Hon. R.E. O'CONNOR (New South Wales)[3.18]: We ought to be careful not to load the commonwealth with any more duties than are absolutely necessary. Although it is quite true that this power is permissive, you will always find that if once power is given to the commonwealth to legislate on a particular question, there will be continual pressure brought to bear on the commonwealth to exercise that power. The moment the commonwealth exercises the power, the states must retire from that field of legislation. END QUOTE . Hansard 2-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE Mr. OCONNOR.-Directly it is exercised it becomes an exclusive power, and there is no doubt that it will be exercised. END QUOTE

10

15

20

25

The Framers of the Constitution referred to subject, meaning the head of powers, and not if there was in a subject matters some item not legislated upon. Albeit the issue of Taxation was 30 perceived by them to be containing separate subject matters such as income tax, land tax, etc. Again:
Hansard 2-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE 35 Mr. OCONNOR.-Directly it is exercised it becomes an exclusive power, and there is no doubt that it will be exercised. END QUOTE

Once an exclusive power it always will be an exclusive power, because there is no constitutional 40 mechanism in place within the constitution to revert uniform exclusive legislative powers from the Commonwealth back to the States. Hence, when the Commonwealth enacted the Land Tax Office to commence operating as from 11 November 1910, then that was the end of all State legislative powers for land taxes and so also the delegated powers by the States for councils to raise council rates, as the High Court of 45 Australia in the 1904 Sydney Council v Commonwealth held that council rates were a delegated state taxation powers. where the principal (the States) no longer has this legislative powers then it neither can delegate this to its agents (municipal/shire councils). All and any council rates and/or State land taxes since 11 November 1910 became unconstitutional. the mere fact that the Commonwealth abolished its land taxes itself cannot revert back legislative 50 powers to the states, this because it became an exclusive and a uniform legislative power of the Commonwealth irrespective if it continue to legislate on the subject matter or not. Again:
Agar v Dolheguy & Anor [2010] VSC 506 (11 November 2010) refers to: QUOTE Agar v Dolheguy & Anor [2010] VSC 506 (11 November 2010) 55 52 I will not deal in detail with the provisions of that Act, but I will mention a few. The objects of the Act include to establish a national system of units and standards of measurement of physical quantities 12-08-2013 Sheriffs Office Ref: COMPLAINT Your Ref: BC/15766 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, by fax 0011-61-3-94577209 or E-mail INSPECTOR-RIKATI@schorel-hlavka.com See also www.schorel-hlavka.com Free download of documents at blog Http://www.scribd.com/InspectorRikati p8

9
and to provide for the uniform use of them throughout Australia. Importantly, the Act does not apply to the exclusion of any State law except in the case of inconsistency (s 4). Thus, if a State has legislated on a matter of measurement, and it is not inconsistent with a provision of the Commonwealth Act, the State Act applies unaffected. 5 END QUOTE Agar v Dolheguy & Anor [2010] VSC 506 (11 November 2010)

Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900 (UK)


QUOTE 106 Saving of Constitutions 10 The Constitution of each State of the Commonwealth shall, subject to this Constitution, continue as at the establishment of the Commonwealth, or as at the admission or establishment of the State, as the case may be, until altered in accordance with the Constitution of the State. 15 END QUOTE

Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900 (UK)


QUOTE 108 Saving of State laws 20 Every law in force in a Colony which has become or becomes a State, and relating to any matter within the powers of the Parliament of the Commonwealth, shall, subject to this Constitution, continue in force in the State; and, until provision is made in that behalf by the Parliament of the Commonwealth, the 25 Parliament of the State shall have such powers of alteration and of repeal in respect of any such law as the Parliament of the Colony had until the Colony became a State. 109 Inconsistency of laws When a law of a State is inconsistent with a law of the 30 Commonwealth, the latter shall prevail, and the former shall, to the extent of the inconsistency, be invalid. END QUOTE

The difference between s108 and s109 is also often misconceivved and misunderstood. For example, the former Premier of Queensland Mr Peter Beattie purportedly went back to the 35 colonial Constitution, and then enacted a new 2001 Queensland constitution, this even so upon Federation this old colonial Constitution as it existed prior to federation no longer existed. That is like a landlord engage in a lease and then later revert back to items prior to the lease, and then reintroduce a new lease with demands upon the tenant that couldnt have been legally possible as to amend the original lease. 40 . As the Framers of the Constitution made clear, when the Commonwealth legislated upon any subject matter within s51 then it had to use the common denominator of the Colonies surviving legislation, unamended since federation, and as such the Commonwealth couldnt legislate against the existing rights of Colonial legislative provisions. This is also why because of South 45 Australia women voting rights the Framers of the Constitution specifically referred to adult franchise in s41 of the Constitution. As such, Colonial laws prior to the federation would survive (OTHER THEN THOSE SPECIFICALLY REFERRED TO WITHIN S52 and which conflicted with S69) and the 50 Commonwealth would be forced to include those provisions in its legislation when legislating on the subject matter. However, if the State were to amend/abolish the old colonial legislation then it would no longer bed a Colonial legislation within s108 but would become subject to s109 of the constitution and then the State would have so to say squandered the existing Colonial rights.
12-08-2013 Sheriffs Office Ref: COMPLAINT Your Ref: BC/15766 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, by fax 0011-61-3-94577209 or E-mail INSPECTOR-RIKATI@schorel-hlavka.com See also www.schorel-hlavka.com Free download of documents at blog Http://www.scribd.com/InspectorRikati p9

10 As for s109, this refers to any State legislation that is in conflict with Commonwealth legislation. As such amended Colonial legislation as well as any legislation that the States would have created since federation until the Commonwealth commenced to legislate upon the subject matter. It has absolutely nothing to do with that states somehow could continue to legislate 5 parallel with the Commonwealth on the same subject matters, as somehow is fancied in the Agar v Dolheguy & Anor [2010] VSC 506 (11 November 2010) decision. Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900 (UK)
QUOTE 10

Part VPowers of the Parliament


51 Legislative powers of the Parliament [see Notes 10 and 11]
The Parliament shall, subject to this Constitution, have power to make laws for the peace, order, and good government of the Commonwealth with respect to: (i) trade and commerce with other countries, and among the States;
QUOTE

15

Here the constitution limits the Commonwealth legislative powers to external State Trade and 20 Commerce matters. This, as to protect the internal State rights to govern in Trade and Commerce.
HANSARD 17-4-1897 Constitution Convention QUOTE Mr. DEAKIN: They both desire to retain for their Several States for all time the privilege of controlling industrial disputes within their own borders. END QUOTE . HANSARD 19-4-1897 Constitution Convention QUOTE Mr. CARRUTHERS: Mr. Barton first of all recites Dicey to show what occurs under the unwritten Constitution of England. But here we are framing a written Constitution. When once that Constitution is framed we cannot get behind it. END QUOTE . HANSARD 27-1-1898 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE Mr. SYMON.The relations between the parties are determined by the contract in the place where it occurs. END QUOTE And HANSARD 27-1-1898 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE Sir EDWARD BRADDON (Tasmania).We have heard to-day something about the fixing of a rate of wage by the federal authority. That would be an absolute impossibility in the different states. END QUOTE And HANSARD 27-1-1898 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE Mr. BARTON: If they arise in a particular State they must be determined by the laws of the place where the contract was made. END QUOTE And HANSARD 27-1-1898 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE Mr. BARTON.-We do not propose to hand over contracts and civil rights to the Federation, and they are intimately allied to this question.

