20230101-Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. To AG Mark Dreyfus MP

Page 1
1
2
3 AG Mark Dreyfus MP 1-1-2023
4 Email attorney@ag.gov.au, mark.dreyfus.mp@aph.gov.au
5 COMPLAINT
6 Sir,
7 I arrived in 1971 into Australia from The Netherlands, and being unable to speak the English
8 language I did what seems to be a sheer impossible task and that to learn what legally was
9 applicable in the Commonwealth of Australia, by self-education. I view that it was the best thing
10 I ever could have done. After all not knowing the English language I had to use word
11 dictionaries to try to get to understand what the true meaning and application of the
12 Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900 (UK) actually stood for.
13
14 Hansard 2-2-1898 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National Australasian
15 Convention)
16 QUOTE Mr. DEAKIN (Victoria).-
17 The record of these debates may fairly be expected to be widely read, and the observations
18 to which I allude might otherwise lead to a certain amount of misconception.
19 END QUOTE
20
21 Hansard 19-4-1897 Constitution Convention Debates
22 QUOTE Mr. CARRUTHERS:
23 This is a Constitution which the unlettered people of the community ought to be able to
24 understand.
25 END QUOTE
26
28 QUOTE
29 The Right Hon. C.C. KINGSTON (South Australia)[9.21]: I trust the Drafting Committee
30 will not fail to exercise a liberal discretion in striking out words which they do not
31 understand, and that they will put in words which can be understood by persons commonly
32 acquainted with the English language.
33 END QUOTE
34
36 QUOTE Mr. ISAACS.-
37 We want a people's Constitution, not a lawyers' Constitution.
38 END QUOTE
39
40 HANSARD 17-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
41 QUOTE
42 Mr. DEAKIN.- In this Constitution, although much is written much remains “unwritten”
43 END QUOTE
44
1-1-2023 Page 1 © Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.

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,
or E-mail admin@inspector-rikati.com See also www.scribd.com/inspectorrikati
Page 2
1 In this Constitution, although much is written much remains “unwritten” are the legal principles
2 the Framers of the Constitution embedded in the constitution by what they stated during the
3 debates.
4
5 For example:
6
8 QUOTE Mr. HIGGINS:
9 I think it is advisable that private people should not be put to the expense of having
10 important questions of constitutional law decided out of their own pockets.
11 END QUOTE
12
13 The very notion by the Framers of the Constitution was that any citizen no matter how poor
14 could still provide a challenge in the High Court of Australia where the citizen held that a law or
15 part thereof was in violation to the provisions of the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution
16 Act 1900 (UK).
17
18 The following will also make clear that the Framers of the Constitution intended to have CIVIL
19 RIGHTS and LIBERTIES principles embedded in the Constitution;
20
22 QUOTE Mr. CLARK.-
23 the protection of certain fundamental rights and liberties which every individual citizen is
24 entitled to claim that the federal government shall take under its protection and secure to
25 him.
26 END QUOTE
27
29 QUOTE
30 Mr. HIGGINS.-Suppose the sentry is asleep, or is in the swim with the other power?
31
32 Mr. GORDON.-There will be more than one sentry. In the case of a federal law, every
33 member of a state Parliament will be a sentry, and, every constituent of a state Parliament
34 will be a sentry.
35 As regards a law passed by a state, every man in the Federal Parliament will be a sentry,
36 and the whole constituency behind the Federal Parliament will be a sentry.
37 END QUOTE
38
39 What remains “unwritten” nevertheless has to be available to the public and can be enforced.
40
41 WATSON v_ LEE (1979) 144 CLR 374;( JUDGE3 STEPHEN J.)
42 QUOTE
43 As Scott L.J. said in Blackpool Corporation v. Locker (1948) 1 KB 349, at p
44 361 , speaking there of sub-delegated legislation, "there is one quite general
45 question . . . of supreme importance to the continuance of the rule of law
46 under the British constitution, namely, the right of the public affected to
47 know what that law is". The maxim that ignorance of the law is no excuse forms the
48 "working hypothesis on which the rule of law rests in British democracy" but to
49 operate it requires that "the whole of our law, written or unwritten, is accessible to
50 the public - in the sense, of course, that at any rate its legal advisers have access to it at
51 any moment, as of right".
52 END QUOTE
Page 3
1
2 I intend to address several constitutional issues in this COMPLAINT however first will address
3 the unconstitutional Facebook interference with publications.
4
5 The Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900 (UK) ((v) postal, telegraphic,
6 telephonic, and other like services;) actually specifically was created that postal services
7 were to be in sole control of the Federal government, but well one doesn’t have to be some
8 conspiracy theorist to be able to point out that in violation of this constitutional provision
9 there are numerous private services to deliver mail articles.
10 The term “and other like services” was added because the Framers of the Constitution
11 made clear that in future times new modes of communication may exist and so that would
12 then also fall within the legislative powers of the Commonwealth. Hence, the internet falls
13 within the powers of the Commonwealth and so does mobile phone communication.
14
15 “ THE ACCOUNTABILITY PROJECT (TAP) ”
16 I view any politician, and his/her minions, scientist, medical doctor, media that is
17 pushing the covid scam should be put in an asylum as there is sufficient information, as I
18 refer to also, to make clear that the misnamed ’vaccines’ (gene therapy) are dangerous
19 for many persons health and wellbeing.
20 You can download the document from:
21 https://www.scribd.com/document/617088721/20221231-Mr-G-H-Schorel-Hlavka-O-W-B-
22 to-R-Kershaw-Chief-Commissioner-of-AFP-Suppl-93-Part15-Electors-candidates-covid-
23 Scam-Etc
24
25 QUOTE
26
27 END QUOTE
Page 4
1
2 What I became aware of was that Facebook unconstitutionally interfered with my
3 publication by adding their label referring to World Health Organisation, UNICEF and the
4 Visit australia.gov.au website details as to undermine what I published.
5
6 https://www.facebook.com/coronavirus_info/?page_source=safety_efficacy_faxit&hoisted_mod
7 ule_type=covid_vaccine_development&__cft__[0]=AZV7q4I3k9liAvTC22Xt517uohPfU70yqk
8 A8TNidE2FYkyepLyGVVbs244eZ9Nac1UOdYAZAUxWiu6cTmtD39g7R1W7gIh9BnIb6Zs5
9 MC22lW6wg2bhMzb-6e7kyF8zFoCD6RCrKBTscHFoSX9cLph5R&__tn__=*W-R
10 QUOTE
11
12
13
14
Page 5
2
3
6
7

