20230916-Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. To Buloke Shire Council & Ors

Page 1
1
2
3 Buloke Shire Council & Ors 16-9-2023
4 buloke@buloke.vic.gov.au
5
6 Cc:
7 Cr Alan Getley (Mayor) crgetley@buloke.vic.gov.au
8 Cr David Pollard (Deputy Mayor) crpollard@buloke.vic.gov.au
9 Cr Carolyn Stewart crstewart@buloke.vic.gov.au
10 Cr Bernadette Hogan crhogan@buloke.vic.gov.au
11 Cr Graeme Milne crmilne@buloke.vic.gov.au
12 Cr Bronwyn Simpson crsimpson@buloke.vic.gov.au
13 Cr Daryl Warren crwarren@buloke.vic.gov.au
14
15 Mayor Tim Mayer timmeyer@westwimmera.vic.gov.au
16
17 Ref; 20230916-Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to Buloke Shire Council & Ors
18
19 Objection to so called council rates, etc.
20 Sir,
21 before setting out my objection to so called council rates there is a saying: “The straw that
22 broke the camel’s back.”. It doesn’t mean that someone actually hit a camel with a straw!
23
24 https://www.skynews.com.au/opinion/peta-credlin/west-wimmera-shire-mayor-concerned-
25 over-andrews-governments-indigenous-land-rights-
26 deal/video/9d8c6664fa11d37893134a6d669c5c7a
27 West Wimmera Shire Mayor concerned over Andrews government's ...
28 3 Aug 2023 ... West Wimmera Shire Mayor Tim Meyer says the Andrews government
29 signing a land rights agreement isn't as much of a "shock" as what is in the ...
30
31 https://www.skynews.com.au/opinion/peta-credlin/west-wimmera-shire-mayor-concerned-over-
32 andrews-governments-indigenous-land-rights-deal/video/9d8c6664fa11d37893134a6d669c5c7a
33 QUOTE
34 West Wimmera Shire Mayor concerned over Andrews government’s Indigenous land
35 rights deal
36 August 03, 2023 - 8:06PM
37 West Wimmera Shire Mayor Tim Meyer says the Andrews government signing a land
38 rights agreement isn’t as much of a "shock" as what is in the deal, saying it contains 39
39 actions the council must fund through provisions of their own revenue.
40 END QUOTE
41
42 I will below refer to this matter further.
43
44 As for any councillor who may have a passion for the voice of the people then well do not bother
45 to seek to vilify me on the internet but rather do as I do provide FREE OF CHARGE the best
16-9-2023 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 services to Australians in general, in particularly property holders in Buloke! Previously Buloke

2 Shire Council wasted about $18,000 on litigation against me (see below limited set out) that I
3 view could have been avoided had Buloke Shire Council used “common sense”. I have however
4 gained respect for West Wimmera mayor Mayor Tim Mayer because he at least is seeking to
5 stand up for the residents within his area, etc. If just all councillors did so a lot of harm could be
6 avoided!
7
8 I have absolutely no doubt, albeit not knowing what any of the councillors background is about,
9 that none of the councillors and/or all of them combined would have the knowledge as I have
10 about constitutional matters, as after all if they had they would have been a real voice for the
11 people and acted against the draconically unconstitutional DEPOPULATION mandates and by
12 it protected residents from harm, etc.
13
14 1974/12/10 – Secretary of State Henry Kissenger’s national Security Study Memorandum
15 200 (NSSM 200) study completed as the Kissinger Report, establishing global
16 depopulation as US geopolitical strategy.
17
18 1975/11/26 – President Gerald Ford endorsed the Kissinger Report’s depopulation plan
19 through National Security Decision Memorandum 314
20
21 https://www.zerohedge.com/political/over-1600-scientists-sign-no-climate-emergency-
22 declaration?utm_source=&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=1790
23 Over 1,600 Scientists Sign 'No Climate Emergen cy' Declaration
24 QUOTE
25 International scientists have jointly signed a declaration dismissing the existence of a
26 climate crisis and insisting that carbon dioxide is beneficial to Earth, contrary to the
27 popular alarmist narrative.
28 END QUOTE
29 And
30 QUOTE
31 “Climate science should be less political, while climate policies should be more
32 scientific.
33 END QUOTE
34
35 Not just farmers but also all property owners should have concern how the Commonwealth of
36 Australia is unofficially the 51st State of the USA, this because it is registered with the District of
37 Columbia governed by the USA Congress.
38
39 OK, constitutionally this is invalid, but the politicians couldn’t care less as after all they pursue
40 the DEPOPULATION agenda of the USA of 1974!