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

12-08-2013 Sheriffs Office Ref: COMPLAINT Your Ref: BC/15766 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, by fax 0011-61-3-94577209 or E-mail INSPECTOR-RIKATI@schorel-hlavka.com See also www.schorel-hlavka.com Free download of documents at blog Http://www.scribd.com/InspectorRikati p10

11
END QUOTE

. As such again the High Court of Australia WorkChoices decision was made it clear defiance of the legal principles embedded in the constitution!
5

Yet, in the Patricks case (1999) then the Courts were wrong to defeat the Commonwealth because the Framers of the Constitution specifically included the legal principle that water side workers would fall within the Commonwealth Industrial Relations legislative powers, because a strike commencing in one ports generally would spread to other ports. It also held that within 10 s100 of the Constitution the Commonwealth could override a state as to the infrastructure of ports, where it affects navigation of navigational rivers. Hence, when at the time Mr Peter Beattie was Premier of Queensland and ships were waiting outside the port to load, the Commonwealth had every legislative power to simply have the port facilities upgraded, albeit this could only be done through the Inter-State Commission, as the Federal Government would be limited to 15 uniform legislation, while the Inter-State Commission using experts in the field, could provide for funding for what was deemed in the interest of each relevant State, as well as the Commonwealth. Its decision could be appealed on an error of law to the High Court of Australia.
20

The fact that I comprehensively defeated the Commonwealth (Australian electoral commission) on FAILING TO VOTE (and numerous other constitutional issues) on 19 July 2006 are set out in my book:

INSPECTOR-RIKATI
25

& What is the Australian way of life really?


A book on CD on Australians political, religious & other rights ISBN 0-9751760-2-1

This book in CHAPTER 03 NOT VOTING IN BANANA REPUBLIC was actually published on 7 July 2006 (About 2 weeks prior to the Court upholding both appeals!) which contains all relevant details of the case, other then the final court decision. therefore the issue never was as to if I voted or not but the constitutional issue that the Commonwealth could not force any person to register or to vote in elections. Yet, despite this judicial officers ignore this and continue to become basically glorified debt 35 collectors (using the Sheriffs Office in the process also) for their political masters where they now operate as a Business Unit 19 for the Government using the same ABN as the State government! .
30 Hansard 1-2-1898 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National 40 Australasian Convention), QUOTE Mr. OCONNER (New South Wales).Because, as has been said before, it is [start page 357] necessary not only that the administration of justice should be pure and above suspicion, but that it should be beyond the possibility of suspicion; END QUOTE 45 . Hansard 8-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates 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. 50 END QUOTE 12-08-2013 Sheriffs Office Ref: COMPLAINT Your Ref: BC/15766 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, by fax 0011-61-3-94577209 or E-mail INSPECTOR-RIKATI@schorel-hlavka.com See also www.schorel-hlavka.com Free download of documents at blog Http://www.scribd.com/InspectorRikati p11

12
. Hansard 31-1-1898 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National Australasian Convention) QUOTE Mr. SOLOMON.5 We shall not only look to the Federal Judiciary for the protection of our interests, but also for the just interpretation of the Constitution: END QUOTE

10

Where then we go once again back to\ Agar v Dolheguy & Anor [2010] VSC 506 (11 November 2010) then where was the elaborate set out by the judge to explain why on earth the State could somehow continue to legislate contrary to the intentions of the Framers of the Constitution?

. Hansard 3-4-1891 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE Mr. DIBBS: 15 The intention of the framers of the constitution has been to make the constitution as flexible as possible, so that arrangements can be made between the various states and the commonwealth when the time comes to make them. END QUOTE . 20 Hansard 17-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE Sir EDWARD BRADDON.When we consider how vast the importance is that every word of the Constitution should be correct, that every clause should fit into every other clause; when we consider the great amount of time, trouble, and expense it would take to make any alteration, and that, if we have not made our intentions 25 clear, we shall undoubtedly have laid the foundation of lawsuits of a most extensive nature, which will harass the people of United Australia and create dissatisfaction with our work, it must be evident that too much care has not been exercised. END QUOTE 30 Hansard 17-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE Sir EDWARD BRADDON.When we consider how vast the importance is that every word of the Constitution should be correct, that every clause should fit into every other clause; when we consider the great amount of time, trouble, and expense it would take to make any alteration, and that, if we have not made our intentions clear, we shall undoubtedly have laid the foundation of lawsuits of a most extensive nature, which will harass the people of United Australia and create dissatisfaction with our work, it must be evident that too much care has not been exercised. END QUOTE . Hansard 8-2-1898 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE Mr. OCONNOR (New South Wales).-The honorable and learned member (Mr. Isaacs) is I think correct in the history of this clause that he has given, and this is [start page 672] one of those instances which should make us very careful of following too slavishly the provisions of the United States Constitution, or any other Constitution. No doubt in putting together the draft of this Bill, those who were responsible for doing so used the material they found in every Constitution before it, and probably they felt that they would be incurring a great deal of responsibility in leaving out provisions which might be in the least degree applicable. But it is for us to consider, looking at the history and reasons for these provisions in the Constitution of the United States, whether they are in any way applicable; and I quite agree with my honorable and learned friend (Mr. Carruthers) that we should be very careful of every word that we put in this Constitution, and that we should have no word in it which we do not see some reason for. Because there can be no question that in time to come, when this Constitution has to be interpreted, every word will be weighed and an interpretation given to it; and by the use now of what I may describe as idle words which we have no use for, we may be giving a direction to the Constitution which none of us now contemplate. Therefore, it is incumbent upon us to see that there is some reason for every clause and every word that goes into this Constitution. END QUOTE . Hansard 2-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates 12-08-2013 Sheriffs Office Ref: COMPLAINT Your Ref: BC/15766 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, by fax 0011-61-3-94577209 or E-mail INSPECTOR-RIKATI@schorel-hlavka.com See also www.schorel-hlavka.com Free download of documents at blog Http://www.scribd.com/InspectorRikati p12