Page 6
4
5 END QUOTE
6
7 I have sought below to provide some of the links of the above images.
Page 7
1
2 QUOTE
3 COVID-19 Information Center
4 Follow for updates and notifications.
5
6 Follow
7
8 Facts about COVID-19
9 These facts come from leading health organizations. They correct common, untrue rumors about COVID-19.
10
11 Vaccines are thoroughly tested for safety before they’re made available to the public
12
13 Young people can get the disease
14
15 You are far more likely to be seriously harmed by COVID-19 than by vaccines
16
17 See all
18
19 Sources: World Health Organization; GAVI, the Vaccine Alliance
20 Common prevention tips
21 Protect yourself and others
22
23 When you can’t keep a safe distance from others, cover your mouth and nose with a mask
24
25 Cover coughs and sneezes with your elbow or tissue
26
27 Keep a safe distance from others
28
29 Don't touch your eyes, nose or mouth
30
31 Listen for instructions from your local government about staying home
32
33 Clean hands often and disinfect frequently touched surfaces at home
34 Source: World Health Organization
35 Emotional Health
36 See ideas from experts on steps you can take to support your emotional health.
37
38 7 TIPS
39 Depression: What you should know
40
41 6 TIPS
42 Managing stress
43
44 5 TIPS
45 Coping with an emotional health crisis
46
47 Visit Emotional Health
48
49 Learn more about coronavirus (COVID-19) at australia.gov.au.
50
51 Visit australia.gov.au
52
53 Featured video spotlight
54 END QUOTE
55
56 As I understand it in Dow Jones & Company Inc v Gutnick [2002] HCA 56 (10 December
57 2002) the High Court of Australia held that where details/information are accessible (in a
Page 8
1 country – legal jurisdiction) via the internet than this is actionable in the location where it was
2 received.
3 What this means is that Facebook, or for that any other Big Tech company is legally accountable
4 for any publication in the Commonwealth of Australia. Meaning, Facebook and so other Big
5 Tech companies are bound by the legal principles embedded in the Commonwealth of Australia
6 Constitution Act 1900 (UK) and all and any laws enacted within the provisions of this
7 constitution. As the World Health Organisation and neither the UNICEF are foreign entities then
8 Facebook cannot by backdoor manner or otherwise interfere with my (for that any other
9 Australian) publication. As my publication clearly relates to politicians then Facebook neither
10 can interfere with my constitutional rights to expose any political wrongdoing, such as the TGA
11 John Skerritt having claimed to follow “government policy”.
12 For all intent and purposes Facebook (and other Big Tech) must be bound by the legal principles
13 embedded in the constitution and so also any legislation enacted within the provisions of the
14 constitution.
15
16 The following underline some more of the legal principles embedded in the constitution:
17
18 Hansard 6-3-1891 Constitution convention Debates
19 QUOTE Mr. BARTON:
20 I hope that I am at any rate acting in the spirit in which we all labour together, and that the
21 result of our labour will be to found a state of high and august aims, working by the eternal
22 principles of justice and not to the music of bullets, and affording an example of freedom,
23 political morality, and just action to the individual, the state and the nation which will one
24 day be the envy of the world.
25 END QUOTE
26
27 Hansard 9-3-1891 Constitution convention Debates
28 QUOTE Sir GEORGE GREY:
29 These must seem almost too daring speculations; but, in point of fact, we are marching on
30 to an altogether new epoch, to new times, and the very essence of the constitution must be
31 this: I heard one hon. gentleman here state that we must remember that we are legislating
32 for the future; and I agree with him if he meant that we are legislating in such a manner as
33 to enable the future to legislate for itself-that it is our object that freedom in every respect
34 shall be given, so that as each generation comes on they shall say, "Blessed be those
35 ancestors of ours who have left us this freedom, so that nothing can take place-no changes
36 in the state of the world-but we possess all powers to define the measures most necessary
37 to bring peace and tranquillity at every epoch it comes on." That is the real duty which we
38 should aim to fulfil; and it is only by allowing the people to speak, and at all times to
39 declare [start page 140] their views and their wishes, and to have them carefully
40 considered, that we can insure peace, tranquillity, and prosperity to each country in each
41 successive epoch of time as it arrives.
42 END QUOTE
43
45 QUOTE
46 Mr. BARTON.- Of course it will be argued that this Constitution will have been made by
47 the Parliament of the United Kingdom. That will be true in one sense, but not true in effect,
48 because the provisions of this Constitution, the principles which it embodies, and the
49 details of enactment by which those principles are enforced, will all have been the work of
50 Australians.
51 END QUOTE

