Category Archives: High Court Australia

Halls of shame – Australian Universities ban free speech

James Cook University in Cairns leads the pack. Their precious academics don’t like peer reviews of their sometimes dodgy work. Never let the facts get in the way when appeasing governments for more and bigger grants.

A dark cloud hangs over the future of academic freedom of speech in Australia following the High Court’s ruling today against Great Barrier Reef expert Dr Peter Ridd, Katter’s Australian Party MPs have said.

The KAP which – alongside a variety of other supporters from across the country – have stood in solidarity with Dr Ridd as he took his former employer James Cook University (JCU) to court after being sacked in 2018, said the professor deserved to be applauded for his tenacity.

MHR Bob Katter; Dr Peter Ridd; Nick Dametto MLA and leader of KAP, Robbie Katter MLA address a recent cane industry forum in Ayr.
Dr Ridd said today he “may have lost a battle but he will win the war.”

Hinchinbrook MP Nick Dametto said today’s decision by the High Court meant, by law, Dr Ridd was in breach of his of JCU work contract when he publicly raised quality assurance and trust concerns around fellow researchers’ works.

The ruling had nothing to do with Dr Ridd’s expertise on the GBR or the validity of his scientific views, he said.

Mr Dametto currently has a Bill before the Queensland Parliament seeking a full repeal of the Palaszczuk Labor Government’s Environmental Protection (Great Barrier Reef Protection Measures) and Other Legislation Amendment Act 2019.

This Bill, labelled as “farm-destroying” due to the onerous requirements it places on North and Central Queensland cane growers, was predicated on water quality research similar to that which was questioned by Dr Ridd.

Dr Ridd has long called for the establishment of an Office of Science Quality Assurance to question and monitor the validity of scientific research used to underpin government policy.

“We believe that, in the court of public opinion, Dr Ridd has been successful,” Mr Dametto said.

“As a scientist, academic and individual we believe he deserves to be applauded for putting everything on the line to fight for what he, and many others, believe in, which is the fundamental importance of freedom of speech and academic integrity.

“In the name of standing up for what he thought was morally right and just, Dr Ridd has sacrificed his job and potentially his career and reputation, but he has done this because he believed it was right to at least question the science. 

“Few people understand the effects of sediment and nutrient run-off to the GBR better than Dr Ridd, and systemic quality assurance problems are still plaguing the way GBR ‘science’ is being used to affect modelling that drives government policy and public opinion. 

“The gravest concern attached to today’s ruling is that it has the real potential to scare off anyone else who wants to raise their head out of the trenches to question not only the reef science institutions but also science across the board.”

Mr Dametto said that, without academic freedom, there was a potential to stifle the progression of science and send us back to a time of limited academic thinking not seen since the Dark Ages. 

Kennedy MP Bob Katter said that the cases of Ridd and Pavlou made it quite obvious that there was no freedom of speech on Australia’s university campuses.

“Peter Ridd was expressing opinions, and that has been the entire essence of universities since the days of Plato and Socrates,” he said.

“There must a free expression of ideals for universities to operate properly. When I was at university I disagreed with radicals who opposed Vietnam but I defended tenaciously their right to free expression of their point of view.

“The CEO class now run the universities, the corporations and half the trade unions. They are stifling freedoms in this country.”

Time to pull up the Covid bandits now!

This legal opinion should stop the Covid bandits in their tracks. Compulsory vaccination is unlawful and trying to force aged care and airport workers into having the deadly jab should result in criminal charges against the perpetrators including politicians and medical staff. They cannot be exempt from criminal liability at Common Law or even in the states’or federal corporate law. Download this excellent dissertation and use this firm to prosecute the medical mafia.

Ask High Court judges if they are on the square before proceedings start

Letter to the Editor

Readers response to Sol Millihin’s HCA challenge to Covid on June 17

Then again the “Commonwealth of Australia” is a registered corporation with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission, so presumably the High Court is also privately owned.

The first thing I would ask the judge or whatever is – “Is this court a valid jurisdiction according to the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Australia in that you as judge are not acting for and/or bound by a corporate entity?”