35

40

45

50

55

13
QUOTE Mr. BARTON. If we are going to give the Federal Parliament power to legislate as it pleases with regard to Commonwealth citizenship, not having defined it, we may be enabling the Parliament to pass legislation that would really defeat all the principles inserted elsewhere in the Constitution, and, in fact, to play ducks and drakes with it. That is not what is meant by the term "Trust the Federal Parliament." END QUOTE

We must understand the true meaning and application of the constitution by considering what the 10 intentions were of the Framers of the Constitution. My grandchildren likely would say I dont know if I were to ask them a question about the constitution, and they would sound more plausible and intelligent then a judicial officer spreading his as I view it utter garbage not having a clue what the constitution really is about is an in justice also to the community of the State concerned.
15 . QUOTE Scuderi v Morris [2001] VSCA 190 (29 October 2001 In order to resolve this appeal and to determine the relevant principles, we have had to look at a considerable number of additional reported decisions as well as a variety of text books, many of which we have had to find for ourselves with the invaluable assistance of the researchers engaged by the Court. 20 END QUOTE http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/1986/11.html BROWN v. THE QUEEN [1986] HCA 11; (1986) 160 CLR 171 No. F.C. 86/010 (20 March 1986) QUOTE 25 3. The question for decision is whether s.80 contains an imperative and indispensable requirement that the trial must be by jury whenever the accused is charged on indictment with an offence against a law of the Commonwealth, or whether the section is intended to secure for the benefit and protection of any person so charged a right or privilege which the accused may waive if the law governing the conduct of the trial permits it. The argument that the requirement is indispensable and cannot be waived is an obvious enough one. The 30 words of s.80 appear to be both clear and mandatory; read literally, they appear to mean that "if there be an indictment, there must be a jury", as Higgins J. said in R. v. Archdall and Roskruge; Ex parte Carrigan and Brown (1928) 41 CLR 128, at p 139, and they do not expressly admit any exception to that rule. 35 4. It then becomes necessary to consider the purpose which the framers of the Constitution had, or must be supposed to have had, in including the provisions of s.80 in the Constitution. The requirement that there should be a trial by jury was not merely arbitrary or pointless. It must be inferred that the purpose of the section was to protect the accused - in other words, to provide the accused with a "safeguard against the corrupt or over-zealous prosecutor and against the compliant, biased, or eccentric judge": Duncan v. Louisiana (1968) 391 US 145, at p 156 (20 L.Ed.2d 491, at p 500). Those who advocate the retention of the jury system almost invariably place in the forefront of their argument the proposition (sometimes rhetorically expressed but not without some truth) that the jury is a bulwark of liberty, a protection against tyranny and arbitrary oppression, and an important means of securing a fair and impartial trial.

40

The successful appellant pays cost! 45 END QUOTE . QUOTE Main v. Thiboutot, 100 S. Ct. 2502 (1980). The law provides that once State and Federal jurisdiction has been challenged, it must be proven. END QUOTE 50 QUOTE Hagens v. Lavine, 415 U.S. 533, Once jurisdiction is challenged, it must be proven END QUOTE 55 QUOTE Standard v. Olsen, 74 S. Ct. 768, No sanctions can be imposed absent proof of jurisdiction. 12-08-2013 Sheriffs Office Ref: COMPLAINT Your Ref: BC/15766 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, by fax 0011-61-3-94577209 or E-mail INSPECTOR-RIKATI@schorel-hlavka.com See also www.schorel-hlavka.com Free download of documents at blog Http://www.scribd.com/InspectorRikati p13

14
END QUOTE QUOTE Basso v. Utah Power & Light Co., 495 2nd 906 at 910, Jurisdiction can be challenged at any time, even on final determination. 5 END QUOTE . QUOTE Thompson v. Tolmie, 2 Pet. 157, 7 L.Ed. 381; Griffith v. Frazier, 8 Cr. 9, 3L. Ed. 471. Where there is absence of jurisdiction, all administrative and judicial proceedings are a nullity and confer no right, offer no protection, and afford no justification, and may be rejected upon direct 10 collateral attack. END QUOTE . Dow Jones & Company Inc v Gutnick [2002] HCA 56 (10 December 2002) QUOTE 15 1. 2. Reformulation of the common law of Australia Reasons for restraint: The responsibilities of this Court extend to the re-expression of the common law of Australia. However, the Court is bound by the Constitution.

END QUOTE 20 Hansard 8-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates 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. Mr. DEAKIN.-It is made for the lawyers under this clause. 25 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, 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 would give 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 been much debated-adhere to the decision we have already arrived at. END QUOTE HANSARD 12-4-1897 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National 35 Australasian Convention) 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 40 invest with federal jurisdiction. END QUOTE Hansard 24-3-1897 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE 45 Sir GEORGE TURNER: It would never do to allow in this Federal Parliament that those representatives who are elected upon the most liberal franchise possible should be outvoted by those who would be elected by a very limited franchise indeed. As this may fairly be regarded as the National House, representing the people of the various States as a nation, we ought to have uniformity in the franchise. We must leave it to the Federal Parliament to say what the franchise should be. At the same time, as some colonies have given the 50 right of voting to those who have not that right in other colonies, it would be unfair and inequitable to take from any who have the right, and therefore whatever uniformity is determined upon we shall have to allow the innovation that no person, man or woman, who has the right to vote shall be deprived of exercising that right, even so far as the elections to the Federal Parliament are concerned. I would go the length of saying that everyone who has the right in the various colonies, if they desire to exercise their 55 franchise, should have the opportunity of doing so. END QUOTE 12-08-2013 Sheriffs Office Ref: COMPLAINT Your Ref: BC/15766 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, by fax 0011-61-3-94577209 or E-mail INSPECTOR-RIKATI@schorel-hlavka.com See also www.schorel-hlavka.com Free download of documents at blog Http://www.scribd.com/InspectorRikati p14

30

15
Again Hansard 24-3-1897 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE Sir GEORGE TURNER: At the same time, as some colonies have given the right of voting to those who have not that right in other 5 colonies, it would be unfair and inequitable to take from any who have the right, and therefore whatever uniformity is determined upon we shall have to allow the innovation that no person, man or woman, who has the right to vote shall be deprived of exercising that right, even so far as the elections to the Federal Parliament are concerned. END QUOTE 10 And Hansard 24-3-1897 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE Sir GEORGE TURNER: I would go the length of saying that everyone who has the right in the various colonies, if they desire to exercise their franchise, should have the opportunity of doing so. 15 END QUOTE