Page 9
1
3 QUOTE Mr. DEAKIN.-
4 What a charter of liberty is embraced within this Bill-of political liberty and religious
5 liberty-the liberty and the means to achieve all to which men in these days can
6 reasonably aspire. A charter of liberty is enshrined in this Constitution, which is also
7 a charter of peace-of peace, order, and good government for the whole of the peoples
8 whom it will embrace and unite.
9 END QUOTE
10 And
12 QUOTE
13 Mr. SYMON (South Australia).- We who are assembled in this Convention are about to
14 commit to the people of Australia a new charter of union and liberty; we are about to
15 commit this new Magna Charta for their acceptance and confirmation, and I can
16 conceive of nothing of greater magnitude in the whole history of the peoples of the
17 world than this question upon which we are about to invite the peoples of Australia to
18 vote. The Great Charter was wrung by the barons of England from a reluctant king. This
19 new charter is to be given by the people of Australia to themselves.
20 END QUOTE
21 And
23 QUOTE
24 Mr. BARTON.- We can have every faith in the constitution of that tribunal. It is appointed
25 as the arbiter of the Constitution. . It is appointed not to be above the Constitution, for
26 no citizen is above it, but under it; but it is appointed for the purpose of saying that
27 those who are the instruments of the Constitution-the Government and the
28 Parliament of the day-shall not become the masters of those whom, as to the
29 Constitution, they are bound to serve. What I mean is this: That if you, after making
30 a Constitution of this kind, enable any Government or any Parliament to twist or
31 infringe its provisions, then by slow degrees you may have that Constitution-if not
32 altered in terms-so whittled away in operation that the guarantees of freedom which
33 it gives your people will not be maintained; and so, in the highest sense, the court you
34 are creating here, which is to be the final interpreter of that Constitution, will be such a
35 tribunal as will preserve the popular liberty in all these regards, and will prevent,
36 under any pretext of constitutional action, the Commonwealth from dominating the
37 states, or the states from usurping the sphere of the Commonwealth.
38 END QUOTE
39
40 Therefore, the Federal government cannot use Big Tech to seek to undermine/counteract my
41 publications merely because of its own political agenda, however it may oppose publications that
42 are contrary to Australian legal provisions that are valid within the constitutional legal
43 principles. Therefore, it would be proper for Facebook to show I published something that
44 violates Australian legal provisions but it then must show this clearly as to which, if any part it
45 claims to be so. It cannot merely assume to be so. Neither can it do so merely because it may
46 clash with the political narratives of the Government of the Day. Moreover it cannot use foreign
47 entities in the process which have no constitutional powers for this. While I understand that
48 “Travelling Pete” (Anthony Albanese) is adamant to violate the legal principles embedded in the
49 constitution such as to give the foreign entity World Health Organisation to take over certain
50 Australian Sovereign powers as to health, finance, privacy details, etc, you as Attorney-General
51 and I understand an OFFICER OF THE COURT cannot allow this to be tolerated as any
Page 10
1 OFFICER OF THE COURT, being it a judicial officer or lawyers admitted to the Bar of the
2 Supreme Court/High Court of Australia is bound to act when a criminal offence is made known
3 to him/her, with the exception of where a legal practitioner is acting in defence of a person/party
4 in a criminal trial
5
6 It ought to be clear that Section 44 of the constitution applies also to any Member of Parliament
7 of any Australian State/Territory, this as Section 106 (creating the States) specifically states
8 “subject to this constitution”.
9
10 In my view therefore Anthony Albanese violated the sovereignty of the Commonwealth of
11 Australia to on 22 may 2022 and thereafter agree for the World Health Organisation to be
12 permitted to take over certain sovereign powers belonging to the Federal/State/Territory
13 Parliaments. I have set out matters in an extensive detailed documentation published at my
14 Scribd blog “inspectorrikati”, and as such no need to include those thousands of pages in this
15 COMPLAINT, albeit must be considered to be part of this COMPLAINT.
16
17 Former PM Scott Morrison in my view violated constitutional limitations including to authorise
18 the signing of a contract such as with Pfizer pharmaceutical company and others. The Pfizer
19 contract specifically claim:
20
21 There was this claim by Premier Daniel Andrews: sorry about excessive rules thru pandemic,
22 lots of damage done, it is a learning process, wrong advises received.
23
24 As this document to some extent sets out it is absurd for Premier Daniel Andrews and/or others
25 to claim that “it is a learning process” when people were not just harmed but even died. Also to
26 claim about “wrong advises received” I will also outline to some extend that he had been
27 provided with details/information in my many correspondences but he simply blatantly ignored
28 it. To me “sorry” cannot do it. The same with any other politicians who violated the Privacy Act
29 and I view each and every one must be held legally accountable. Failing to do so means they will
30 do so time and again as already is shown to be so where it comes to providing privacy details to
31 foreign entities to pursue some kind of a NEW WORLD ORDER despite it being
32 unconstitutional.
33
34 Hansard2-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates;
35 QUOTE Dr. QUICK.-
36 The Constitution empowers the Federal Parliament to deal with certain external affairs,
37 among which would probably be the right to negotiate for commercial treaties with foreign
38 countries, in the same way as Canada has negotiated for such treaties. These treaties could
39 only confer rights and privileges upon the citizens of the Commonwealth, because the
40 Federal Government, in the exercise of its power, [start page 1753] could only act for and
41 on behalf of its citizens.
42 END QUOTE
43
44 Let us see what some of the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner claims are:
45
46 https://www.oaic.gov.au/privacy
47 QUOTE
48 We protect your personal information by upholding Australia’s national privacy
49 laws, resolving privacy complaints and investigating potential data breaches. We give

Page 11
1 guidance on how to handle your personal information and promote awareness of