41 They went into numerous FAKE wars based upon lies, such as Vietnam, Afghanistan and let not
42 overlook the mass murders in Iraq, all for the non-existing Weapons of mass Destruction!
43
44 And the USA is so concerned about “environment” that it was behind the largest manmade
45 environment disaster the destruction of Nord Stream 1 & 2 pipelines.
46
47
Page 3
1 https://seymourhersh.substack.com/p/how-america-took-out-the-nord-stream
2 How America Took Out The Nord Stream Pipeline - Seymour Hersh
3 8 Feb 2023 ... Nord Stream 1 was dangerous enough, in the view of NATO and Washington,
4 but Nord Stream 2, whose construction was completed in September of 2021 ...
5
6 Obviously, if this was of extreme concern countries around the world would have insisted that
7 the perpetrators having engaged in an Act of War be held legally accountable, but to the
8 contrary Sweden concealed its investigation report, etc. If just the evidence could have been used
9 to blame the Russian (Russophobia) then it would have been released. But now the largest
10 human environmental disaster somehow is no longer important. After all, what is a bit of gas
11 escaping? Well, The Victorian Government is now clamping down on new houses not being
12 entitled to have gas connections, even so the gas referred to is no where near the scale of the
13 Nord Stream 1 & 2 disaster! All in the name of global cooling, global warming, climate change,
14 global boiling and whatever slogan they may come up with. Remember Al gore that Australians
15 rivers would be dry by 2000? The Epoch times showed how many climate predictions were
16 turning out never to have eventuated. But the globalist will be travelling in private planes
17 claiming those do not harm the environment but somehow lawnmowers do? And this while the
18 evidence is:
19
20 https://www.wnd.com/2023/09/not-climate-change-arson-confirmed-cause-states-largest-ever-
21 blaze/?utm_source=Email&utm_medium=wnd-
22 breaking&utm_campaign=breaking&utm_content=breaking&ats_es=a706e995ec590e9480340416ca68a7e0
23 &ats_ess=3b96bb1aa28cc0b6fa73dbed2f634ed3b3de7f721adf5b5f2722b51f34f53061
24 Not climate change: Arson confirmed as cause of state's largest-ever blaze
25 'Unprecedented. We've never had to fight this many fires simultaneously'
26
27
28 As I indicated whatever goes on in the USA in time usually happens in the Commonwealth of
29 Australia subsequently.
30
31 https://www.westernjournal.com/democratic-governor-signs-executive-order-requiring-mass-
32 replacement-gas-powered-lawn-
33 equipment/?utm_source=Email&utm_medium=CTBreaking&utm_campaign=breaking&utm_co
34 ntent=conservative-tribune
35 Democratic Governor Signs Executive Order Requiring Mass Replacement of Gas-Powered
36 Lawn Equipment
37
38
Page 4
1 Next we likely will find that not just gas stoves and gas hot water boilers in the USA are targets
2 but also combine harvesters allegedly polluting the world will be next!:
3
4 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combine_harvester
5 QUOTE
6 Combine harvester
7 Machine that harvests grain crops
8
9 Overview
10 Summary
11 The modern combine harvester, or simply combine, is a machine designed to harvest a
12 variety of grain crops. The name derives from its combining four separate harvesting
13 operations—reaping, threshing, gathering, and winnowing—to a single process. Among
14 the crops harvested with a combine are wheat, rice, oats, rye, barley, corn (maize),
15 sorghum, millet, soybeans, flax (linseed), sunflowers and rapeseed…+
16 Read More
17 END QUOTE
18
19 As I set out below, locals didn’t vote for me when I stood for State election and that was their
20 right and entitlement and as I merely was offering my services the decline by them was not an
21 issue to me. Just that property owners may perhaps regret to have voted for politicians which
22 seem to me having sold them out to the globalist! After all, without fuel to run combine
23 harvesters the return to horse and wagon may not be that attractive to many farmers. The
24 cli8mnate change mantra is an elaborate scam as was the covid scam! This I have exposed
25 extensively at my blog https://www.scribd.com/inspectorrikati.
26
27 Premier Daniel Andrews destroying thousands upon thousands of trees for the sake of building a
28 freeway connection to his choice, while alternative less environmental destructive were rejected
29 somehow is not an issue, but a farmer who would dare to cut down a tree could be in for a long
30 spell of litigation and charges and likely a huge legal bill.