More on the Liberty Group –owners of Victorian Courts

The court I presume will be a Jew/Freemason County Court —

Sol should learn a few of the Freemason hand signals before entering their playground/court.

The Victorian County Court Facility was opened in 2002. It is privately owned, maintained and operated by The Liberty Group, a wholly owned subsidiary of Challenger Limited.

It is certainly no secret to the people involved and to certain other sections of the community that there is a great deal of corruption in the Anglo – Masonic legal system of Australia.

These are the foundations laid in Australia by the forefathers, and kept within the Masonic brotherhood.

What will never be revealed is the extent of fraudulent judgments against non-masons based upon the other party being a member of the same lodge or any other masonic lodge for that matter, and NOT the merits of the case.

Court hearings where a masonic versus a non masonic member involve judgments made against the non mason as being :

“inadmissible”
“dismissed, due to not enough evidence / no grounds”

just to name a couple, even though legally they can be incorrect.

Read on –

http://corpau.blogspot.com/2011/03/corrupt-masonic-judges-road-fines.html

http://awn.bz/BrendonOConnellSpeaksOut.html

from Kev Crisscross, Brisbane

Senator Rod Culleton’s Constitutional legacy still hovering over Parliament House

Open letter to Senator Michaelia Cash as acting Attorney General

Dear Senator  Michaelia Cash,

I was present in then Senator Rod Culleton’s Office during a meeting between you both and you made some promises that were not kept.  The World Wide Cabal entrenched in the Australian Legal System set out to get him, and succeeded but not before he put landmines in the ground that got rid of most if not yet all of the people who engineered his demise. He was badly represented by Peter King a barrister from Sydney whose advice contradicted mine, and the High Court was badly misled by counsel instructed by  the Australian Government Solicitor.  The Senate is still scarred by its refusal to accept its Motion 163 of 2016. Turnbull is gone, Parry is gone, Brandis is gone, Barker J resigned a year early. The solicitor and barrister  who prosecuted his bankruptcy were sacked by King Wood Mallesons.

Senator Rod Culleton’s judicial reform efforts still hover over Canberra

Dick Lester is not a happy camper. The perpetrator of the action in the Court of Disputed Returns Ian Bruce Bell  is dead. The transcript of the hearing in the High Court in November 2016 has been edited  doctored and replaced, because in front of witnesses a Pro Bono Publico legal practitioner attempted to appear and the exchange between CJ French and himself has been expunged. Senator Rod Culleton had a signed agreement with the Australian Government Solicitor that he was never subject to imprisonment so the Barristers and Solicitors who prosecuted these matters in the High Court are prima facie guilty of an offence under S 42, 43 and 44 Crimes Act 1914 (Cth). Christian Porter may well attempt suicide, as his watch has been marred by gross negligence on his part when he has been contacted about these gross misfeasances.

The article I have prepared below does not raise the issue of pedophilia that is attracting widespread attention in the United States of America. There are allegations that pedophilia is used by the Deep State as a tool of blackmail, to control governments, Judges, journalists and captains of industry and the entertainment industry,  and Politicians  worldwide. When there is smoke there is usually fire, and on two occasions I have seen allegations that Prime Minister Morrison and Daniel Andrews are implicated in the worldwide pedophilia pandemic being exposed in the United States of America. I have seen allegations that there are DUMB,  Deep Underground Military Bases in Australia as well as the United States of America and Europe,  and that children have been rescued from them. I have no way of confirming or denying those allegations, but the inaction by Prime Minister Morrison on the illegal Border Closures, prohibited by S 92 Constitution and S 268:12 Criminal Code Act 1995 (CTH)  by State Premiers indicates he is under undue influence, and compromised.

The body language exhibited by many ministers in the Government is terrible. The gross ignorance of S 268:12 Criminal Code Act 1995 (CTH) and refusal of the Home Affairs minister to activate the Australian Federal Police to enforce it on behalf of the Commonwealth speaks volumes. You must know that unless there is a declaration of war, the laws of the Parliament of the Commonwealth cannot be either ignored or suspended. We are in a world war but it is between good and evil. Christianity and Satanism, and when President Donald Trump was elected he declared Gesara-Nesara in his inauguration speech. During his Presidency he issued executive Orders, to the United States of America Military to implement it, and give back power to the people. Those orders cannot be countermanded by President Biden even if he knew what day it was.