Desire stands for an expressed wish, option, choice, request, etc, not being compulsory!
Hansard 27-1-1898 Constitution Convention Debates 20 QUOTE Sir GEORGE TURNER.-Will you briefly restate the point? Mr. DEAKIN.-My point is that by the requests of different colonies at different times you may arrive at a position in which all the colonies have adopted a particular law, and it is necessary for the working of that law that certain fees, charges, or taxation should be imposed. That law now relates to the whole of the Union, because every state has come under it. As I read clause 52, the Federal Parliament will have no power, until the law has thus become absolutely federal, to impose taxation to provide the necessary revenue for carrying out that law. Another difficulty of the sub-section is the question whether, even when a state has referred a matter to the federal authority, and federal legislation takes place on it, it has any-and if any, what-power of amending or repealing the law by which it referred the question? I should be inclined to think it had no such power, but the question has been raised, and should be settled. I should say that, having appealed to Caesar, it must be bound by the judgment of Caesar, and that it would not be possible for it afterwards to revoke its reference. It appears to me that this sub-section, which is certainly one of the very valuable sub-sections of this clause, affording, as it does, means by which the colonies may by common agreement bring about federal action, without amending the Constitution, needs to be rendered more explicit. One point more especially which needs to be rendered clear is whether, when we have this federal action, there shall not be a federal means of providing for the necessary revenue that may be required or for imposing the necessary charges under such legislation. Sir JOHN DOWNER.-Is that not implied? 40 Mr. DEAKIN.-If it is implied, would it not be best to make it explicit? The parentage of this clause, as I have shown-originating as it does in a body with practically no financial power-casts a certain suspicion on that reading of it, although, of course, the provision when embodied in this Act would have a different effect. Still, why not make it clear whether we mean that, when the Federal Parliament has passed federal legislation for some of the colonies, we shall allow that same legislation to deal with any necessary raising of revenue from those colonies which may be required to give effect to the legislation? Dr. QUICK (Victoria).-I think the point taken by my honorable friend (Mr. Deakin) is one well worthy of the consideration of the Drafting Committee, and probably the difficulty to which he has drawn attention could be obviated by some such provision as that which he suggested. But this matter has struck me also from another point of view, and it seems to me that the provision affords an easy method of amending the Federal Constitution, without referring such amendments to the people of the various states for their assent. Now, either when the state Parliaments have referred these matters to the Federal Parliament, and the Federal Parliament has dealt with such matters, that becomes a federal law, and cannot afterwards be repealed or revoked by the State Parliaments-that is one position, and in that case, of course, the reference once made [start page 218] is a reference for all time, and cannot be revoked, so that to that extent it becomes an amendment of the states' Constitution, incorporated in and engrafted on the Federal Constitution without the consent of the people of the various states. On the other hand, if that be not so, and the states can, after making such reference, repeal such reference, what is the result? You have a constant state of change-no guarantee for continuity or permanence-in this class of laws, and this might lead to a great deal of confusion and a most unsatisfactory state of things. My principal objection to the provision 12-08-2013 Sheriffs Office Ref: COMPLAINT Your Ref: BC/15766 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, by fax 0011-61-3-94577209 or E-mail INSPECTOR-RIKATI@schorel-hlavka.com See also www.schorel-hlavka.com Free download of documents at blog Http://www.scribd.com/InspectorRikati p15

25

30

35

45

50

55

16
is that it affords a free and easy method of amending the Federal Constitution without such amendments being carried into effect in the manner provided by this Constitution. Mr. BARTON.-I cannot understand how it gives an opportunity of amending the Federal Constitution. 5 END QUOTE

The following applies as much to Federal laws of the Commonwealth of Australia as it does to federal laws in the USA; http://familyguardian.taxtactics.com/Subjects/LawAndGovt/ChallJurisdiction/AuthoritiesArticle/AuthOnJurisdiction.htm 10 QUOTE 37 Am Jur 2d at section 8 states, in part: "Fraud vitiates every transaction and all contracts. Indeed, the principle is often stated, in broad and sweeping language, that fraud destroys the validity of everything into which it enters, and that it vitiates the most solemn contracts, documents, and even judgments." END QUOTE 15 And QUOTE The general misconception is that any statute passed by legislators bearing the appearance of law constitutes the law of the land. The U.S. Constitution is the supreme law of the land, and any statute, to be valid, must be in agreement. It is impossible for both the Constitution and a law violating it to be valid; one must prevail. 20 This is succinctly stated as follows: The general rule is that an unconstitutional statute, though having the form and name of law, is in reality no law, but is wholly void, and ineffective for any purpose; since unconstitutionality dates from the time of its enactment, and not merely from the date of the decision so branding it. An unconstitutional law, in legal contemplation, is as inoperative as if it had never been passed. Such a 25 statute leaves the question that it purports to settle just as it would be had the statute not been enacted. Since an unconstitutional law is void, the general principles follow that it imposes no duties, confers no rights, creates no office, bestows no power or authority on anyone, affords no protection, and justifies no acts performed under it. . . A void act cannot be legally consistent with a valid one. An unconstitutional law cannot operate to supersede 30 any existing valid law. Indeed, insofar as a statute runs counter to the fundamental law of the land, it is superseded thereby. No one is bound to obey an unconstitutional law and no courts are bound to enforce it. END QUOTE Sixteenth American Jurisprudence 35 Second Edition, 1998 version, Section 203 (formerly Section 256) Sixteenth American Jurisprudence 2d; SS: 256 & 257: "The general rule is that an unconstitutional statute is in reality no law, but is wholly void, and ineffective for any purpose; since unconstitutionality dates from the time of it's enactment, and not merely from the date of the decision so branding it. An unconstitutional law, in legal contemplation, is as inoperative as if it had never been passed. Such a statute leaves the question that it purports to settle just as it would be had the statute not been enacted. 'Such an unconstitutional law is void', the general principles follow that it imposes no duties, confers no rights, creates no office, bestows no power or authority to anyone, affords no protection, and justifies no acts preformed under it . . . 'A void act cannot be legally consistent with a valid one. An unconstitutional law cannot operate to supersede any existing valid law. Indeed, insofar as a statute runs counter to the fundamental law of the land, it is superseded thereby. 'No one is bound to obey an unconstitutional law and no courts are bound to enforce it." . . . The fact that one acts in reliance on a statute which has theretofore been adjudged unconstitutional does not protect him from civil or criminal responsibility ....

40

45

50 Re Wakim; Ex parte McNally; Re Wakim; Ex parte Darvall; Re Brown; Ex parte Amann; Spi [1999] HCA 27 (17 June 1999) QUOTE Constitutional interpretation 1. 55 The starting point for a principled interpretation of the Constitution is the search for the intention of its makers[51]. That does not mean a search for their subjective beliefs, hopes or expectations. Constitutional interpretation is not a search for the mental states of those who made, or for that matter approved or p16

12-08-2013 Sheriffs Office Ref: COMPLAINT Your Ref: BC/15766 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, by fax 0011-61-3-94577209 or E-mail INSPECTOR-RIKATI@schorel-hlavka.com See also www.schorel-hlavka.com Free download of documents at blog Http://www.scribd.com/InspectorRikati

17
enacted, the Constitution. The intention of its makers can only be deduced from the words that they used in the historical context in which they used them[52]. In a paper on constitutional interpretation, presented at Fordham University in 1996, Professor Ronald Dworkin argued, correctly in my opinion[53]: 5 "We must begin, in my view, by asking what - on the best evidence available - the authors of the text in question intended to say. That is an exercise in what I have called constructive interpretation[54]. It does not mean peeking inside the skulls of people dead for centuries. It means trying to make the best sense we can of an historical event someone, or a social group with particular responsibilities, speaking or writing in a particular way on a particular occasion." 10 2. The application which this Court has given to some words and phrases of the Constitution would almost certainly have surprised most of those who participated in the making of the Constitution. Most of them could not have foreseen the extent to which the application of those words and phrases would enable the Commonwealth to dominate the federation and reduce the power of the States to control their domestic affairs. But that does not mean that this Court's interpretation of our Constitution has lacked fidelity to the intentions of those who made the Constitution. Where the interpretation of individual words or phrases of the Constitution is in issue, the current doctrine of the Court draws a distinction between connotation and denotation or, in other words, between meaning and application. Thus, in Ex parte Professional Engineers' Association[55] Windeyer J said: "We must not, in interpreting the Constitution, restrict the denotation of its terms to the things they denoted in 1900. The denotation of words becomes enlarged as new things falling within their connotations come into existence or become known. But in the interpretation of the Constitution the connotation or connotations of its words should remain constant. We are not to give words a meaning different from any meaning which they could have borne in 1900. Law is to be accommodated to changing facts. It is not to be changed as language changes." END QUOTE

15 3.

20

25

It is irrelevant if the devices now used may have been invented this year, this is, because for constitutional issues if they are used for measuring something then they fall within exclusive 30 Commonwealth legislative power, the moment the court recognises that the Commonwealth has legislated within the heading of (xv) weights and measures; it c annot go beyond it as if it doesnt exist. No one could expect the Commonwealth to legislate about every new piece of invention when imported from some other country the moment it is imported. Any measurement item used to measure something, not just in trade, must be deemed to be within the ambit of 35 (xv) weights and measures;. The Framers of the Constitution were not at all narrow minded, indeed, had a considerable foresight, that constitutionally even recent inventions such as Ipots, mobile phone, bleutooth, modem, Wi-Fi, Internet, etc all fall within Commonwealth legislative powers. This, because the 40 Framers of the constitution debated that new technological inventions could exist in the future and so for this purpose they added the wording and other like services in (v) postal, telegraphic, telephonic, and other like services;. At that time the ability to talk to England by telephone had just become a reality! . 45 What also should be understood is, the misconception that the Constitution must be interpreted by the intentions of the Framers of the Constitution who are long dead and buried. Anyone, including any judge of the High Court of Australia or other judicial officer who utter such a nonsense would display his/her lack of proper understanding about the true nature of the constitution. 50 Each time electors approve or veto a proposed amendment to the constitution the electors are in fact part of the Framers of the Constitution. As such the constitution must be interpreted as to the intentions of the Framers of the Constitution when the original constitution was created complimented with the intentions of the Framers of the constitution, being the electors in p17 12-08-2013 Sheriffs Office Ref: COMPLAINT Your Ref: BC/15766
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, by fax 0011-61-3-94577209 or E-mail INSPECTOR-RIKATI@schorel-hlavka.com See also www.schorel-hlavka.com Free download of documents at blog Http://www.scribd.com/InspectorRikati

18 referendums,. This however does also poses a problem in itself because when one consider the 1967 con-job referendum to amend s51(xxvi) to include Aboriginees, it in fact only allows to DISCRIMINATE against Aboriginees and not at all to enact in favour of Aboriginees contrary to the general community. This is why in the early 1950 this proposed amendment to the 5 constitution was shelved by the then Federal Government when they discovered that it would create conflict in law. Surely, any fair dinkum judge would be aware that you cannot have one constitutional provision having one meaning for one race and another for another race. As s51(xxvi) was included to discriminate against a race then it cannot be accepted that somehow the electors asked to vote in regard of the Aboriginal issue only somehow then accepted that the 10 Federal Government can now legislate against the general community in favour of any race! After all, this totally undermines the total purpose of this s51(xxvi).
. Hansard 27-1-1898 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE 15 Mr. BARTON.-We are going to suggest that it should read as follows:the people of any race for whom it is deemed necessary to make any laws not applicable to the general community; but so that this power shall not extend to authorize legislation with respect to the affairs of the aboriginal race in any state. 20 Mr. ISAACS.-My observations were extended much further than that. The term general community" I understand to mean the general community of the whole Commonwealth. If it means the general community of the whole Commonwealth, I do not see the meaning of saying that the Parliament of the Commonwealth shall have the exclusive authority to do that, because any single state would have the right to do it under any circumstances. If it means less than that-if it means the general community of a state-I do not see why it should not be left to the state. We should be placed in a very awkward position indeed if any particular state is forbidden to pass any distinctive legislation in certain well-known instances. For instance, if Victoria should choose to enact that Afghans shall only get hawkers' licences under certain conditions which are not [start page 228] applicable to Europeans she may be debarred by this sub-section from doing so. I do not know how it will affect our factory law in regard to the Chinese which does not operate beyond the confines of Victoria at all. Sir EDWARD BRADDON.-Why single out the Afghans? Mr. ISAACS.-If any other race possess the same characteristic as the Afghans I will put them in the same class. At all events, the expression general community" means the whole community of the Commonwealth. I do not think that this has any application. If it is to have any application at all, it seems to me to be intended to debar the state from passing legislation-necessary legislation, but purely confined to that state. I do not think that that sub-section ought to be there at all if that is the meaning of it. Mr. BARTON (New South Wales).-I think the original intention of this sub-section was to deal with the affairs of such persons of other races-what are generally called inferior races, though I do not know with how much warrant sometimes-who may be in the Commonwealth at the time it is brought into existence, or who may under the laws of the Commonwealth regulating aliens come into it. We have made the dealing with aliens, which includes a certain degree of coloured immigration, a power of the Commonwealth, and we have made the dealing with immigration a power of the Commonwealth, so that all those of the races who come into the community after the establishment of the Commonwealth will not only enter subject to laws made in respect to their immigration, but will remain subject to any laws which the Commonwealth may specially devise for them. There is no reason why the Commonwealth should not have power to devise such laws. Sir GEORGE TURNER.-An exclusive power? Mr. BARTON.-It ought to have an exclusive power to devise such laws. Sir GEORGE TURNER.-If it does not exercise it can the state exercise it? 50 Mr. BARTON.-Once the Commonwealth legislates with reference to the question of aliens and immigration, its legislation displaces the state law. END QUOTE HANSARD 28-1-1898 Constitution Convention Debates 12-08-2013 Sheriffs Office Ref: COMPLAINT Your Ref: BC/15766 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, by fax 0011-61-3-94577209 or E-mail INSPECTOR-RIKATI@schorel-hlavka.com See also www.schorel-hlavka.com Free download of documents at blog Http://www.scribd.com/InspectorRikati p18