31
32 The globalist have gone mad and Australians are in general silent to speak up because well they
33 are too busy to attend to whatever. Until, as shown in the about 3,000 closures of farms in The
34 Netherlands the same likely will be eventuating in Victoria!
35
36 Geo-engineered Fire Bombs = Directed Energy Weapons Not Climate Change
37 https://www.globalresearch.ca/geo-engineered-directed-energy-weapons-not-climate-
38 change/5829036
39
Page 5
1
2 https://www.globalresearch.ca/geo-engineered-directed-energy-weapons-not-climate-
3 change/5829036
4 Geo-engineered Fire Bombs = Directed Energy Weapons Not ...
5 16 Aug 2023 ... A tsunami is scheduled to hit Japan Tuesday with predictions of 20 inches
6 of rain in 24 hours. Climate is changing patterns.
7
8 https://airpower.airforce.gov.au/sites/default/files/2021-03/BPAF03_Directed-Energy-
9 Weapons.pdf
10 Directed Energy Weapons - Air and Space Power Centre
11 Directed Energy Weapon (DEW) effects originate from exploiting quantum behaviours
12 occurring on the subatomic scale to convert energy from one form into another ...
13
14 https://www.westernjournal.com/fox-news-host-questions-constitution-suspended-maui-official-
15 tries-enforce-media-free-zone/?utm_source=Email&utm_medium=newsletter-
16 CT&utm_campaign=dailypm&utm_content=conservative-tribune
17 Fox News Host Questions if the 'Constitution Has Been Suspended' in Maui After Official
18 Tries to Enforce 'Media-Free Zone'
19 QUOTE
20 Democratic Hawaii Gov. Josh Green told CBS News on Monday that police officers
21 and firefighters are currently searching through fire-ravaged areas of Maui looking for the
22 remains of those missing.
23 Green said they expect to find up to 20 bodies a day for the foreseeable future.
24 “They will find 10 to 20 people per day probably until they finish, and it’s probably
25 going to take 10 days,” Green said. “It’s impossible to guess really.”
26 END QUOTE
27
28 Let it be very clear no one can suspend the Constitution! Anyone claiming to be able to suspend
29 the constitution needs to be locked up in an asylum!
30
31 https://www.lewrockwell.com/lrc-blog/95-vaxxed-are-dying-more-than-unvaxxed/
32 95% Vaxxed are Dying MORE than Unvaxxed
33 Michael McKay
34 Please share widely
35
36 Latest 2023 Data from England’s Office for National Statistics shows
37 that vaccinated individuals in 2023 are dying 95% more than the
38 unvaccinated.
39 Sources:

Page 6
1 England’s Office for National Statistics.

2
3 With “Emergencies” authorities may prohibit citizens to enter a certain area, they are not
4 suspending anyone’s constitutional rights but merely themselves violating the constitutional
5 rights of citizens. As was shown after the USA Civil War, property owners who had their
6 wagons and animals acquired by the military were entitled to sue for compensation. Their
7 constitutional rights were never defeated merely that the courts did not prosecute the offenders
8 because in the circumstances at the time the court may have held that violations of constitutional
9 rights could not or should not be punished. As such, if an emergency is declared and say
10 afterwards it was held to be without legitimate basis then those who violated the constitutional,
11 legal, human, natural and/or common law rights could be held legally accountable. This is
12 precisely what I am on about regarding the covid scam to hold the traitors/terrorist and their
13 collaborators legally accountable.
14
15 https://www.lewrockwell.com/2023/08/brandon-smith/from-covid-to-climate-change-vehicles-
16 for-global-authoritarianism/
17 From Covid to Climate Change: Vehicles for Global Authoritarianism
18 QUOTE
19 As I have noted in the past, the western world came within a knife’s edge of being
20 completely subjugated and placed under perpetual medical tyranny by a coalition of
21 government officials, globalist interests and corporate partners. Liberty movement
22 analysts have talked often of “open conspiracy,” but it was not until the pandemic
23 response that we truly witnessed the mask come off and the greater agenda revealed.
24 Not more than five years ago the most common retort from skeptics was that such a
25 conspiracy was “impossible” because it was “too elaborate to organize.” Today these
26 people look rather foolish. It is undeniable – There is a cabal of power elites, they are
27 highly organized around the globalist ideology and they want total centralized control
28 of society. It is an immutable fact supported by endless proof. The debate is over. The
29 covid response ended it.
30 END QUOTE
31 And
32 QUOTE
33 Keep in mind that all of these measures were rationalized in the name of “saving
34 lives.” No lives were saved by the mandates. The official median infection fatality rate of
35 covid is a mere 0.23%. In other words, all of these constitutional violations were attempted
36 over a virus that 99.8% of people would inevitably catch and easily survive.