As acting Attorney General you have power to indict Mark McGowan and John Quigley under S 71 Judiciary Act 1903 without prior committal for failing to accept S 92 Constitution as binding upon them and thereby offending S 268:12 Criminal Code Act 1995 (CTH). If you do this and it is within your power, it will put a brake on the Western Australia election and result in the suspension of all governments Australia wide. I am sure there are good people in both the Australian Labor Party and Liberal Party and if in fact Prime Minister Morrison is compromised, as alleged, a Government of National Reconciliation to implement Gesara-Nesara is not an impossible dream.

Kind regards

Peter Alexander Gargan 

Constitutional Advocate

Fabius Maximus Whitlam strikes again

Letter to the Editor

Dear Editor,

Nowhere in the Cth Constitution is mentioned Political Parties or a Prime Minister, only a Federal Executive Council.

COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA CONSTITUTION ACT – SECT 62

Federal Executive Council

“There shall be a Federal Executive Council to advise the Governor-General in the government of the Commonwealth, and the members of the Council shall be chosen and summoned by the Governor-General and sworn as Executive Councillors, and shall hold office during his pleasure.”

To this end, all Members of Parliament must be independent and to influence a Member in any way is an offence, therefore Political Parties should not exist and are criminally liable for the offences of influence and collusion.

Also, the Whitlam govt criminally enacted the Common Informers (Parliamentary Disqualifications) Act 1975 without Referendum  to disable s46 of the Constitution. = TREASON.

“4  Suits not to be brought under section 46 of the Constitution

On and after the date of commencement of this Act, a person is not liable to pay any sum under section 46 of the Constitution and no suit shall be instituted, continued, heard or determined in pursuance of that section.

5  Jurisdiction

Original jurisdiction is conferred on the High Court in suits under this Act and no other court has jurisdiction in such a suit.”

 COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA CONSTITUTION ACT – SECT 46

Penalty for sitting when disqualified

“Until the Parliament otherwise provides, any person declared by this Constitution to be incapable of sitting as a senator or as a member of the House of Representatives shall, for every day on which he so sits, be liable to pay the sum of one hundred pounds to any person who sues for it in any court of competent jurisdiction.”

As well in Common Informers (Parliamentary Disqualifications) Act 1975

“3  Penalty for sitting when disqualified

…. (3)  The High Court shall refuse to make an order in a suit under this Act that would, in the opinion of the Court, cause the person against whom it was made to be penalized more than once in respect of any period or day of sitting as a senator or as a member of the House of Representatives.”  = TREASON.

So much for Separation of Powers!

Cheers,

Brett Baker

Sydney

High Court expulsion of Senator Culleton wrong at law – UK Supreme Court

Exclusive report by Jim O’Toole

Culleton advised by UK Supreme Court his senate expulsion was wrong at law leaving the way open for other expelled senators to reclaim their seats

The Supreme Court of the United Kingdom has advised Western Australia Senator-in-exile Rod Culleton the High Court of Australia has erred by removing him from the senate.

‘Bank Basher’ WA senator in exile Rod Culleton heading back to the senate

In January Culleton filed an appeal, contrary to legal advice, against his senate expulsion in the Supreme Court(Privy Council) citing s47 of the Commonwealth Constitution of Australia, which had been ignored by the High Court.

This section states: ‘Until the Parliament otherwise provides, any question respecting the qualification of a senator or of a member of the House of Representatives, or respecting a vacancy in either House of the Parliament, and any question of a disputed election to either House, shall be determined by the House in which the question arises.’

The High Court, sitting as the Court of Disputed Returns, expelled him from the senate in 2017 on a referral from then Attorney General, Senator George Brandis.

“Preliminary guidance from my case manager in the UK Supreme Court referred me to a legal maxim from a case precedent, Hilary Term [2014] UKSC 3.”