2 your privacy rights.
3 END QUOTE
4
5 What we have is an alleged “independent national regulator ” to allegedly “by upholding
6 Australia’s national privacy laws” but what if those laws are UNCONSTITUTIONAL?
7
8 If privacy laws purportedly allows the Commonwealth to transfer details to the World Health
9 Organisation (read U.,N. & W.E.F.) then that would not make it lawful because they are foreign
10 entities outside our constitutional system.
11
12 Surely, any competent medical doctor would be well aware that a “gene treatment” cannot
13 combat an infectious disease to prevent infection or the transmission of an infection? Neither
14 would a competent medical doctor agree to use a “gene treatment” for people who have no
15 defect in their gens!
16
17 I may not have been trained in formal education regarding medical or science issues but surely
18 even Blind Freddy would be aware that it is utter and sheer nonsense to claim that by
19 deliberately misnaming a “gene treatment” as a “vaccine” then somehow this will change the
20 end result. And yet the Commonwealth still continues its fraudulent pushing of boosters as if
21 they are a “vaccine” and have gullible people going along.
22
23 Let us go back to the 31-12-2020 contract issue, etc.
24
25 As I previously referred to about the TGA claiming:
26
27 QUOTE
28 COMIRNATY has been shown to prevent COVID-19 however, it is not yet known
29 whether it prevents transmission or asymptomatic disease.
30 END QUOTE
31 And
32 QUOTE
33 The decision to provisionally approve the vaccine was also informed by expert advice
34 from the Advisory Committee on Vaccines (ACV), an independent committee with
35 expertise in scientific, medical and clinical fields including consumer representation.
36 END QUOTE
37
38 And then the 31-12-2020 contract the contract was based upon “which is intended to prevent
39 SARS-CoV-2 (“COVID-19”) in humans”.
40
41 I will also raise the (European Union Member of Parliament EUMP Mr Rob Roos video
42 “Member of the European Parliament Rob Roos exposes Pfizer” asked Pfizer Director Janine
43 Small (under oath) as to Pfizer testing.
44
45 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=noJO5DBe7x0
46 Member of the European Parliament Rob Roos exposes Pfizer
47 4 days ago ... Member of the European Parliament Rob Roos exposes Pfizer ... In
48 COVID hearing, #Pfizer director admits: #vaccine was never tested on preventing ...
49
50 https://expose-news.com/2022/10/12/get-vaccinated-for-others-was-always-a-lie/
Page 12
1 Pfizer admits to European Parliament

2 they NEVER tested whether Covid
3 Vaccine prevented transmission or
4 infection – “Get Vaccinated for
5 Others” was always a Lie
6 QUOTE
7 After Pfizer’s CEO Albert Bourla declined to appear before the European
8 Parliament to answer questions, Janine Small attended a parliamentary hearing on
9 Monday in his stead. Member of the European Parliament (“MEP”) Rob Roos from
10 the Netherlands asked her a simple “yes” or “no” question: Was the Pfizer Covid
11 vaccine tested for stopping transmission of the virus before it entered the market?
12 Janine Small answered “No.”
13 This removed the entire legal basis for the Covid passport, MEP Rob Roos said. “This is
14 scandalous. Millions of people worldwide felt forced to get vaccinated because of the
15 myth that ‘you do it for others’.”
16 “Get vaccinated for others” was always a lie, tweeted MEP Rob Roos yesterday.
17 MEP Rob Roos on Twitter, 11 October 2022
18 This huge admission was made during the second debate of the European Parliament’s
19 special committee on Covid-19 (“COVI”) with representatives from pharmaceutical
20 companies held on Monday, 10 October 2022. Representatives from five pharmaceutical
21 companies attended:
22 Janine Small, President of International Developed Markets, Pfizer
23 Dr Franz-Werner Haas, Chief Executive Officer, CureVac
24 Stanley Erck, Chief Executive Officer, Novavax
25 Roger Connor, President Global Vaccines, Glaxo Smith Kline
26 Carlos Montañés, Executive Vice-President, HIPRA
27 You can watch the full debate HERE.
28 https://multimedia.europarl.europa.eu/en/webstreaming/covi-committee-
29 meeting_20221010-1430-COMMITTEE-COVI
30 The first debate was held on 5 September 2022 with representatives from Gilead Sciences,
31 Sanofi, AstraZeneca and Moderna.
32 Further reading: MEP Grills AstraZeneca and Moderna About Vaccines and Vaccine
33 Contracts During EU Covid Committee Meeting
34 END QUOTE
35
36 Therefore in my view where the contract was based upon “which is intended to prevent SARS-
37 CoV-2 (“COVID-19”) in humans” and this Novavax knew was something they never tested for
38 and so it was a deceptive/fraudulent claim the entire contract for this must be deemed invalid,
39 this as the very purpose of the contract was to acquire an alleged ‘vaccine’ that never would
40 serve the purpose it was intended for.
41
42 QUOTE

