JUSTICE Michael Kirby has retired from the High Court in a blaze of controversy, accusing fellow judges of exercising racial bias against Aborigines in the Northern Territory intervention case.

Justice Kirby's attack drew an extraordinary rebuke from Chief Justice Robert French, who attacked the departing judge for his "gratuitous" suggestion that the bench had made a ruling based on the "Aboriginality" of those involved in the case.

And not for the first time, Justice Kirby was the sole dissenter in a 6-1 decision. In this case a majority of judges ruled against Aborigines who challenged the constitutionality of a key aspect of the former Howard government's 2007 intervention.

Chief Justice French's rebuke was blistering, accusing his former colleague of insinuating discrimination by the rest of the bench.

Chief Justice French may rebuke and Kirby J may be insinuating BUT we are telling it to you face, Chief Justice French, for you are listed as co-conspirators to pervert justice, to cause injury and institutionalised racism in M142/2007.

 http://sydney.indymedia.org.au/story/invalid-australian-constitution-empowers-crooked-high-court-judges-violate-common-law-rights-a

The People of Australia awaits your voice Chief Justice French, enlighten us with your racist intellect, so the world can decide how to treat this nation in the International Community.

Too long have your racism hidden in the shadows of your legal decisions, it's time to bring ALL your racism to the fore.

Thank you Justice Kirby for your enlightened and honorable service to this country.

Death of Mandamus: French, Hayne, Gummow, Crennan JJ protecting and coverup conspiracy to pervert justice



AUTHORITY

Mandamus will lie for an abuse of discretion where discretion has been exercised arbitrarily and
capriciously or where discretion has been exercised in bad faith, Peavey Co. V. Corcoran 714 S.W.2d 943.
In such instances the abuse amounts, in effect, to no discretion. Mandamus is warranted when the abuse is
clear or results in a manifest injustice, Reis V. Nangle 349 S.W.2d 943. Mandamus will lie when an official
refuses to act when he has a duty to act and refuses to do so.

 http://kangaroocourtaustralia.com/

 http://iwitness.x24hr.com/kangaroo_court_australia/index.php?s=4c0bf304e5864c9f35ae559d8189f056&showtopic=11130

In 2008 a writ of mandamus was filed against French et al JJ, for perverting justice by relying on a fictitious document not listed in the Appeals Book.

Death of Mandamus: French, Hayne, Gummow, Crennan JJ conspire to pervert and to cause injury

 http://www.scribd.com/doc/12980588/Death-of-Mandamus-French-Hayne-Gummow-Crennan-JJ-conspire-to-pervert-and-to-cause-injury

Not only did Hayne J refuse to hear a Notice of a Constitutional Matter, and a Writ of Mandamus, from an Application for an Order to show Cause, he decided that Mandamus actually was spelt Certiorari.

High Court Transcript M142/2007 Pham vs French & ors

 http://www.scribd.com/doc/10960139/Perverting-Justice-High-Court-Australia-Hayne-J

1. notice of a constitutional matter

2. application for an order to show cause

3. affidavit

Thus, allowing all other crooked judges, senior members, the free rein to abuse the law, and causing pain, suffering and death.

Byrne J and prothonotaries:

 http://www.scribd.com/doc/12980889/Death-of-Mandamus-High-Court-Australia-allow-Byrne-J-to-pervert-justice

1. notice of a constitutional matter

2. application for an order to show cause

3. affidavit

Senior member AAT: John Handley, Tim de Uray, Paul Mentor of Sparke Helmore

Transcript:V2007/1865

 http://www.scribd.com/doc/10960326/Perverting-Justice-AAT-Senior-Member-John-Handley

So now we are back again with a notice of a Constitutional Matter and a Mandamus !

 http://www.scribd.com/doc/12779129/Suing-CentrelinkGovernment-Notice-of-Appeal

 http://www.scribd.com/doc/12779061/Suing-CentrelinkGovernment-Notice-of-a-Constitutional-Matter

1. International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination;

2. Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Act (Cth) 1986;