The case precedent cites “….. Blackstone (Commentaries on the Laws of England)  says that the whole of the law and custom of Parliament has its original from this one maxim: ‘that whatever matter arises concerning either House of Parliament, ought to be examined, discussed, and adjudged in that house to which it relates, and not elsewhere.

“The senate now has no choice but to remove all of those candidates who filled casual vacancies created by the High Court and reinstate me, because a legal maxim is the final say, there is no law above it,” Culleton said.

“This includes Jacquie Lambie and Bob Day who have indicated to me they will now contest their expulsions by the High Court under s44 of the Constitution.

“The senate will have to decide on my eligibility to sit as a senator.”

Tomorrow Culleton intends to inform the Clerk of the senate of this legal maxim leaving the Clerk no choice but to ask the senate to reinstate any senator expelled by the High Court.

“The Parliament is compelled and bound by this maxim. The senate cannot abuse its powers and must immediately ask the surrogate senators to remove themselves from the House as they are only filling a vacancy,” he said.

“Furthermore, I believe those unelected surrogate Senators are now impersonating a Commonwealth Public Official and putting the Senate in disrepute through their unlawful representations and I quote  Odgers Australian Senate Practice, 13th Edition, 2012  page 160:

Presumably if a conviction is quashed on appeal the vacancy which was taken to have occurred upon conviction and sentence is taken not to have occurred. If such a presumed vacancy has been filled the filling of the vacancy would then also be void.”

Culleton files in UK High Court to overturn senate expulsion

by Jim O’Toole

Senator in exile, Rodney Culleton, after being locked in battle with the corporate Australian legal system since 2016, has filed an action in the High Court of the United Kingdom to have his expulsion from the senate overturned.

Culleton said yesterday he was excited the High Court had accepted his Constitutional argument in the first step to overturn the Australian High Court direction he be thrown out of the senate because of bankruptcy.

“I have never been bankrupt,” he said.

WA Senator in exile, Rodney Culleton, has moved aside the tradition of Australian litigants being denied access to the Privy Council and higher UK courts by having the High Court of the UK accept his Constitutional argument about his wrongful dismissal from the senate.

A single judge of the Federal Court issued sequestration orders against Culleton in 2017 freezing his assets in spite of a 21 day stay of proceedings being granted by the Federal Court.

Vexatious litigant and Perth businessman Dick Lester claimed Culleton owed him $200,000 over a failed sale contract on land, a claim pursued hotly by Culleton but he says Federal Court Judge Michael Barker failed to follow court rules, ignored all due process and did not look at his affidavits.

“When I was sworn-in as a senator on August 30, 2016, I swore allegiance to Queen Elizabeth 2 of the United Kingdom, making an oath to uphold the law.

“I did not swear allegiance to the fictitious Queen of Australia.

“This ceremony was witnessed by the Governor General and his deputy.

“It should be noted the Commonwealth Constitution Act of Australia 1900, (UK) remains in force and cannot be repealed by an Australian Government.

“The High Court of Australia does not have the jurisdiction to throw senators or members out of Parliament. Either House has the only jurisdiction under s47 of the Constitution to deal with a Member’s qualification.

“The Constitution is everyone’s contract but we can’t get a remedy in Australian star chambers which don’t recognise the Constitution.”

The HCA has long drawn criticism from those being refused a hearing on Constitutional matters, with litigants claiming the court is not functioning as a Chapter 3 court as required by the Constitution.

Culleton gave the example of any senator or MHR who files an action in the HCA. It is unlawful for the court to hear any evidence relating to parliamentary procedures under s16 (iii) of the Parliamentary Privileges Act 1987, he said.

“As a result they threw out my Motion 163 without having jurisdiction because they are not sitting as a Chapter 3 court operating under the proper Crown.

“There is no such thing as the ‘Queen of Australia’.

Culleton has asked the Law Lords of the Queens Bench to examine his request to debate his senate Motion 163 of 2016 which the Solicitor General filed in the HCA.

The statement of agreed facts filed in the HCA by the Solicitor General states a NSW Magistrate, in Culleton’s absence could not imprison him for the alleged theft of a $7 truck key from his own truck.

This matter could have, if imprisoned, disqualified Culleton from the senate under s44 of the Constitution.