37 END QUOTE
38
39 People did get sick as they always do from time to time and people did get the flue and died as
40 even in the USA tens of thousands did each year. Renaming the Flu being Covid was not going
41 to change this whatsoever, but to then mandate the “gene therapy” DEPOPULATION
42 bioweapon was ensuring a lot more people died. It was the jab that caused many to die instantly
43 or shortly thereafter! And ironically “Travelling Pete” (Anthony Albanese) was promoting the
44 killer jab and do nothing to prevent the murders of Aboriginals who were in violation of their
45 constitutional, legal, human, natural and common law rights incarcerated in concentration camps
46 named quarantine centres. That is how much he proved to care about Aboriginals!
47
48 Hansard 8-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National Australasian
49 Convention)
50 QUOTE
51 Mr. ISAACS.-We want a people's Constitution, not a lawyers' Constitution.
52 END QUOTE
53
Page 7
1 HANSARD18-2-1898 Constitution Convention Debates

2 QUOTE Mr. ISAACS.-
3 The right of a citizen of this great country, protected by the implied guarantees of its
4 Constitution,
5 END QUOTE
6
7 HANSARD 17-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
8 QUOTE Mr. DEAKIN.-
9 What a charter of liberty is embraced within this Bill-of political liberty and religious
10 liberty-the liberty and the means to achieve all to which men in these days can reasonably
11 aspire. A charter of liberty is enshrined in this Constitution, which is also a charter of
12 peace-of peace, order, and good government for the whole of the peoples whom it will
13 embrace and unite.
14 END QUOTE
15 And
17 QUOTE
18 Mr. SYMON (South Australia).- We who are assembled in this Convention are about to
19 commit to the people of Australia a new charter of union and liberty; we are about to
20 commit this new Magna Charta for their acceptance and confirmation, and I can
21 conceive of nothing of greater magnitude in the whole history of the peoples of the
22 world than this question upon which we are about to invite the peoples of Australia to
23 vote. The Great Charter was wrung by the barons of England from a reluctant king. This
24 new charter is to be given by the people of Australia to themselves.
25 END QUOTE
26 And
28 QUOTE
29 Mr. BARTON.- We can have every faith in the constitution of that tribunal. It is appointed
30 as the arbiter of the Constitution. . It is appointed not to be above the Constitution, for
31 no citizen is above it, but under it; but it is appointed for the purpose of saying that
32 those who are the instruments of the Constitution-the Government and the
33 Parliament of the day-shall not become the masters of those whom, as to the
34 Constitution, they are bound to serve. What I mean is this: That if you, after making
35 a Constitution of this kind, enable any Government or any Parliament to twist or
36 infringe its provisions, then by slow degrees you may have that Constitution-if not
37 altered in terms-so whittled away in operation that the guarantees of freedom which
38 it gives your people will not be maintained; and so, in the highest sense, the court you
39 are creating here, which is to be the final interpreter of that Constitution, will be such a
40 tribunal as will preserve the popular liberty in all these regards, and will prevent,
41 under any pretext of constitutional action, the Commonwealth from dominating the
42 states, or the states from usurping the sphere of the Commonwealth.
43 END QUOTE
44
46 QUOTE
47 Mr. BARTON.- Of course it will be argued that this Constitution will have been made by
48 the Parliament of the United Kingdom. That will be true in one sense, but not true in
49 effect, because the provisions of this Constitution, the principles which it embodies,
50 and the details of enactment by which those principles are enforced, will all have been
51 the work of Australians.
52 END QUOTE
53
54 The following will also make clear that the Framers of the Constitution intended to have CIVIL
55 RIGHTS and LIBERTIES principles embedded in the Constitution;
Page 8
1
3 QUOTE Mr. CLARK.-
4 the protection of certain fundamental rights and liberties which every individual
5 citizen is entitled to claim that the federal government shall take under its protection
6 and secure to him.
7 END QUOTE
8
9 Hansard 1-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
10 QUOTE
11 Mr. HIGGINS.-Suppose the sentry is asleep, or is in the swim with the other power?
12
13 Mr. GORDON.-There will be more than one sentry. In the case of a federal law,
14 every member of a state Parliament will be a sentry, and, every constituent of a state
15 Parliament will be a sentry.
16 As regards a law passed by a state, every man in the Federal Parliament will be a
17 sentry, and the whole constituency behind the Federal Parliament will be a sentry.
18 END QUOTE
19
20
21
22 I as a property owner in Buloke Shire Council have concerns that if the following is also true
23 then this might be considered to be “The straw that broke the camel’s back.”