Page 13
1
2 END QUOTE
3
4 Do note ‘Vaccine’:
5 QUOTE
6
7 END QUOTE
8
9 Clearly the mRNA “gene therapy” never was a “Vaccine” and therefore even before any
10 “provisional approval” was obtained from the TGA already there was a deliberate deception to
11 refer to it as a “Vaccine” when it never was.
12
13 It means that Scott Morrison PM, Greg Hunt Minister for Health, Premier Daniel Andrews and
14 numerous others did provide disinformation and pursued mandates, etc, without a shred of
15 scientific data to prove this was all legally justified.
16
17 Olga (my wife) eye doctor receptionist Mary suffered from cancer and gave me the
18 understanding that the hospital refused to treat her unless she was jabbed with the alleged
19 COVID-19 vaccine. So was coerced to allow this and afterwards gave me the understanding the
20 cancer was regressing. Just that after wards, as I all along expected, her cancer flared up and on 1
21 September 2022 she died. I view that those who were pushing for the jab and also the hospital
22 concerned should be charged with manslaughter/murder. After all there was in my view no
23 scientific and/or medical justification to coerce Marty to be jabbed with a “gene therapy”. Worse
24 is that in 2017 Moderna claimed the “gene therapy” was to combat cancer. Well, it seems to
25 have achieved the opposite. Likewise the so called flu vaccinations are as I understanding to no
26 benefit for any person over the age of 60 years old and in fact may harm them due to
27 compromising the immune system. Hence many elderly die after the flu shot. Again, my Scribd
28 blog “inspectorrikati” has documents published on it setting out details.
29
30 With the Ukraine dispute with the Russian Federation I understand that PM Scott Morrison in
31 violation of our constitutional system provided monies, munition and vehicles/weapons to
32 Ukraine. As the Governor-General had not published in the Gazette any DECLARATION OF
33 WAR naming the Russian Federation then as I posted at my blog in extensive details, the
34 conduct of PM Scott Morrison, including the Minister of Defence, etc, was unconstitutional.
35 Likewise Anthony Albanese doing the same. And as I (unchallenged by any of the 9 Attorney-
36 Generals) in my successful appeals (representing myself) also made clear that John Howard, etc,
Page 14
1 violated constitutional limitations to have Australian Armed forces invade Iraq without the
2 Governor-General having published in the Gazette a DECLARATION OF WAR naming Iraq.
3 Again, I have detailed it all at my Scribd blog. There is no such thing as some “convention” to
4 overrule the constitution. There is no such thing as a DECLARATION OF EMERGENCY/
5 DECLARATION OF DISASTER to override the constitution.
6
8 QUOTE
9 Mr. HIGGINS.-No, because the Constitution is not passed by the Parliament.
10 END QUOTE
11
13 QUOTE Mr. THYNNE:
14 I shall quote from Mr. Dicey's recent work, which is very clear in its language. He says:
15 One of the characteristics of a federation is that the law of the constitution must be either
16 legally immutable or else capable of being changed only by some authority above and
17 beyond the ordinary legislative bodies, whether federal or state legislatures, existing under
18 the constitution.
19 END QUOTE
20
22 QUOTE
23 Mr. WISE.-If the Federal Parliament chose to legislate upon, say, the education question-
24 and the Constitution gives it no power to legislate in regard to that question-the Ministers
25 for the time being in each state might say-"We are favorable to this law, because we shall
26 get £100,000 a year, or so much a year, from the Federal Government as a subsidy for our
27 schools," and thus they might wink at a violation of the Constitution, while no one could
28 complain. If this is to be allowed, why should we have these elaborate provisions for the
29 amendment of the Constitution? Why should we not say that the Constitution may be
30 amended in any way that the Ministries of the several colonies may unanimously agree?
31 Why have this provision for a referendum? Why consult the people at all? Why not leave
32 this matter to the Ministers of the day? But the proposal has a more serious aspect, and for
33 that reason only I will ask permission to occupy a few minutes in discussing it.
34 END QUOTE
35
37 QUOTE
38 Mr. SYMON ( South Australia ).-
39 In the preamble honorable members will find that what we desire to do is to unite in one
40 indissoluble Federal Commonwealth -that is the political Union-"under the Crown of the
41 United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland , and under the Constitution hereby
42 established." Honorable members will therefore see that the application of the word
43 Commonwealth is to the political Union which is sought to be established. It is not
44 intended there to have any relation whatever to the name of the country or nation which we
45 are going to create under that Union . The second part of the preamble goes on to say that it
46 is expedient to make provision for the admission of other colonies into the Commonwealth.
47 That is, for admission into this political Union, which is not a republic, which is not to be
48 called a dominion, kingdom, or empire, but is to be a Union by the name of
49 "Commonwealth," and I do not propose to interfere with that in the slightest degree.
50 END QUOTE
51
Page 15
1 As I extensively canvassed at my Scribd blog it is my view that the judges in Sue v Hill
2 declaring that the Commonwealth of Australia was an independent nation was TREASON this
3 because the High Court of Australia has no such judicial authority. It should be noted that Kirby
4 J dissented.
5
7 QUOTE Sir JOHN DOWNER.-
8 I think we might, on the attempt to found this great Commonwealth, just advance one step,
9 not beyond the substance of the legislation, but beyond the form of the legislation, of the
10 different colonies, and say that there shall be embedded in the Constitution the righteous
11 principle that the Ministers of the Crown and their officials shall be liable for any arbitrary
12 act or wrong they may do, in the same way as any private person would be.
13 END QUOTE
14 .
15 The following could also be deemed applicable to the sheer madness about this unproven to exist
16 alleged SARS-CoV-2 VIRUS where at no time it was proven to exist by the isolation and
17 purification by the Koch postulate.
18
20 QUOTE
21 Mr. OCONNOR.-I think that the reason of the proposal is obvious. So long as each state
22 has to do only with its own citizens it may make what laws it thinks fit, but we are creating
23 now a new and a larger citizenship. We are giving new rights of citizenship to the whole of
24 the citizens of the Commonwealth, and we should take care that no man is deprived of life,
25 liberty, or property, except by due process of law.
26 Mr. GORDON.-Might you not as well say that the states should not legalize murder?
27 Mr. OCONNOR-That is one of those suppositions that are against the first instincts of
28 humanity.
29 Mr. GORDON.-So is this.
30 Mr. OCONNOR.-No, it is not. We need not go far back in history to find cases in which
31 the community, seized with a sort of madness with regard to particular offences, have set
32 aside all principles of justice. If a state did behave itself in that way, why should not the
33 citizens of the Commonwealth who did not belong to that state be protected? Dr. Cockburn
34 suggested in so contemptuous a way that there could be no reason for this amendment, that
35 I got up to state again what had been stated before.
36 Dr. COCKBURN.-Not contemptuous.
37 Mr. OCONNOR.-I know the honorable member meant nothing personal, but I thought it
38 necessary to state the reasons of what, had it not been for the honorable member's
39 statement, would have seemed to be a perfectly obvious proposition. Mr. Clark, of
40 Tasmania, thought the amendment of importance, and pointed out that it had been put in
41 the United States Constitution. It should also be put in this Constitution, not necessarily as
42 an imputation on any state or any body of states, but as a guarantee for all time for the
43 citizens of the Commonwealth that they shall be treated according to what we recognise to
44 be the principles of justice and of equality.
45 END QUOTE
46
47 Again my Scribd blog has relevant details about it all including documentation such as from the
48 CSIRO that it had not isolated/purified the alleged SARS-CoV-2 virus.
49