“Motion 163 of 2016 was a requirement passed by the House announcing that Attorney General George Brandis’ referral of November 7, 2016 to the HCA is faulty and that there needs to be further investigation into that faulty action,  originally orchestrated by former Senators Parry and  Brandis, which was never passed by any procedure of law, ,” Mr Culleton said.

He said the senate could not lawfully vote on Brandis’ December 7 motion at the time because there were insufficient senators present to form a Quorum under s22 of the Constitution and the relevant material was withheld from the chamber by Senator Brandis and Senator Pauline Hanson.

Culleton’s legal team remains in London until a hearing date is set by the full bench.

Culleton beats up CDPP over unknown charge in Magistrates Court

by Gil Hanrahan in Melbourne

An attempt by the Commonwealth Department of Public Prosecutions to prosecute ‘Senator in exile’ Rod Culleton for not complying with a sequestration order, has so far failed in the Commonwealth Magistrates Court in Perth.

After a submission by Culleton, at a hearing on Friday, the Magistrate ordered the criminal matter be adjourned for two months to allow mediation between the parties.

Culleton said he had not been served with any summons by the CDPP prior to the court appearance yet the case had been listed to be heard on July 27 without his prior knowledge, had he not been ‘tipped off’ by a third party.

He said inquiries made to the court prior to the sitting revealed he had been charged but not informed of the charges.

In a letter to the court Culleton explained he had not been served with any process.

“I made appropriate enquiries today (July 10) to the registry of the Magistrates Court in Perth and to Peter Botros (CDPP, Canberra) outlining my concerns. I have been informed that fresh criminal charges have been made against me personally, which has taken me by surprise,” Mr Culleton said.

“I had not been informed of the details of the spurious charge …..listed for 27th July 2018 as I have not been personally served on any matter.

“It appears that the CDPP is usurping its powers to commence a criminal prosecution over a matter I know nothing about.

“All other matters are before the High Court (C15/2016) in Canberra re s44(ii) and s44(iii) (disqualification re jurisdiction) which is still awaiting a ‘date to be fixed,’” he said.

WA police have charged Senator Rod Culleton with car theft for placing light weight barley straw bales around an ANZ Bank receiver’s locked car at a failed farm seizure by the bank in 2015. The power of the banksters over government and police is fast coming to an end thanks to the Bank Inquiry, ironically forced to take place by Rod Culleton and MP Bob Katter.

Culleton was charged by WA police two years ago for allegedly stealing a receiver’s car at an attempted farm seizure by the ANZ Bank. The police, without any benefit of a sworn statement by any person present commenced proceedings against him for allegedly placing barley straw bales around the locked vehicle.

Barley straw is so light in weight that a child could have removed the hay bales, an onlooker commented at the time.

He said the police have no direct evidence or sworn statement that implicates him. He was one of a large crowd helping another distressed farmer rally against the now-proven criminal activities of banks.

“At the original hearing about the straw bales I told the Magistrate there was no case to answer. Then the police escorted me from the court,” Mr Culleton said.

This matter has been set down for another hearing on August 27.

The Federal Liberal Government is desperate to get Culleton out of the way before the High Court rules on the unsettled matter of jurisdiction.

Should the HCA order Culleton be returned to the senate the ramifications for the government are extraordinary, which would almost certainly result in criminal conspiracy charges against former Attorney General George Brandis QC, the dismissal of the Government and a fresh election of both Houses.

A directions hearing is scheduled for August 6.

In reply from a letter to the Governor General from Culleton suggesting Saturday’s five by-elections could be unlawful, Government House Secretary Mark Fraser said the GG cannot intervene in a matter “that is the responsibility of the Government”

The GG is the Head of Government in Australia. Legislation passed in Parliament cannot become law unless the GG gives Royal Assent, albeit a token gesture these days.

The letter demonstrates the highest office in Australia has been completely neutered since the creation of Whitlam’s republic in 1975 and Hawke’s Australia Act 1986.

The Constitution clearly gives the GG Sir Peter Cosgrove authority to intervene in the Culleton matter, but it seems the former army General has lost his way.