24
25 https://www.news.com.au/technology/environment/sustainability/handed-over-ten-victorian-
26 councils-blindsided-by-sweeping-aboriginal-land-rights-deal/news-
27 story/6760aea4ee5b59ea3572b0207fdd4df5
28 ‘Handed over’: Ten Victorian councils blindsided by sweeping Aboriginal land rights deal
29 QUOTE
30 An Aboriginal group would be given “unprecedented” control over 10 Victorian councils
31 under sweeping proposals in a secret deal signed by the Andrews government.
32 END QUOTE
33 And
34 QUOTE
35 However, the government insists the deal “does not contain legal obligations” or impact
36 current laws and regulations, and instead is an “aspirational” list of ways the traditional
37 owners would like to work with councils, with the help of state authorities.
Page 9
1 “We’re not allowed to name roads anymore,” said West Wimmera mayor Tim Meyer,
2 commenting on the proposals in the agreement.
3 “The land council has to tell us what the road names are going to be from now on.
4 END QUOTE
5 And
6 QUOTE
7 “The land council has to be consulted on everything and you’ve got to pay for that
8 consultation,” said Cr Meyer. “We don’t know [how much it will cost]. “We don’t know
9 [how much it will cost]. They might say it’s 20 bucks an hour, they might say it’s 1000
10 bucks an hour. We don’t know.”
11 END QUOTE
12 And
13 QUOTE
14 Victorian Attorney-General Jaclyn Symes signed the “expanded settlement package” with
15 the Wotjobaluk, Jaadwa, Jadawadjali, Wergaia and Jupagulk (WJJWJ) Peoples last
16 October, but the affected councils claim they were not included in the negotiations and
17 were only made aware of the deal just over a month ago when it was presented to them as a
18 “fait accompli”.
19 The agreement, which will be administered by the Barengi Gadjin Land Council (BGLC),
20 covers 10 council areas in Victoria’s northwest – Mildura, West Wimmera, Northern
21 Grampians, Southern Grampians, Buloke, Hindmarsh, Pyrenees, Yarriambiack, Horsham
22 and Ararat – a total area of nearly 36,000 square kilometres.
23 END QUOTE
24 And
25 QUOTE
26 Regional newspaper The Weekly Times first reported on the details of the agreement in
27 early July, at which time the full document had yet to be made public, more than eight
28 months after it was signed.
29 It was uploaded to the Victorian government’s First Peoples – State Relations website
30 on July 21.
31 END QUOTE
32
33 As a self-educated constitutionalist I have the view that the agreement is ULTRA VIRES as it
34 violates the legal principles embedded in the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act
35 1900 (UK)
36
37 Buloke Shire Council may perhaps seek to argue that I am not that good because after all I lost
38 the case of Buloke Shire Council v Schorel-Hlavka. Well, sweet dreaming as legally this even
39 eventuated.
40
41 Let me explain.
42
43 Buloke Shire Council with its lawyers instituted legal proceedings in the wrong court and hence I
44 submitted an OBJECTION TO JURISDICTION. The magistrates court however simply
45 ignored this and by this never invoked jurisdiction. However, well aware how eager Buloke
46 Shire Council would be to litigate to obtain whatever the magistrates Court purportedly ordered
47 and being well aware of the legal principle:
48
49 Re Wakim; Ex parte McNally; Re Wakim; Ex parte Darvall; Re Brown; Ex parte Amann; Spi [1999] HCA
50 27 (17 June 1999)
51 QUOTE
52 For constitutional purposes, they are a nullity. No doctrine of res judicata or issue
53 estoppel can prevail against the Constitution. Mr Gould is entitled to disregard the
Page 10
1 orders made in Gould v Brown. No doubt, as Latham CJ said of invalid legislation, "he
2 will feel safer if he has a decision of a court in his favour". That is because those relying
3 on the earlier decision may seek to enforce it against Mr Gould.
4 END QUOTE
5
6 I held it was better to appeal the matter to seek to avoid any misconceptions.
7
8 The matter was then heard in the County Court and certain orders were issued against Buloke
9 Shire Council and then transferred to Ballarat for further hearing at the Ballarat hearing I
10 submitted to the Court that the lawyers representing Buloke Shire Council had failed to comply
11 with the orders the court had issued previously, and I OBJECTED TO THE JURISDICTION
12 of the court.
13 Carmody J responded that as I had filed an appeal and therefore the court had jurisdiction.
14 WRONG!
15 It did happen at times a party institute legal proceedings being it an original application, appeal
16 or whatever and the court strikes it out for various reasons.
17 For example, if a party OBJECTS TO THE JURISDICTION of the court, this party doing the
18 objection doesn’t have to support this objection at all, the mere statement of this is sufficient for
19 the Court to be aware it has no jurisdiction unless the other party can present to the Court why
20 the court can invoke jurisdiction and should do so.
21 With Carmody J this was blatantly ignored and as such Carmody J never invoked jurisdiction!
22 At no time did Carmody J invite Banyule City Council legal representatives to submit their
23 presentation why Buloke Shire Council held the Court had jurisdiction and a judge cannot be a
24 substitution for an opposing party to make a declaration without a shred of evidence. The
25 presiding judge cannot claim some form of evidence that has not been presented by the party
26 which has the legal obligation to present its case. As such, the failure by Buloke Shire Council to
27 present their case to claim the court had jurisdiction means that legally the court never invoked
28 jurisdiction!
29
30 Perhaps Carmody J was aware of the AEC v Schorel-Hlavka of 19 July 2006 case and so held it
31 better to ignore the OBJECTION TO JURISDICTION issue likely very well that to have a
32 jurisdictional hearing would be fatal to Buloke Shire Council’s case!
33
34 Let me briefly explain the matter of AEC v Schorel-Hlavka regarding 2 charges.
35 I was an INDEPENDENT candidate in the federal election and promoted that “compulsory”
36 part of voting was unconstitutional and well AEC decided to charge me for FAILING TO VOTE
37 in the 2001 federal election. I responded with filing a NOTICE OF CONSTITUTIONAL
38 MATTER which was also served upon all 9 Attorney-Generals and the court on 4 December
39 2002 ordered this NOTICE OF CONSTITUTIONAL MATTER to be heard and determined
40 by the High Court of Australia. This never eventuated for the simple reason that I challenged the
41 validity of the purported Australian Citizenship Act to declare “Australian citizenship” as a
42 nationality “nationality”, being in violation to the constitution, which means that no purported
43 legal practitioner, judge, elector, candidate (in a political election) police officer, etc, was validly
44 appointed within each such position. Once a legal challenge is made the contested legislative
45 provisions becomes ULTRA VIRES Ab Initio. It doesn’t exist unless and until, if ever at all, a
46 Court of competent jurisdiction declares it to be INTRA VIRES.
47
48 Bowers v Smith (1953) 1 ALL ER 320 (Re Clarke Hall) and (Morrison on Children, 7 Ed, P3)
49 QUOTE
50 "... the first business of the court is to try to issue whether or not the case is bought
51 within the terms of the statute, and only if this be proven by proper evidence can the
52 court proceed to decide upon treatment"
Page 11
1 END QUOTE
2
3 QUOTE ASIS v. US, 568 F2d 284.
4 A judge ceases to sit as a judicial officer because the governing principle of
5 administrative law provides that courts are prohibited from substituting their
6 evidence, testimony, record, arguments, and rationale for that of the agency.
7 Additionally, courts are prohibited from substituting their judgment for that of the
8 agency. Courts in administrative issues are prohibited from even listening to or
9 hearing arguments, presentation, or rational.
10 END QUOTE
11
12 QUOTE Basso v. Utah Power & Light Co., 495 F 2d 906, 910.
13 Jurisdiction can be challenged at any time." and "Jurisdiction, once challenged, cannot be assumed
14 and must be decided.
15 END QUOTE
16
17 QUOTE Basso v. Utah Power & Light Co., 495 2nd 906 at 910,
18 Jurisdiction can be challenged at any time, even on final determination.
19 END QUOTE
20
21 QUOTE Burns v. Sup. Ct., SF, 140 Cal. 1.
22 Ministerial officers are incompetent to receive grants of judicial power from the
23 legislature, their acts in attempting to exercise such powers are necessarily nullities.
24 END QUOTE
25
26 QUOTE Dillon v. Dillon, 187 P 27
27 Thus, where a judicial tribunal has no jurisdiction of the subject matter on which it
28 assumes to act, its proceedings are absolutely void in the fullest sense of the term. .
29 END QUOTE
30
31 QUOTE In Re Application of Wyatt, 300 P. 132; Re Cavitt, 118 P2d 846.
32 Jurisdiction is fundamental and a judgment rendered by a court that does not have
33 jurisdiction to hear is void, ab initio.
34 END QUOTE
35
36 QUOTE (Jagens v. Lavine, 415 S.Ct.768).
37 Once jurisdiction is challenged, it must be proven.
38 END QUOTE
39
40 QUOTE Joyce v. US, 474 F2d 215.
41 There is no discretion to ignore that lack of jurisdiction.
42 END QUOTE
43
44 Latana v. Hopper, 102 F. 2d 188; Chicago v. New York, 37 F Supp. 150.
45 QUOTE
46 Court must prove on the record, all jurisdiction facts related to the jurisdiction asserted.
47 END QUOTE
48
49 QUOTE Main v. Thiboutot, 100 S. Ct. 2502 (1980).
50 The law provides that once State and Federal jurisdiction has been challenged, it must be
51 proven.