3. Racial Discrimination Act (Cth) 1975;

4. Subramaniam v Public Prosecutor [1956] 1 WLR 965;

5. Travers v State of New South Wales [2000] FCA 1565 (3 November 2000);

6. R v Derek Bentley (Deceased) [1998] EWCA Crim 2516

7. R v Mahmoud Mattan (Deceased) 24th February 1998 No: 9706415/S2

8. High Court of Australia Act 1979 (Cth) s I I and Schedule (emphasis added)

9. Lord Denning, The Discipline of Law, Butterworths, London 1979 p 292 (emphasis added)

10.Gipp v The Queen (1998) 155 ALR 15 at 48; [1998] HCA 21 at [121]

11.Gipp v The Queen (1998) 155 ALR 15 at 60; [1998] HCA 21 at [169] per Kirby J referring to Davis &
20 Cordy v R (1937) 57

12.CLR 170 at 180 and Ratten v R (1974) 131 CLR 510 at 515

13.Gipp v The Queen (1998) 155 ALR 15 at 49; [1998] HCA 21 at [126] per Kirby J

Workers’ Constitutional Rights Arising From Unlawful Termination Case of Hilda Zhang



Background (Preamble):
Hilda, an accountant, was forced to falsify accounting records and reports (cook the books). After she complained about her boss’s unlawful instructions and activities both inside and outside the company she was immediately dismissed on 16 December 2003.

In the Federal Court, a judge characterized Hilda’s complaint as “only in the capacity as employee” and the employer’s counsel conceded that: “the illegality is in fact on the part of the employer”. However the Federal Court struck out her claim of unlawful termination of employment certified by the Industrial Relations Commission and dismissed her appeals, holding her claim “had been instituted vexatiously or without reasonable cause” because she did not file a complaint against her boss’s unlawful instructions and activities “to a Court or Tribunal” before she was terminated.

Under the Covering Clause 5 of the Constitution: “This Act, and all laws made by the Parliament of the Commonwealth under the Constitution, shall be binding on the courts, judges, and people of every State;……”, however, Hilda has been punished whilst she tried to uphold and obey law in the workplace, and sought protections from the courts. The Full Federal Court ignored Hilda’s appeal grounds in respect of workers’ Constitutional rights in the workplace.

On 21 April 2006, under the Judiciary Act, notices of a Constitutional matter certified by the High Court were serviced to the Attorneys-General of the Commonwealth, the States and Territories. Apparently the High Court wanted to obtain opinions from the Attorneys-General, the elected officers and members of parliaments, on whether that workers’ Constitutional rights in the workplace arisen from this case were of “public importance”, which was an essential “Criteria for granting special leave to appeal” under the Judiciary Act. However none of the Attorneys-General directly responded to the notices specifically addressed to them under the Judiciary Act.

On 10 May 2006, the High Court did not doubt that Hilda’s appeals were about workers’ fundamental Constitutional rights and did not doubt that she could win her appeals if special leaves to appeal were granted, however, holding to the effect that they were not “sufficient to justify a grant of special leave to appeal” because “No Attorney-General has indicated a desire to intervene”, even though the High Court was informed on 5 May that 600 people had supported and signed the petitions against the laws made by the Federal Courts in the judgments of Hilda’s matter.

On 23 August 2006 a solicitor from Victorian Government Solicitor finally responded to the notices of 21 April 2006 and wrote: “This office deals with all s 78B notices referred to the Attorney-General for the State of Victoria”, “As a general rule, the Attorney-General does not intervene in special leave applications”, “The High Court has indicated previously that is not appropriate as, until leave is granted, there is nothing to intervene in”.

The Judiciary Act did not refer s 78B notices to any Government Solicitors, who were neither the elected officers nor members of parliaments, but the Attorney-General surrendered his responsibility, as the elected people’s representative, which has been enacted by the Judiciary Act, to some solicitors. The solicitors were not able to take this responsibility and excused themselves by saying: The High Court has indicated previously that is not appropriate for the Attorney-General to intervene, until leave is granted. However, the High Court did not indicate that they knew anything in relation to the solicitors’ allegation. In the transcript, the High Court simply said: “The applicant has also filed, and [served], a notice under s 78B of the Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth) to the Attorneys-General……. No Attorney-General has indicated a desire to intervene.”