Culleton’s very public argument that s 47 of the Commonwealth Constitution clearly states his matter of qualification to sit in the senate under s 44 can only be decided by the senate and not the Court of Disputed Returns, has been filed with the HCA.

So-much-so that he attracted the attention of respected counsel and former Solicitor General of Australia, David Bennett AC, QC to represent him on the disqualification question.

The Federal Government’s dirty tricks department is alive and well and demonstrates the extent to which Cabinet and the Liberal Party will go to protect the Canberra lawyers club.

New State of North Queensland is looming

A proposal to create new state of North Queensland has been around for decades but momentum is gathering among fed-up Far Northerners who attended the ‘Boot Brisbane’ forum on Wednesday night.

The first State of Origin match for the year did not deter more than 80 supporters from packing the Brother’s club boardroom in Cairns to hear a decisive argument for the north to break away from a decadent south east corner.

A southern border following the Tropic of Capricorn north of Rockhampton would ultimately foster great prosperity for a languishing North Queensland economy.

Katters Australian Party parliamentary representatives, Robbie Katter, Shane Knuth, Nick Dametto and newest recruit Senator Fraser Anning joined Member for Kennedy Bob Katter who held the floor with compelling economic data compiled by Cairns economist Bill Cummings.

New state promoters Ron Crew;Bob Katter; Barrister Peter Raffles; Shane Knuth; Nick Dametto

Mr Katter said necessary infrastructure had been neglected by successive state and federal governments and there was no alternative but to allow North Queenslanders to govern themselves because much of the State’s economy was generated north of Rockhampton.

“The State Government has committed $7.5 billion – $2 billion for pleasure domes and $5.5 billion for yet another tunnel in Brisbane.

“There’s just no way that a budget of $54 billion can take a hit of $7.5 billion and have something left over for the rest of the state and the further away from Brisbane then the less money you will get. While they’ve got $5 billion to improve their transportation systems, four years ago we did not get a single cent for road improvement in North Queensland except for a roundabout at Port Douglas that was it.

“We got a roundabout at Port Douglas worth half a million dollars and Brisbane got $3 billion for tunnels and this is going to go on.”

Mr Katter accused the governments of failing to understand industry and economic development in the North.

“You are not allowed to use a drop of water for irrigation in North Queensland except if you make outrageous, corrupt payments to political parties – that’s the only way you’ll ever get a drop of water in North Queensland for irrigation and yet, if North Queensland were a separate country we would be the wettest country on earth.

“We’ve got these huge resources and we’re not allowed to use them so we can’t develop. “We’re not allowed to dredge the Port of Cairns; one of most significant tourist destinations in the world.

“Don’t expect any new dams from the State Government for the Tablelands anytime soon.”

Former Mulgrave Councillor Ron Crew explained how Cairns and the hinterland agricultural industry lost $35 million a year due to a lack of infrastructure projects

“The government won’t agree to dredge the port in a reasonable manner, yet we have the largest population adjacent to any port in northern Australia and agriculture can’t expand,” Mr Crew said.

From a legal point of view the creation of a new state was a simple exercise according to Townsville barrister Peter Raffles, one of the first law graduates from JCU in 1991.

Mr Raffles cited a High Court case in 1978 whether the approval of a majority of electors for surrendering a State and the acceptance by the Commonwealth is necessary and the ability of the Queensland Parliament to legislate for the excising of a new State.

“The State Parliament can do it and no referendum is required,” he said.

High Court ruling paves way for Culleton and others to be re-instated to the senate

West Australian Senator in exile, ‘bank basher’ Rodney Culleton is expecting to be re-instated to the senate after the High Court delivered a fatal blow to the long-running ANZ Bank campaign to destroy his career and livelihood

A unanimous decision handed down on March 21, 2018, Alley-v-Gillespie, paves the way for the senate to re-install senators Bob Day and Rod Culleton, however it could have further far-reaching ramifications for other senators removed under s44 of the Commonwealth Constitution.

In essence the HCA has ruled it cannot decide on a question of disqualification or vacancy without first empowering the House under s22  and s47 challenging any question under s44 of the Constitution which states any question of eligibility for an elected candidate to the Upper or Lower House can only be decided by the respective House of Parliament.

