Treasonous Australian Senate modifying terms of reference for inquiry into corru

Treasonous Australian Senate modifying terms of reference for inquiry into corrupt Judiciary; were the Greens & Ludlum involved?

"To distrust the judiciary," said Honoré de Balzac, "marks the beginning of the end of society."

The Senate Inquiry into Australia’s Judicial System, the Role of Judges and Access to Justice

 http://sydney.indymedia.org.au/event/inquiry-australia-s-judicial-system-role-judges-and-access-justice

Has now been split into two:

 http://www.aph.gov.au/Senate/committee/legcon_ctte/inquiries.htm

Inquiry into Australia’s Judicial System and the Role of Judges
The terms of reference for the new inquiry into Australia's judicial system and the role of judges require the committee to have particular reference to:

(a) procedures for appointment and method of termination of judges;

(b) term of appointment, including the desirability of a compulsory retirement age, and the merit of full-time, part-time or other arrangements;

(c) jurisdictional issues, for example, the interface between the federal and state judicial system; and

(d) the judicial complaints handling system.

Inquiry into Access to Justice
The terms of reference for the new inquiry into Access to justice require the committee to have particular reference to:

1. the ability of people to access legal representation;

2. the adequacy of legal aid;

3. the cost of delivering justice;

4. measures to reduce the length and complexity of litigation and improve efficiency;

5. alternative means of delivering justice;

6. the adequacy of funding and resource arrangements for community legal centres; and

7. the ability of Indigenous people to access justice.

So what point of reference did they remove:
o. other matters relating and incidental thereto.

This term of reference was added by the Greens and Senator Ludlum's instigation;

We would certainly like to know why the inquiry is separated into two; we can always squeeze our arguments into either hole they want. But the price of Freedom and Democracy is still vigilance, or else the cost might be nazism and totalitarianism. Maybe they did it due to our earlier submission on March 4th or thereabouts: naming French, Hayne JJ and John von Doussa for perverting justice and racial discrimination.

In any case, playing the white man's game, we have now submitted: (among others, paraphrased here)

* The whole of the Australian legal fraternity have tried to conceal the enactment of ICCPR under HREOA1986; they have done it in many ways to maintain the White Australia Policy;

* The legal fraternity have done it through Legal Aid by refusing to provide written legal arguments and fraudulently refuse cases that should be heard in court in the interest of the public; The Senate is now asked to pass legislations to compel legal aid centres to provide written legal opinions and legislations to support their legal advice; Ms Zhang did not receive any whatsoever;

* The legal fraternity have done it through the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission and its President John von Doussa, in refusing to investigate human rights violations, and refusing to report human rights violations by the Commonwealth to Parliament, and making false reports to the United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination and other International bodies. The Senate is now urged to investigate the actions of HREOC and president John von Doussa regarding All persons making this submission and others;

* The independence of the Judiciary can only be maintained when justice IS seen to be done; it is not enough that justice is done, justice MUST be seen to be done! There are Acts of Parliament and High Court rulings that require judges to provide legislations for their rulings and decisions; Ms Zhang has not been provided with such legislations, grandmother Tran had not been given her rights. Judges are using their henchmen like the police and registrars and prothonotaries to prevent access to the legal process and courts, sometimes fatally in Aborigines cases. How can the Senate provide for the independence of the Judiciary and at the same time ensuring that the laws and constitution of the Commonwealth are complied with?

* A Writ of Mandamus was sought for perverting justice and fabricating documents against Federal Court Judge French & ors JJ; each crime carries a penalty of 5 years imprisonment. Prime Minister Kevin Rudd and all the Attorneys Generals including McClelland were notified of a Notice of a Constitutional Matter in conjunction with the Writ of Mandamus; Kevin Rudd and Parliament promptly appointed French J as not only a High Court Judge BUT the Chief Justice of the High Court. How can Australians feel that their High Court is not being influenced by the Executive Branch having appointed a judge with a pending case of contempt for the rule of law, perverting justice and fabricating documents; the Chief Justice French would be indebted to the Prime Minister for installing him in order to influence cases against the chief justice himself! How can Ms Hilda Zhang be sure that the judge is not influenced by corporate interests in abuse of discretionary powers and depriving her of employment when all Australian laws point to unfair dismissal as admitted to by the judge? Judges have denied grandmother Tran the opportunity to die with dignity covering up for corruption and racism;

* It would seem that the position of Chief Justice is untenable; the appointment of French J was dubious and smells of the Executive trying to influence the Judiciary by doing its Chief Justice favours;

There are 20 pages more of submission

The price of Freedom and Democracy is vigilance, the cost of Freedom and Democracy is nazism and totalitarianism.

 http://kangaroocourtaustralia.com/