52 END QUOTE
53
54 QUOTE Melo v. US, 505 F2d 1026.
55 Once jurisdiction is challenged, the court cannot proceed when it clearly appears that the
56 court lacks jurisdiction, the court has no authority to reach merits, but, rather, should
57 dismiss the action.
Page 12
1 END QUOTE
2
3 QUOTE Merritt v. Hunter, C.A. Kansas 170 F2d 739.
4 Where a court failed to observe safeguards, it amounts to denial of due process of law,
5 court is deprived of juris.
6 END QUOTE
7
8 QUOTE Norwood v. Renfield, 34 C 329; Ex parte Giambonini, 49 P. 732.
9 A universal principle as old as the law is that a proceedings of a court without jurisdiction
10 are a nullity and its judgment therein without effect either on person or property.
11 END QUOTE
12
13 QUOTE Rosemond v. Lambert, 469 F2d 416.
14 The burden shifts to the court to prove jurisdiction."
15 END QUOTE
16
17 Thompson v. Tolmie, 2 Pet. 157, 7 L.Ed. 381; Griffith v. Frazier, 8 Cr. 9, 3L. Ed. 471.
18 QUOTE
19 Where there is absence of jurisdiction, all administrative and judicial proceedings are a
20 nullity and confer no right, offer no protection, and afford no justification, and may be
21 rejected upon direct collateral attack.
22 END QUOTE
23
25 QUOTE Mr. HIGGINS:
26 I think it is advisable that private people should not be put to the expense of having
27 important questions of constitutional law decided out of their own pockets.
28 END QUOTE
29 .
30 QUOTE Yunghanns & Ors & Yunghanns & Ors & Yunghanns [1999] FamCA 64
31 (2) The Court always has jurisdiction to entertain proceedings for the
32 purpose of and up to the point of deciding whether it has jurisdiction to
33 make the orders sought in the proceedings.
34 (3) In carrying out that limited exercise of jurisdiction, the Court is required to
35 determine any essential facts upon which the existence of its jurisdiction to make
36 the orders sought ultimately depends (“the jurisdictional facts”). That
37 determination is a function which is incidental to the exercise of the jurisdiction
38 referred to in (2) above.
39 END QUOTE
40
41 QUOTE Standard v. Olsen, 74 S. Ct. 768,
42 No sanctions can be imposed absent proof of jurisdiction.
43 END QUOTE
44
45 QUOTE Hagens v. Lavine, 415 U.S. 533,
46 Once jurisdiction is challenged, it must be proven
47 END QUOTE
48
49 QUOTE Stuck v. Medical Examiners, 94 Ca 2d 751. 211 P2d 389.
50 Once challenged, jurisdiction cannot be assumed, it must be proved to exist.
51 END QUOTE
52
53 The High Court of Australia held that where a party pleads the non-application of a State Act
54 because of Commonwealth legislation then the State Court is exercising Federal jurisdiction.
55 (However only if the State Court can invoke jurisdiction, which VCAT cannot and neither is a
56 court!) Troy v Wrigglesworth (1919) 26 C.L.R. 305; 25 (1926) 38 C.L.R. 441; 33 A.L.R. 66.
Page 13
1 .
2 While the authorities below are USA Authorities, the legal concepts nevertheless are of a general
3 nature that can be applied within the Commonwealth of Australia.
4 .
5 QUOTE
6 JURISDICTION the power to hear and determine a case. 147 P.2d 759, 761. This power
7 may be established and described with reference to particular subjects or to parties who fall
8 into a particular category. In addition to the power to adjudicate, a valid exercise of
9 jurisdiction requires fair notice and an opportunity for the affected parties to be heard.
10 Without jurisdiction, a court's judgment is void. A court must have both SUBJECT
11 MATTER JURISDICTION and PERSONAL JURISDICTION (see below). See also
12 territorial jurisdiction; title jurisdiction."
13 END QUOTE
14 .
15 QUOTE
16 SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION refers to the competency of the court to hear and
17 determine a particular category of cases. Federal district courts have "limited" jurisdiction
18 in that they have only such jurisdiction as is explicitly conferred by federal statutes. 28
19 U.S.C. §1330 [EDITOR'S NOTE: see also 40 U.S.C.S. §255] et seq. See LIMITED
20 [SPECIAL] JURISDICTION. Many state trial courts have "general" jurisdiction to hear
21 almost all matters. The parties to a lawsuit may not waive a requirement of subject matter
22 jurisdiction.