Implicitly, people’s fundamental Constitutional rights are important for the people. Over a thousand people have signed the petition on paper including Ms Sharan Burrow (the president of Australian Council of Trade Unions), Father Bruce Duncan (Redemptorist Priest) and Mr Peter Marshall (the president of Victorian Trade Hall Council) and Members of Parliaments.

Organizations Have Supported the Petition:

Central Branch of Union Solidarity, Maritime Union of Australia Victorian Branch, International Socialist Organization, Communication Workers Union, P+T Victorian Branch, Union Solidarity, Socialist Alternative, Socialist Party, Australian Services Union, Industrial Workers of the World, Friends of the Earth, Communication Workers Union of Australia, Socialist Alliance, Unite, Geelong and Region Trades and Labour Council, Australian Manufacturing Workers’ Union North Districts Committee (AMWU Victorian Branch), Thornbury Women’s Neighbourhood House, Darebin Workers Rights and Social Justice Campaign, Australian Manufacturing Workers’ Union Victorian Branch, Construction and General Division of Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union Victorian Branch, United Firefighters Union Victorian Branch, Darebin Community Legal Centre, Australian Nursing Federation Victorian Branch, Australian Meat Industry Employees Union, Australian Education Union Victorian Branch, Mining and Energy Division of the CFMEU Victorian Branch, Australian Institute of Marine and Power Engineers Victoria/Tasmania Branch, Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology University Students Union, Communications, Electrical and Plumbing Union of Australia, Electrical Trades Union of Australia Southern States Branch, Australia Asia Worker Links Inc., Women's Information Referral Exchange, Australian Nursing Federation, Country Alliance, Preston Reservoir Progress Assoc, National Tertiary Education Union, Western Suburbs Legal Service Inc., Union of Australian Women Southern Branch, Union of Australian Women, seditioncharter.org

MPs Have Supported the Petition:

Ms Nicola Roxon MP (ALP), the Hon Simon Crean MP (ALP), Mr Lindsay Tanner MP (ALP), Senator Lyn Allison (ADP), Ms Anna Burke MP (ALP), Ms Catherine King MP (ALP), Senator Gavin Marshall (ALP), Ms Maria Vamvakinou MP (ALP), Mr Carlo Carli MP (Vic ALP) and Mr Alistair Ross Harkness (Vic ALP), Mr Gavan O’Connor MP (ALP), Ms Tamara Lobato MP (Vic ALP), Mr Donato Antonio Nardella MP (Vic ALP), Ms Dympna Anne Beard MP (Vic ALP), the Hon Marsha Rose Thomson MLC (Vic ALP), Mr Ian Douglas Trezise MP (Vic ALP), Mr Luke Donnellan MP (Vic ALP) and Mr Jude Perera MP (Vic ALP), Mr Anthony Robinson MP (Vic ALP), Mr George Seitz MP (Vic ALP), Mr John Eren MP (Vic ALP), Mr Shaun Leane MLC (Vic ALP), Ms Colleen Hartland MLC (Vic Greens), Mr Greg Barber MLC (Vic Greens), Mr Nazih Elasmar MLC (Vic ALP), the Hon Robert Smith MLC (Vic ALP), Ms Gayle Tierney MLC (Vic ALP), Mr Tim Pallas MP (Vic ALP), Ms Fiona Richardson MP (Vic ALP), the Hon Gavin Jennings MLC (Vic ALP), Mr Evan Thornley MLC (Vic ALP) and Mr Martin Pakula MLC (Vic ALP)

Local Government:

Moreland City Council

Online petition:  http://gopetition.com/online/9454.html (to Federal Senate)

Website:  http://www.upholding-peoples-rights.blogspot.com

Email:  Upholding.Peoples.Rights@hotmail.com

Petition:
The Petition of the undersigned residents of Victoria draws to the attention of the House:

The Federal Court struck out Hilda Zhang’s claim of unlawful termination of employment, which is certified by the Industrial Relations Commission, and ordered her to pay the employer’s cost, holding that her claim was instituted “vexatiously or without reasonable cause” because she only complained about her former employer’s unlawful instructions and activities to the employer, the Auditor, the Unions, Victorian Employers Chamber of Commerce and Industry, the ATO and the WorkCover and not “to a Court or Tribunal" before the termination. The judgments of the Federal Court do not uphold the employee’s right and obligation to uphold and obey law in the workplace under the Constitution.