Perth businessman and Liberal Dick Lester allegedly under instruction from the ANZ Bank pursued Senator Rod Culleton through the courts spending $1.6 million trying to recover an alleged debt of $200,000

Culleton has maintained this argument ever since Judge Barker of the Federal Court in 2016 found Culleton bankrupt because a proposed land deal between himself and Perth businessman and leading Liberal Dick Lester had turned sour.

Lester was reported as spending $1.6 million with Perth law firm King Wood Malleson chasing an alleged

debt of $200,000.

Culleton alleges the law firm and Lester were acting on instructions from the ANZ Bank because he had challenged the ANZ Bank’s bona fides over bank foreclosures through the senate.

Two solicitors, Michael Lundberg and Adam Rompopis  who were leading the Culleton offensive, have since departed the firm.

To add insult to injury in June last year, the Federal Government pursued Culleton for $712,000 in expenses and wages incurred while his senate office was in operation.

It was a first ever demand for office expenses by government against a former Member.

On March 7 the Finance Minister Mathias Cormann wrote to Culleton stating he had forgiven the office bill. Culleton said he refused the offer because legally, he remained a senator.

Former Senator Rod Culleton warned of a massive Constitutional correction 18 months ago and it has just arrived with the High Court handing the eligibility of Members or senators over to either House

“I did not accept Cormann’s waiver of the debt because I was unlawfully removed from the senate,” Mr Culleton said.

“After the s47 ruling on March 21 I informed the senate President he must recall the senate to deal with the matter of my disqualification which will have implications for other senators who were also disqualified by the High Court.

“All facts must be debated in the House and questions of disqualification or vacancies must be dealt with by the House.

“My argument regarding s47 has never changed and I put the President on notice last week the ‘surrogate’ senators not elected by the people are only filling the void created by the High Court sitting as the Court of Disputed Returns.

“They should pack up and go home. The whole senate has been brought into disrepute by former Liberal Attorney General George Brandis and former President Stephen Parry when Brandis withheld the statement of agreed facts from the senate.

“The new president must recall the senate and deal with the matters.”

The extract below is from a story published by Cairns News on March 8, 2017:

A single judge of The High Court of Australia, on March 2, 2017 struck out Culleton’s appeal against bankruptcy, previously handed down by the Full Bench of the Federal Court.

“I am outraged and disappointed Justice Patrick Keane of the High Court did not ever read my written submissions yet he handed down his finding in spite of me asking for more time to prepare,” Mr Culleton said.

Coincidentally, March 2, 2017 was the 12 month anniversary when he was convicted of larceny in absentia in the Armidale Magistrates Court over the disappearance of a truck key worth $7.50, a charge for which he would not ever have been jailed.

“My counsel clearly told Justice Keane that the High Court did not have jurisdiction to deal with my position in the senate,” he said.

“Counsel told the court only the senate could deal with it and Justice Keane only had to read Section 47 of the Constitution which says any question over the qualification of a senator or a member of either House, ‘….shall be determined by the House in which the question arises.’

High Court Chief Justice Susan Kiefel backed by a unanimous decision on March 21, 2018 handed over the eligibility of members of Parliament to the respective Houses, the basis of Culleton’s argument since he was disqualified from the senate

“The High Court says it gets its power from the unlawful Australia Act 1986 which was introduced two years after a referendum of Australian people said they did not want the Commonwealth to give its powers to the States.

“This referendum failed but here we have the High Court using powers the states should not have such as the denial of juries.”

Lower House supporter Katter’s comments from January 19, 2017.

KAP Federal Member for Kennedy, Bob Katter who had formed an alliance with Senator Culleton because of his effective attack against unlawful bank foreclosures, waded into the fray last year.

“The more we become aware what has been done to Senator Culleton the more clear it becomes that the Liberal Party counts on the vote of One Nation,” Mr Katter said.

“This morning in the Perth Federal Court, Senator Rod Culleton was granted his right to have an Appeal heard on his bankruptcy ruling.