Page 16
1 My blog also shows why Special Appropriation Bills are required to be passed by the Parliament
2 and enacted before any monies can be provided to anyone outside the Annual Appropriation
3 Bills (Acts).
4
5 As such, Anthony Albanese I view fraudulently provided monies to Ukraine without
6 Parliamentarian authority as no Parliament had been in session since the Federal election.
7 Likewise, any vehicles, weapons, munition of the ADF was previously provided by
8 Appropriation Act for the ADF and therefore couldn’t be used to be given to Ukraine! And
9 certainly not without a DECLARATION OF WAR having been published in the gazette naming
10 the Russian Federation. I do not seek to imply that with such declaration somehow the
11 Commonwealth can provide weapons, munition, monies, etc, as the draft constitution was
12 rejected and at the Premiers conference then it was inserted to allow funding for the States, upon
13 which the draft constitution was then approved. As such if for the states it had to be in the
14 constitution then unless Ukraine mysteriously somehow was in the constitution or part of the
15 Commonwealth of Australia I view that any monies, munition, weapons, vehicles provided was
16 theft/fraud.
17
18 “Sovereign citizen” & “Australian citizen”.
19
20 Ordinary every State citizen is an “Australian citizen”, which has absolutely nothing to do with
21 nationality. Any citizen who is permitted to vote is by this an elector and a “Sovereign citizen”.
22 While I am aware there are people claiming “Sovereign citizenship” excludes them from the rule
23 of law, this is a gross misconception. Those who violate the rule of law can be prosecuted and
24 convicted and if convicted pending the punishment can be stripped of being a “Sovereign
25 citizen” and by this denied to vote in State and so Federal elections.
26
28 QUOTE
29 Mr. SYMON.-The honorable and learned member is now dealing with another matter.
30 Would not the provision which is now before us confer upon the Federal Parliament the
31 power to take away a portion of this dual citizenship, with which the honorable and
32 learned member (Dr. Quick) has so eloquently dealt? If that is the case, what this
33 Convention is asked to do is to hand over to the Federal Parliament the power, whether
34 exercised or not, of taking away from us that citizenship in the Commonwealth which we
35 acquire by joining the Union. I am not going to put that in the power of any one, and if it is
36 put in the power of the Federal Parliament, then I should feel that it was a very serious blot
37 on the Constitution, and a very strong reason why it should not be accepted. It is not a
38 lawyers' question; it is a question of whether any one of British blood who is entitled to
39 become a citizen of the Commonwealth is to run the risk-it may be a small risk-of
40 having that taken away or diminished by the Federal Parliament! When we declare-
41 "Trust the Parliament," I am willing to do it in everything which concerns the working out
42 of this Constitution, but I am not prepared to trust the Federal Parliament or anybody to
43 take away that which is a leading inducement for joining the Union.
44 END QUOTE
45 .
47 QUOTE
48 Mr. SYMON (South Australia).-I think the honorable member (Mr. Wise) has expanded
49 the spirit of federation far beyond anything any of us has hitherto contemplated. He has
50 enlarged, with great emphasis, on the necessity of establishing and securing one
Page 17
1 citizenship. Now, the whole purpose of this Constitution is to secure a dual

2 citizenship. That is the very essence of a federal system. We have debated that matter
3 again and again. We are not here for unification, but for federation, and the dual
4 citizenship must be recognised as lying at the very basis of this Constitution.
5 END QUOTE
6
8 QUOTE
9 Mr. SYMON.-Very likely not. What I want to know is, if there is anybody who will
10 come under the operation of the law, so as to be a citizen of the Commonwealth, who
11 would not also be entitled to be a citizen of the state? There ought to be no opportunity for
12 such discrimination as would allow a section of a state to remain outside the pale of the
13 Commonwealth, except with regard to legislation as to aliens. Dual citizenship exists, but it
14 is not dual citizenship of persons, it is dual citizenship in each person. There may be two
15 men-Jones and Smith-in one state, both of whom are citizens of the state, but one only is a
16 citizen of the Commonwealth. That would not be the dual citizenship meant. What is
17 meant is a dual citizenship in Mr. Trenwith and myself. That is to say, I am a citizen of the
18 state and I am also a citizen of the Commonwealth; that is the dual citizenship. That does
19 not affect the operation of this clause at all. But if we introduce this clause, it is open to the
20 whole of the powerful criticism of Mr. O'Connor and those who say that it is putting on the
21 face of the Constitution an unnecessary provision, and one which we do not expect will be
22 exercised adversely or improperly, and, therefore, it is much better to be left out. Let us, in
23 dealing with this question, be as careful as we possibly, can that we do not qualify the
24 citizenship of this Commonwealth in any way or exclude anybody [start page 1764] from
25 it, and let us do that with precision and clearness. As a citizen of a state I claim the right to
26 be a citizen of the Commonwealth. I do not want to place in the hands of the
27 Commonwealth Parliament, however much I may be prepared to trust it, the right of
28 depriving me of citizenship. I put this only as an argument, because no one would
29 anticipate such a thing, but the Commonwealth Parliament might say that nobody
30 possessed of less than £1,000 a year should be a citizen of the Federation. You are putting
31 that power in the hands of Parliament.
32 Mr. HIGGINS.-Why not?
33 Mr. SYMON.-I would not put such a power in the hands of any Parliament. We must rest
34 this Constitution on a foundation that we understand, and we mean that every citizen of a
35 state shall be a citizen of the Commonwealth, and that the Commonwealth shall have no
36 right to withdraw, qualify, or restrict those rights of citizenship, except with regard to one
37 particular set of people who are subject to disabilities, as aliens, and so on.
38 END QUOTE
39
40 Now, this latter part actually refers to Subsection 51(xxvi) where special legislation regarding a
41 race applies against ALL persons of that race and cannot be used against the “general
42 community”. This means since the 1967 Subsection 51(xxxvi) referendum Aboriginals were
43 now deemed a race and meaning they are not permitted to have franchise, voting rights and
44 neither to be a Member of Parliament.
45
46 Welcome to the crazy world of politicians, judges and so called constitutional lawyers who
47 instead of providing JUSTICE robbed Aboriginals of their rights to be equal as any other
48 Australian, as they were since federation. And no Anthony Albanese seek some nonsense of
49 “The Voice” as if we are going to have some singing contest amongst Aboriginals? It is utter and
50 sheer nonsense and would violate other principles in the constitution.
Page 18
1
3 QUOTE
4 Sir JOHN DOWNER.-Now it is coming out. The Constitution is made for the people and
5 the states on terms that are just to both.
6 Mr. DEAKIN.-It is made for the lawyers under this clause.
7 Sir JOHN DOWNER.-I do not think so. If you say "Trust the Parliament," no
8 Constitution is required at all; it can simply be provided that a certain number of gentlemen
9 shall be elected, and meet together, and, without limitation, do what they like. Victoria
10 would not agree to that. But there is a desire to draw the very life-blood of the
11 Constitution, so far as the states are concerned, by this insidious amendment, which would
12 give the Houses authority from time to time to put different constructions on this most
13 important part of the Constitution. I hope we will do as we have done in many instances
14 before, in matters that have been much debated-adhere to the decision we have already
15 arrived at.
16 END QUOTE
17
19 QUOTE Mr. BARTON.
20 If we are going to give the Federal Parliament power to legislate as it pleases with regard
21 to Commonwealth citizenship, not having defined it, we may be enabling the Parliament to
22 pass legislation that would really defeat all the principles inserted elsewhere in the
23 Constitution, and, in fact, to play ducks and drakes with it. That is not what is meant by the
24 term "Trust the Federal Parliament."
25 END QUOTE
26
27 The same (again) is to try to put “The Voice” or “Voice” into the constitution. Obviously you7
28 as Attorney-General lack the understanding/competence as to the true meaning and application
29 of the constitution as if you had been competent I would not have needed to write this
30 COMPLAINT in the first place because you would already have addressed these issues long
31 ago. As Attorney-General you simply are obligated to immediately without delay investigate
32 matters, and also why the Australian Federal Police failed to do so since I commenced to lodge
33 my complaint on 6 August 2022 with the AFP!
34
35 As for the issue of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal” I understand that for legal reasons this
36 need to be abolished as to so to say get rid of the political appointments. However, replacing
37 them with other political appointments isn’t really going to resolve anything as within some
38 years it will be back to the same rot.
39 Firstly, any person who seeks to obtain an appointment such as a judicial appointment, Minister,
40 head of a Department should be vetted by a consulting management bureau which test a person
41 for competence in management position. I over the decades came across judicial officers who I
42 view lacked to be up to the job. As such, any person desiring such an appointment must be
43 required to achieve at the very least an average of 50% score. If I with my self-professed
44 crummy English already about 4 decades ago (testing at a management level) was able to score
45 65% for English Test and all the rest well above 90% some 100% then surely it shouldn’t be too
46 difficult for others to achieve the same in particular judicial officers who need to understand
47 what unrepresented litigants are seeking to convey. And then let’s try to take out the politics and
48 hold elections for those positions where each candidate to a particular office provides details as
49 to the consulting management bureau score.