The petitioners therefore request that the Legislative Assembly of Victoria:

1. ensure that employees’ rights under the Constitution are upheld by the laws and courts;

2. ensure that the Attorney General of Victoria responds to Hilda Zhang’s Notice of A Constitutional Matter, which is certified by the High Court, and intervenes in the matter in the High Court under section 77J(1) of the Judiciary Act 1903.

 http://www.gopetition.com/online/9491.html

Invalid Australian Constitution empowers crooked (High Court) Judges to violate Common Law rights for ALL Australians

Australia Sovereignty: So who wants to be King and Queen of Australia?
Invalid constitution means Terra Nullius still?

 http://www.scribd.com/doc/12725319/Invalid-Australian-Constitution-empowers-crooked-High-Court-Judges-to-violate-Common-Law-rights-for-ALL-Australians

 http://kangaroocourtaustralia.com/

 http://iwitness.x24hr.com/kangaroo_court_australia/index.php?showtopic=10581

These issues are not national but international in scope, affecting the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Australia, New Zealand and Canada. The problems are constitutional, political and hence, legal in nature. By way of a quick example: If you have your retirement money in a managed retirement fund and that managed fund has investments in Australia, New Zealand or Canada how can those investments be enforced if the legislation governing companies, trusts and businesses in Australia, New Zealand and Canada is invalid? How can your investments in those countries be safe if there is no valid, internationally enforceable law governing such entities in those countries? And many American Managed Retirement Funds have investments in those countries!

Yesterday, Thursday 7th May 2009, a friend of mine went to the British Consulate in Sydney, New South Wales and got talking to a gentleman at the Passports' Counter. This gentleman admitted that 'Australia is a political wasteland' and gave instructions on how to claim political asylum by visiting the British Consulate! He stated that although 'the Australian constitution is valid British law it is referred to as waste legislation because it doesn't apply to anything any more'! He went on to state that 'since 1922 (the time that the UK of Great Britain and Ireland became the UK of Great Britain and Northern Ireland) Australia has had no law because there was no monarch who could give Royal Ascent or make Vice-Regal appointments in Australia (and by implication, in Canada or New Zealand as well) and that this problem couldn't be rectified by the Queen or her government because neither were permitted by international law to interfere in the affairs of a free, sovereign and independent nation'!!

This is not an issue in which the governments of America have been greatly involved – although they have all known about it. However, the American government has interests in keeping the situation as it is. Successive Australia, New Zealand and Canadian governments have historically maintained good relations with the American administration so there's little to be gained and perhaps much to be lost, in altering the situation. In particular, off of the western coast of Australia there exist some very deep ocean trenches which American nuclear submarines use. The American Administration is concerned that in the political upheaval that will follow this story the Indonesian government may be able to successfully claim the oceans wherein these trenches are situated and that is something the American government definitely doesn't want!

In 2000 a journalist from Time Magazine spent time in Australia researching this stuff and his last words before he got on the plane home were, 'This is huge! Time Magazine has never come across anything like this so we'll put out a special edition!' That was nine years ago. There are Defence Notices (sometimes referred to as D-Notices, a hang-over from WWII) in place to prevent this story reaching the world and the situation being rectified. It is for this reason that although we would greatly appreciate any assistance you can offer, we maintain that only a journalist fluent in English but not working in an English speaking country will be able to publish this story.

We have proof that Jack Straw has forged Queen Elizabeth's signature on Royal Appointment documents! In one case Appointment documents show that Queen Elizabeth II allegedly signed at Buckingham Palace when the public record shows that she was elsewhere!

Whoever breaks this story will be remembered for it long after their death, because other stories with the profound economic and political consequences of this one just don't exist.