25

30

35

40

45

19
QUOTE Mr. ISAACS.-What is the meaning of the statement that the state cannot legislate for the whole general community? 5 Mr. BARTON.-That is by way of description. A law made by the state does not apply to the general community. [start page 254] END QUOTE

WE SEEM TO HAVE SOME KIND OF CONSTITUTIONAL ADVISORY PANEL TO THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, BUT OBVIOUSLY THEY ARE JUST LAWYERS PRETENDING TO BE CONSTITUTIONALIST, AND AFTER ALL THEY ARE PAID FOR BY THE GOVERNMENT (FROM TAXPAYERS HARD EARNED MONIES), SO THEY ARE BIAS. And considering they advise at times wrongly to the government about the constitutional validity of legislation it may underline this. If a government is to be agents of the 15 people then why woyuld it claim to have legal advise but refuses to disclose this as to constitutional issues? Surely the people are entitled to be aware what their agents are up to?
10 HANSARD 17-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates 20 QUOTE 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, therefore, it can only act as the agents of the people. END QUOTE 25 . HANSARD 17-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE Mr. BARTON.- Of course it will be argued that this Constitution will have been made by the Parliament of the United Kingdom. That will be true in one sense, but not true in effect, because the 30 provisions of this Constitution, the principles which it embodies, and the details of enactment by which those principles are enforced, will all have been the work of Australians. END QUOTE And HANSARD 17-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates 35 QUOTE Mr. DEAKIN.What a charter of liberty is embraced within this Bill-of political liberty and religious liberty-the liberty and the means to achieve all to which men in these days can reasonably aspire. A charter of liberty is enshrined in this Constitution, which is also a charter of peace-of peace, order, and good government for the whole of the peoples whom it will embrace and unite. 40 END QUOTE And HANSARD 17-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE Mr. SYMON (South Australia).- We who are assembled in this Convention are about to commit to the 45 people of Australia a new charter of union and liberty; we are about to commit this new Magna Charta for their acceptance and confirmation, and I can conceive of nothing of greater magnitude in the whole history of the peoples of the world than this question upon which we are about to invite the peoples of Australia to vote. The Great Charter was wrung by the barons of England from a reluctant king. This new charter is to be given by the people of Australia to themselves. 50 END QUOTE

This is why I have for long also canvassed in my published books published in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI series on certain constitutional and other legal issues that we need a OFFICE-OF-THE-GUARDIAN (Dont forget the hyphens!) which will advise the 55 Government, the people, the Parliament and the Courts as to the true meaning and application of the constitution. p19 12-08-2013 Sheriffs Office Ref: COMPLAINT Your Ref: BC/15766
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, by fax 0011-61-3-94577209 or E-mail INSPECTOR-RIKATI@schorel-hlavka.com See also www.schorel-hlavka.com Free download of documents at blog Http://www.scribd.com/InspectorRikati

20 .
HANSARD 17-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE Mr. DEAKIN.- In this Constitution, although much is written much remains unwritten, 5 END QUOTE

This is why one needs a constitutionalist and not some lawyer trying so to say gets his client of the hook by twisting the meaning and application of the constitution. The constitution is so to say a contract between citizens and state that their agents can govern within the limits of the 10 constitution in the interest of the citizens, not despite of it! Lets apply the following reasoning. Agar v Dolheguy & Anor [2010] VSC 506 (11 November 2010;
QUOTE Agar v Dolheguy & Anor [2010] VSC 506 (11 November 2010) 15 66 A driver might misconstrue his or her actual speed because the error tolerance latent in the vehicles speedometer is greater than that in the detection device. But drivers can meet that risk by having their instruments actual error tolerance measured, or drivers can drive at a speed that allows for a potential under-reading of 10 per cent of actual speed. END QUOTE Agar v Dolheguy & Anor [2010] VSC 506 (11 November 2010) 20

A judge may assume the position of the constitution but his disinterest or other reasons not to adequately inform himself about the true meaning and application of the constitution doesnt excuse himself of handing down utter and sheer nonsense about a case based upon his own fancy full beliefs, no matter how mistaken he might be. 25 . If a citizen is to be aware and know the rule of law, then surely the first principles of the rule of law, enshrined in the constitution cannot be defied, ignore or otherwise disregarded by a judge who in particular seeks to use the application of the constitution against a party before the court. .
30 Agar v Dolheguy & Anor [2010] VSC 506 (11 November 2010) refers to: QUOTE Agar v Dolheguy & Anor [2010] VSC 506 (11 November 2010) 55 Under those powers, regulations have been prescribed in the National Measurement Regulations 1999 with respect to maximum permissible uncertainty in relation to certain measurements (but not speed), and maximum permissible error in relation to a breath analyser.[14] No regulation has been made in relation to a speed measuring device. END QUOTE Agar v Dolheguy & Anor [2010] VSC 506 (11 November 2010)

35

Again, if the item is a measuring device then it falls under Commonwealth exclusive legislative powers the moment the Commonwealth commenced to to legislate within the 40 provisions of measurement, irrespective if it didnt specifically legislated for every different type of measuring instrument whenever it becomes in existence. It should have been the duty and obligation to pursue the Commonwealth to appropriately legislate for the devices it sough to use as measuring devices. The State ignorance to do so cannot then be an excuse to convict motorist of offences using a non-approved measuring device. For all I know, the 45 Commonwealth may very well have refused to legislate or may do so in the future of any device it may hold would be a deviance to the constitutional rights of a citizen. therefore, the States cannot just willy nilly legislate on their own accord because they way desire to use some device the Commonwealth may have refused to approve to be used! Again, the onus was upon the relevant State to seek the Commonwealth to enact legislation to 50 approve a measuring device it desired to use and failing obtaining such an approval then it cannot be used. More over, I view it is blatant political for any judge then to ignore this kind of reasoning and defies the rights of citizens embedded in the constitution! p20 12-08-2013 Sheriffs Office Ref: COMPLAINT Your Ref: BC/15766
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, by fax 0011-61-3-94577209 or E-mail INSPECTOR-RIKATI@schorel-hlavka.com See also www.schorel-hlavka.com Free download of documents at blog Http://www.scribd.com/InspectorRikati

21 . Why is it that no judicial officer seems to be capable of addressing the above issues in a competent manner as citizens are entitled upon? . 5 To me Agar v Dolheguy & Anor [2010] VSC 506 (11 November 2010) lacks any proper reasoning the accused was entitled upon, to have a concise but well set out consideration as to why somehow the court held that the State could legislate, such as quoting the Framers of the Constitution (as I do) rather then their own fanciful claims without a shred of set out of proper consideration!
10 . QUOTE In the Marriage of Tennant (1980) 5 FLR 777 at 780 As no grounds for appeal are required to be specified in the notice of Appeal, which, on filing institutes the appeal (reg 122), there is no limitations of the scope of the appeal and all findings of fact and law made in the lower court in relation to the decree appealed are in challenge and cannot be relied on by the appellant or the 15 respondent. All the issues (unless by consent) must be reheard. This of course brings me to the point of the absence of reason for the magistrates decision in this case. Perhaps reasons were given orally but not recorded for the record. Apart from the requirement of such reason for the purpose of the appeal process, there is the basic ground of criticism that litigants who go to court, put their witnesses up, argue their case and attempt to controvert the opposing case are entitled to know, if they lose, why they lost. If they are given no 20 reason they may be entitled to feel the decision against them was conceived in prejudice, bias, or caprice. In such a case not only the litigant, but justice itself, is the loser. Magistrates should realise, even more than they seem to do, that this class of business is not mere ordinary trivial work, and they should deal with these cases with a due sense of responsibility which administrations of 25 the summary jurisdiction Act and the far reaching consequences of the orders that they make thereafter entail. [Baker v Baker (1906) 95 LT 549; In Robinson v Robinson (1898) p135; and again in Cobb v Cobb (1900) p145] it was stated that when making orders of this kind, from which lies an appeal to other courts, it is the duty of the magistrate not only to cause a note to be made of the evidence, and of his decision, but to give the reasons for his decision and to cause a note to be made of his reasons... Elaborate judgements are not required, 30 but the reasons which lead the magistrate to make his order must be explicitly stated. END QUOTE

Obviously a judge of a Supreme Court of Victoria should not ignore this legal principle either, and have shown in the reason of judgment on what constitutional basis he held to have his kin d 35 of fanciful argument, rightly or wrongly! .
QUOTE http://www.trafficlaw.com.au/forum/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=179&start=54 by slattery Tue Nov 20, 2012 10:42 am Directly from the camera commissioner 40 The Road Safety Camera Commissioner received complaints to the effect that a person cannot be convicted of exceeding the speed limit on the basis of a reading taken by a road safety camera unless it can be established that the measurements obtained by the speed camera comply with section 10 of the National Measurement Act 1960 (Cth) (the Commonwealth Act). The decision of Owen J in Breedon v Kongras (1996) 16 WAR 66 has been cited as authority for this proposition. It was hoped that a later contrary decision of Macaulay J in Agar v Dolheguy (2010) VSC 406 would resolve the issue. However, subsequent correspondents seem to have either been unaware of, or paid no heed to this more recent decision. In his judgement, His Honour observed that the provisions of the Commonwealth Act: do not compel States to adopt or apply metrological principles in their regulatory provisions with respect to measuring instruments (eg. their use and testing) except perhaps in relation to measuring instruments used in trade and, as I will show, in relation to an evidential breath analyser. In June 2012, the Road Safety Camera Commissioner briefed a leading Victorian Silk PG Nash QC to examine the authorities and advise. Mr Nash brought all relevant authorities together with the following result. The decision in Breedon v Kongras supports an argument that a prosecution for exceeding the speed limit which is based on a reading by a speed camera is required to satisfy the requirements of the Commonwealth Act. 12-08-2013 Sheriffs Office Ref: COMPLAINT Your Ref: BC/15766 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, by fax 0011-61-3-94577209 or E-mail INSPECTOR-RIKATI@schorel-hlavka.com See also www.schorel-hlavka.com Free download of documents at blog Http://www.scribd.com/InspectorRikati p21

45

50

55

22
However, that decision is contrary to decisionsof the Full Court of the Supreme Court of Victoria, the WA Court of Appeal, the Queensland Court of Criminal Appeal, the Supreme Court of Western Australia, the Supreme Court of Tasmania and the Supreme Court of Victoria. No decision handed down in any superior court in Australia since 1960 has followed Breedon v Kongras. Irrespective of the compelling logic of the reasoning in the decided cases, Victorian courts, other thanthe Court of Appeal, are bound by the coinciding views as to the operation of the Commonwealth Act expressed by the Full Court of the Supreme Court of Victoria, the WA Court of Appeal, and the Queensland Court of Criminal Appeal. And that should be the end of the matter.

10 END QUOTE http://www.trafficlaw.com.au/forum/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=179&start=54

Again:
QUOTE http://www.trafficlaw.com.au/forum/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=179&start=54 In June 2012, the Road Safety Camera Commissioner briefed a leading Victorian Silk PG Nash QC to examine the authorities and advise. Mr Nash brought all relevant authorities together with the following result. END QUOTE http://www.trafficlaw.com.au/forum/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=179&start=54

15

Where was Mr Nash set out about constitutional issues, or was this something he simply never bothered to attend to?
20