“The Senator’s Appeal application was a live matter last week when the Senate President removed Senator Culleton from his elected seat in the Senate on the basis of Senator Culleton’s bankruptcy declaration being finally determined, which at the time — it was not.

“Whilst One Nation may have started off the ‘Killing of Culleton’, it is most certainly the Liberal Party who are trying to finish the job.  The Liberals are doing exactly the same job on Senator Culleton that they did on Pauline Hanson herself. I was always appalled with what they did to her and publicly said so on numerous occasions. However, it is hard to feel sorry for her now.

“It’s becoming clear now that the Liberals with the support of One Nation moved at lightning speed to bankrupt Senator Culleton and in my opinion, stand him down from the Senate.

“On the issue of bankruptcy, the Liberal W.A Government gets to make the decision (in cahoots with One Nation).

“If Senator Culleton is thrown out over the loss of a $7 key then the Liberals and One Nation do not get to choose his replacement. It goes to the number 2 on the ballot who is a One Nation True Believer, not of the new, ‘James Ashby (Liberal) One Nation’ that we see today.”

On March 8, 2017, Culleton warned of the looming “biggest Constitutional correction since federation.” It has occurred.

Senate orders inquiry into the sacking of Senators Culleton and Day

Submissions called to investigate the unlawful removal of Senator Rod Culleton from the senate earlier this year.

What really happened?  Why did the Attorney General Liberal George Brandis, intentionally mislead the senate about Culleton and how did the Senate President Stephen Parry(former Port Arthur undertaker) remove Culleton without a motion of the senate? Section 47 of the Commonwealth Constitution of Australia says only the senate can rule on the eligibility of a senator.

The senate has ordered an inquiry into the sacking of WA senator Rod Culleton while Brandis and Parry head for the hills.

Brandis is hightailing it to London as the new High Commissioner. He will no doubt be called to give evidence. He has a problem.

‘On 6 December 2017, the Senate resolved that the following matter be referred to the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters for inquiry and report by 6 February 2018:

The implications of recent decisions by the Court of Disputed Returns concerning section 44 of the Constitution on questions referred by the Parliament under section 376 of the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918, with particular reference to:

(a) the decisions in connection with the disqualification of former Senators Bob Day and Rodney Culleton;
(b) a regime for disclosing information relating to aspects other than section 44(i), for which the Parliament has already provided;
(c) the form such a process might take and how it could be implemented; and
(d) any related matters.’

Senator Bob Day(above) and Rod Culleton could be reinstated to the senate after a senate inquiry investigates the circumstances of their removal

 

Committee Secretariat contact:

Committee Secretary
Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters
PO Box 6021
Parliament House
Canberra ACT 2600

Phone: +61 2 6277 2374
Fax: +61 2 6277 4773
em@aph.gov.au

High Court belongs to political parties

Letter to the editor
I have the Doc to prove what I write.
The Political Parties changed the Constitutional and Official Definitions in 1973 without a Referendum. So now the word Australia is NOT the Australia or Commonwealth of Australia as established UNDER the Founding and Primary law, Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1901 as Proclaimed and Gazetted = TREASON
The High Court of Australia belongs lock stock and barrel by the Political Parties. It is NOT a Chapter 3 Court and was established in 1979 by and for the Political Parties under their own Party Constitutions and sealed by the Great Seal of Australia. That Seal (Great Seal of Australia) was established by and for the Political Parties in 1973.
The Judiciary of the Political Parties High Court of Australia sit there as a Coram.
Note: Butterworths Concise Australian Legal Dictionary
Coram /koraem/ lat – in the presence of: before. = TREASON
Therefore they have NO MORE Authority than you and me.
The Judges at times have told us
KIRBY J. : “ A legislature cannot, by preambular assertions, recite itself into constitution power where none exists. ”
DAWSON J. : “ It may be observed that a legislature wishing to enact a statute ordering that all blue-eyed babies be killed would hardly be perturbed by a principle of law which purported to deny it that power. ”
Chief Justice French
We do so against the backdrop of the supremacy of Parliament
Chief Justice French
A new kind of common law evolves derived from many decisions applying the same broad statutory language.
Dick Yardley
Babinda
%d bloggers like this: