One Nation Senator Rod Culleton sending High Court scrambling through their rule book

Dark clouds are gathering over the duopoly dictatorship with One Nation unearthing the High Court of Australia dismissing the rule book and running their own race.

This video of the senate show attorney general Brandis running for cover to the question from Senator Culleton;

“It has come to my attention that there is a discrepancy between Section 33 of the High Court Act 1979 which says all process shall (which means must) be issued in the name of the Queen and the High Court Rules 2004. Why has the High Court felt free to defy the Parliament for 12 years?”

Advertisements

About cairnsnews

Patriot activist publishing information to Australians government do not want known

Posted on October 25, 2016, in Courts, Federal Politics, Judges, mythmanagement, One Nation Party, Pauline Hanson, Politicians and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. 4 Comments.

  1. the reason why the High Court no longer follows rules is because Whitlam signed Australia over to the foreign: UNIDROIT Treaty of Rome in 1973, but didn’t seem to make the people of Australia aware … That’s why so many lawyers are now in Government, in order to hide such facts from the people … The UNIDROIT legal government has become the Lawyers Club! .. AUSTRALIAN Citizens, are no longer Australians in a legal sense, they have been secretly “converted” into UNIDROIT Roman debtors subject to the District of Columbia and the wishers of the UNITED STATES and its Federal Reserve…! … no longer Australians …

  2. How about asking the High Court why they are allowed to make spilt decisions, knowing full well, every split decision is a flawed decision. If the top seven legal brains in the Commonwealth can’t come to an unanimous decision then it is proof they are dealing with opinions and not legalese. Why is a jury compelled to come to unanimous decisions and these men aren’t? If seven men cannot agree on the legality of an issue they are not authorised to make interpretations that alter the meaning and intent of either the law or the Constitution. If unanimity can’t be achieved it is the responsibility to hand the issue back to Parliament and explain why unanimity isn’t possible. It is Parliament’s job to fix the problem, not the High Court’s to compromise. There is no law that says a majority opinion is any more correct than a minority opinion. All opinions are based on prejudice, upbringing, education, bias and personal attitudes, none of which constitute a definition of legality.

  3. I like one nation. But this rod culleton is one dodgy bloke for certain. Ripped off half the farmers of the south west over here.

  4. Read the Queens employment contract which is The Act of Settlement 1701
    And it was thereby further enacted, that all and every person and persons that then were, or afterwards should be reconciled to, or shall hold communion with the see or Church of Rome, or should profess the popish religion, or marry a papist, should be excluded, and are by that Act made for ever incapable to inherit, possess, or enjoy the Crown and government of this realm, and Ireland, and the dominions thereunto belonging, or any part of the same, or to have, use, or exercise any regal power, authority, or jurisdiction within the same: and in all and every such case and cases the people of these realms shall be and are thereby absolved of their allegiance: and that the said Crown and government 

    http://australianpolitics.com/democracy/act-of-settlement-1701

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s