Page 19
1 Recently Premier Daniel Andrews announced that he is representing all Victorians. Now to me
2 this underlined his bias, as no politician should declare to be for all citizens when in a Ministerial
3 job as it is actually a constitutional requirement to do so.
4
5 The book "Law Made Simple" by Colin F. Padfield, LL.B.,D.P.A.(Lond.) on page 55:
6 QUOTE
7 "The Rule against Bias. A true judicial decision can be reached only if the judge himself
8 is impartial. This is an obvious requirement in a court of law or a tribunal. In R. v Rand
9 (1866) it was held that a judge is disqualified where (i) he has a direct pecuniary interest,
10 however small, in the subject-matter in dispute; or (ii) there is real likelihood that the judge
11 would have a bias in favour of one of the parties.
12
13 For example, if a judge is related to, or is a friend of, one of the parties to a dispute there
14 would be real likelihood of bias. It is immaterial whether a judicial decision was in fact
15 biased, for as was said by Lord Chief Justice Heward in R. v Sussex Justices, ex parte
16 McCarthy (1924): 'Justice should not only be done, but should manifestly and undoubtedly
17 be seen to be done.'
18 END QUOTE
19
20 Dimes v. Proprietors of the Grand Junction Canal (1852) 3 II,L.C. 759
21 QUOTE
22 The fundamental rule of English (Australian) law is that "No man can be a judge in his
23 own case". It has long been held that if there is bias or the appearance of bias such as to
24 deny justice or create the impression that justice has not been done, then that bias, or
25 apparent bias, is sufficient to invalidate the decision of those who made the decision.
26 END QUOTE
27 Reg v. The London County Council (1894) XI .L.R. 24
28 Sharp v. Carey (1897) 23 V.L.R. 248 Austin Digest 17.
29 Reg. v. Moleswort (1893) 23 V.L.R. 582 Austin Digest 17.
30 Black v. Black (1951) N.Z.L.R. 723
31 Ex Parte Blume (1958) W.N. (N.S.W.) 411Austin Digest 93,339,457,458
32
33 QUOTE R v. Lusink and another; Ex Parte Shaw (1980) 6 FLR 235 and 236
34 However in some cases the words or conduct of a judge may be such as to lead the parties
35 reasonably to think that the judge has prejudged an important question in the case, and then
36 prohibition may issue. Of course, the court which is asked to grant prohibition will not lightly
37 conclude that the judge may reasonably be suspected of bias in this sense; it must be "firmly
38 established" that such a suspicion may reasonably be engendered in the minds of the parties or
39 the public, as was made clear by the court in R v Commonwealth Conciliation and Arbitration
40 Commission; Ex Parte Angliss Group (1969) 122 CLR 546 at 553-4, in the passage cited in R
41 v Watson; Ex Parte Armstrong (132 CLR at 262).”
42 “The critical question, however, is not whether a judge believes he or she has prejudged
43 a question, but whether that is what a party or the public might reasonably suspect has
44 occurred (see per Lord Denning MR in Metropolitan Properties Co. (FGC Ltd v Lannon
45 (1969) 1 QB 577 at 599, a judgement cited with approval by this court in R v Commonwealth
46 Conciliation and Arbitration Commission; Ex Parte Angliss Group (1969) 122 CLR 546 at
47 553; In some circumstances repeated denials of prejudging might well convey the impression
48 of "protesting to much...
49 END QUOTE
50
51 .QUOTE In the Marriage of P.N. and J.S. Axtell 7 FLR 931
Page 20
1 The test of judicial bias as laid down by the high court is ‘whether it has been established that it might
2 reasonably be suspected by a fair minded person that the judge might not resolve the question before him
3 with a fair and unprejudiced mind’
4 END QUOTE
5 And
6 QUOTE
7 An appellated court has to consider whether on a reading of a transcript it should conclude
8 that a fair minded person would consider that the husband did not have a fair hearing and
9 that the issues raised by his case were not fairly considered.
10 END QUOTE
11 Official Solicitor v K. (1936) AC 201;
12 Reynolds v Reynolds (1975) 1 ALR 318;47 ALJR 501;
13 Corbett v Corbett (1953) 2 ALL E.R. 69 referred to
14 That a court of appeal in exercising its discretionary power to rectify a miscarriage of justice
15 should not permit a conceivable miscarriage of justice to occur, particularly in relation to a
16 custody case which is concerned with the question of the right of children.
17
18 QUOTE Sorell v Smith (1925) Lord Dunedin in the House of Lords
19 In an action against a set person in combination, a conspiracy to injure, followed by actual
20 injury, will give good cause for action, and motive or instant where the act itself is not
21 illegal is of the essence of the conspiracy.
22 END QUOTE
23
24 Well that Premier Daniel Andrews is bias has been shown ongoing where he blatantly ignored to
25 act against constitutional violation, etc.
26
27 But the same applies to numerous politicians which for whatever reason fail/refuse to act when
28 they should have done so.
29
30 For example in 1904 Sydney case the High Court of Australia held that “council rates” were a
31 “State land taxation”. On 11 November 1901 the Commonwealth commenced to legislate as to
32 Land taxation and by this actually wiped out the States being able to charge State land taxes, as
33 much as the High Court of Australia held in regard of the ‘income taxation”. It has been claimed,
34 such as by N.S.W. that the Commonwealth no longer had legislation as to Land taxation and so
35 the State were able to reclaim this legislative power. The truth is that while the Commonwealth
36 abolished land taxation, constitutionally once a Commonwealth legislative power always a
37 Commonwealth legislative power and there is no constitutional provision to return to the States a
38 legislative power, even if the Commonwealth desired to do so. And as the Commonwealth
39 remained to have on its books legislation regarding land taxation, even if it was to abolish
40 certain land taxation then it must be clear the Commonwealth may not claim taxes but still
41 exercises that legislative powers. Likewise other legislative powers that once were “concurrent
42 legislative powers” as like the income tax legislative powers becoming “exclusive
43 Commonwealth legislative powers so were others, being it weight and measurers, etc!
44
46 QUOTE
47 Mr. BARTON.-I was going to explain when I was interrupted that the moment the
48 Commonwealth legislates on this subject the power will become exclusive.
49 END QUOTE
50
52 QUOTE
Page 21
1 Mr. BARTON (New South Wales).-If this is left as an exclusive power the laws of the
2 states will nevertheless remain in force under clause 100.
3 Mr. TRENWITH.-Would the states still proceed to make laws?
4 Mr. BARTON.-Not after this power of legislation comes into force. Their existing laws
5 will, however, remain. If this is exclusive they can make no new laws, but the necessity of
6 making these new laws will be all the more forced on the Commonwealth.
7 END QUOTE
8
10 QUOTE Mr. HOWE.-
11 My only desire is to give power to the Federal Parliament to achieve a scheme for old-age
12 pensions if it be practicable, and if the people require it. No power would be taken away
13 from the states. The sub-section would not interfere with the right of any state to act in the
14 meantime until the Federal Parliament took the matter in hand.
15 END QUOTE
16
17 There is a lot more to it all, such as Premier Daniel Andrews in violation of Section 92 of the
18 constitution taking about $9 billion dollars not for improvement of harbour but for whatever.
19 OK, you may claim that was before you became Attorney-General but then where were you
20 before that? And are you now asleep behind the wheel failing to address issues. Surely if a
21 person like myself can expose so much done wrong and you as Attorney-General appears to be
22 asleep behind the well then HOUSTON WE GOT A PROBLEM.
23
24 In you decide to ignore this COMPLAINT you keep in mind that failing to act appropriately
25 may just make you being an accomplice/accessory to any crimes you fail to appropriately to
26 address and deal with. You were the one making an oath/affirmation to become an OFFICER
27 OF THE COURT and since then to become Attorney-General and either you resign to let a
28 more competent person do the job or you make sure you are doing the job you are getting paid
29 for and don’t bother the claim by Daniel Andrews that it is a learning process as you are not
30 attending some kindergarten and just grow up and do the job.
31
32 We need to return to the organics and legal principles embed in of our federal constitution!
33
34 This correspondence is not intended and neither must be perceived to address all issues.
35 Awaiting your response, G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. (Friends call me Gerrit)
36 MAY JUSTICE ALWAYS PREVAIL®

37 (Our name is our motto!)


20230101-Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. To AG Mark Dreyfus MP

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

20230101-Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. To AG Mark Dreyfus MP

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Page 1

1-1-2023 Page 1 © Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.

1-1-2023 Page 5 © Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.

1-1-2023 Page 8 © Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.

1-1-2023 Page 10 © Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.

1 guidance on how to handle your personal information and promote awareness of

1 Pfizer admits to European Parliament

1-1-2023 Page 12 © Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.

1-1-2023 Page 15 © Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.

1 citizenship. Now, the whole purpose of this Constitution is to secure a dual

1-1-2023 Page 18 © Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.

36 MAY JUSTICE ALWAYS PREVAIL®

1-1-2023 Page 21 © Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.

You might also like