Well, if the Sheriffs Office is part of the Court system then it should not rely upon what Road Safety Camera Commissioner may publish, as it would be bias for any court official to do so, as it is irrelevant as to the execution of court orders. . 25 What I did was from onset oppose the constitutional validity of the Infringement Act 2006, the Infringement Court, etc. and the Agar v Dolheguy & Anor [2010] VSC 506 (11 November 2010) was prior to the Infringement notice having been issues and I am and maintain my constitutional objections. After all, in the Wakim case the Federal Court had issued its determination and yet the High Court of Australia in HCA 27 of 999 then stated:
30 Re Wakim; Ex parte McNally; Re Wakim; Ex parte Darvall; Re Brown; Ex parte Amann; Spi [1999] HCA 27 (17 June 1999) QUOTE For constitutional purposes, they are a nullity. No doctrine of res judicata or issue estoppel can prevail against the Constitution. Mr Gould is entitled to disregard the orders made in Gould v Brown. No doubt, as 35 Latham CJ said of invalid legislation, "he will feel safer if he has a decision of a court in his favour". That is because those relying on the earlier decision may seek to enforce it against Mr Gould. END QUOTE . Uniform Tax \case, 1942 (65CLR 373 at 408) 23-7-1942 40 QUOTE Common expressions such as: 'The Courts have declared a statute invalid'," says Chief Justice Latham, "sometimes lead to misunderstanding. A pretended law made in excess of power is not and never has been a law at all. Anybody in the country is entitled to disregard it. Naturally, he will feel safer if he has a decision of a court in his favor, but such a decision is not an element, which produces invalidity in any law. 45 The law is not valid until a court pronounces against it - and thereafter invalid. If it is beyond power it is invalid ab initio. END QUOTE In Re O (infants) (1971) Ch 748,754 and 755 50 QUOTE In my considered opinion the law now is that if an appellate court is satisfied that the decision of the lower court is wrong, it is it's duty to say so and act accordingly. END QUOTE 55

It should be understood that courts at times may be required by convention, to follow a previous decision but it never can be a bar to the constitution, as Wakim proved!
12-08-2013 Sheriffs Office Ref: COMPLAINT Your Ref: BC/15766 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, by fax 0011-61-3-94577209 or E-mail INSPECTOR-RIKATI@schorel-hlavka.com See also www.schorel-hlavka.com Free download of documents at blog Http://www.scribd.com/InspectorRikati p22

23 I note that you failed to respond to my 12 August 2013 requests regarding issues such as but not limited to if you were as the Sheriffs Office part of the IMPARTIAL Chapter III Court system or part of the government or both? .
5 Hansard 25-3-1897 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National Australasian Convention) QUOTE Mr. O'CONNOR: You cannot ask a judge to serve two masters. END QUOTE 10

If you are nothing more but some glorified debt collector pretending to be an OFFICER OF THE COURT enforcing court orders while in reality being a so to say government bagman, using as I view it stand over tactics, terrorism, bulliness, extortion, etc, then I can only look forwards that your day in court will come sooner then later to answer for your misdeeds against the citizens of 15 this state, and others affected by your doings. Quite frankly I do not know if you are so to say brain dead but it is to me extra ordinary that you seem to have such an extremely difficult ability to grasp what is constitutionally appropriate. Indeed, the fact that you refer to the Agar v Dolheguy & Anor [2010] VSC 506 (11 November 20 2010) despite of my past writings appears to me you are having a tunnel vision and unable to consider reality. still it can be of no excuse.
. Hansard 1-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE Sir JOHN DOWNER.25 I think we might, on the attempt to found this great Commonwealth, just advance one step, not beyond the substance of the legislation, but beyond the form of the legislation, of the different colonies, and say that there shall be embedded in the Constitution the righteous principle that the Ministers of the Crown and their officials shall be liable for any arbitrary act or wrong they may do, in the same way as any private person would be. 30 END QUOTE

The mere fact that you despite the elborate wrirtings of the past nevertheless persist in continuing your threatening conduct may underline as I view it your own displayed blatant ignorance to the rule of law. In myh view citizens need to be protected against a person hiolding a position as you 35 do, exercising it in such a utterly displorable manne!
Ambard v Att Gen for Trinidad and Tabaco (1939) AC 322 at 335 QUOTE The basic of the right to fair comment is the Right of Freedom of speech and the inalienable right of 40 everyone to comment fairly upon matters of public importance. END QUOTE No wrong committed in criticism of administration of justice: LORD ATKIN in AMBARD v ATTORNEY-GENERAL for TRINIDAD and TABAGO (1936) A.C. 332, at 335 45 QUOTE But whether the authority and position or an individual judge, or the due administration of justice, is concerned, no wrong is committed by any member of the public who exercises the ordinary right of criticising, in good faith, in private or public, the public act done in the seat of justice. The path of criticism is a public way, the wrong headed are permitted to err therein: provided that members of the public abstain from imputing improper 50 motives to those taking part in the administration of justice, and are genuinely exercising a right of criticism, and not acting in malice or attempting to impair the administration of justice, they are immune. Justice is not a cloistered virtue: she must be allowed to suffer the scrutiny and respectful, even though outspoken, comments of ordinary man END QUOTE 55 . The right for the public to be informed about the judicial process being properly applied or acts: 12-08-2013 Sheriffs Office Ref: COMPLAINT Your Ref: BC/15766 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, by fax 0011-61-3-94577209 or E-mail INSPECTOR-RIKATI@schorel-hlavka.com See also www.schorel-hlavka.com Free download of documents at blog Http://www.scribd.com/InspectorRikati p23

24
THE COMMENTS OF SIR JAMES MARTIN C.J., IN THE MATTER THE EVENING NEWS (1880) N.S.W. LR 211 AT 239.: QUOTE The right of the public to canvass fairly and honestly what takes place here cannot be disputed. Our practice of 5 sitting here with open doors and transacting our judicial functions as we do, always in the broad light of day, would be shown of some of its value if the public opinion respecting our proceedings were at all times to be rigidly suppressed. We claim no immunity from fair, even though it be mistaken criticism. END QUOTE . 10 As to value of criticism, keeping judge subject to rules and principles of honour and justice; (a) R v FOSTER (1937) St. E Qd 368 (b) Re WASEMAN (1969) N.Z.L.R. 55, 58-59 (c) Re BOROVSKI (1971) 19 D.L.R. (34) 537 (d) SOLICITOR-GENERAL v RADIO AVON LTD (1978) 1 N.Z.L.R. 225, at 230-31 15 .

This correspondence is not intended and neither must be perceived to set out all issues and or details and neither has anything been stated in order of priority.

Awaiting your response,


20

G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. (Friends call me Gerrit)

MAY JUSTICE ALWAYS PREVAIL


.

Our name is our motto!)

12-08-2013 Sheriffs Office Ref: COMPLAINT Your Ref: BC/15766 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, by fax 0011-61-3-94577209 or E-mail INSPECTOR-RIKATI@schorel-hlavka.com See also www.schorel-hlavka.com Free download of documents at blog Http://www.scribd.com/InspectorRikati p24