23 END QUOTE
24 .
25 QUOTE
26 TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION the territory over which a government or a subdivision
27 thereof has jurisdiction, 147 P.2d 858, 861; relates to a tribunal's power with regard to the
28 territory within which it is to be exercised, and connotes power over property and persons
29 within such territory. 94 N.E. 2d 438, 440.
30 END QUOTE
31
32 While a State may be deemed to have certain unlimited powers over those who own properties
33 and/or reside within the State reality is however that the State is subject to Section 106 of the
34 Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900 (UK).
35
36 106 Saving of Constitutions
37 The Constitution of each State of the Commonwealth shall, subject to this Constitution,
38 continue as at the establishment of the Commonwealth, or as at the admission or
39 establishment of the State, as the case may be, until altered in accordance with the
40 Constitution of the State.
41
42 The wording “subject to this Constitution” applies also to all legal principles embedded in the
43 constitution and it takes for this a person like myself who researched the unwritten legal
44 principles as to know and understand how it applies:
45
46 WATSON v_ LEE (1979) 144 CLR 374;( JUDGE3 STEPHEN J.)
47 QUOTE
48 As Scott L.J. said in Blackpool Corporation v. Locker (1948) 1 KB 349, at p
49 361 , speaking there of sub-delegated legislation, "there is one quite general
50 question . . . of supreme importance to the continuance of the rule of law
51 under the British constitution, namely, the right of the public affected to

Page 14
1 know what that law is". The maxim that ignorance of the law is no excuse forms the
2 "working hypothesis on which the rule of law rests in British democracy" but to
3 operate it requires that "the whole of our law, written or unwritten, is accessible to
4 the public - in the sense, of course, that at any rate its legal advisers have access to it at
5 any moment, as of right".
6 END QUOTE
7 Again;
8 QUOTE
9 it requires that "the whole of our law, written or unwritten, is
10 accessible to the public - in the sense, of course,
11 END QUOTE
12
14 QUOTE
15 Mr. DEAKIN.- In this Constitution, although much is written much remains unwritten,
16 END QUOTE
17
18 HANSARD 17-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National
19 Australasian Convention)
20 QUOTE Mr. CLARK.-
21 the protection of certain fundamental rights and liberties which every individual
22 citizen is entitled to claim that the federal government shall take under its protection
23 and secure to him.
24 END QUOTE
25
26 It is wrongly assumed by lawyers/judges, etc, that we do not have a Bill of Rights, etc, as our
27 very constitution is a Bill of Rights, etc.
28
29 We also have to consider:
30
31 Part V—Powers of the Parliament
32 51 Legislative powers of the Parliament [see Notes 10 and 11]
33 The Parliament shall, subject to this Constitution, have power to
34 make laws for the peace, order, and good government of the
35 Commonwealth with respect to:
36
37 It may be noted that it also refers to “Commonwealth” however this doesn’t mean it doesn’t
38 apply to the States. After all it would be utter and sheer nonsense that the States when they were
39 to exercise “concurrent” legislative powers somehow would not be subject to “peace, order, and
40 good government”!
41
42 HANSARD 22-9-1897 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National
44 QUOTE The Hon. E. BARTON (New South Wales)[10.32]:
45 I have read these reasons through very carefully, and I have been unable to discover that any of the
46 evils which my hon. and learned friend, Mr. Clark, fears may be expected from leaving these words as
47 they are. The powers are powers of legislation for the peace, order, and good government of the
48 commonwealth in respect of the matters specified. No construction in the world could confer any
49 powers beyond the ambit of those specified.
50 The Hon. N.E. LEWIS (Tasmania)[10.35]: I should like to submit for the consideration of the leader of the
51 Convention the question whether the words which the legislature of Tasmania have proposed to omit might
52 not raise the question whether legislation of the federal parliament was in every instance for the peace,
Page 15
1 order, and good government of the commonwealth. Take, for instance, navigation laws. Might it not be
2 contended that certain navigation laws were not for the peace, order, and good government of the
3 commonwealth, and might there not be litigation upon the point? We are giving very full powers to the
4 parliament of the commonwealth, and might we not very well leave it to them to decide whether their
5 legislation was for the peace, order, and good government of the commonwealth? Surely that is
6 sufficient, without our saying definitely that their legislation should be for the peace, order, and good
7 government of the commonwealth. I hope the leader of the Convention will give the matter full
8 consideration with a view to seeing whether these words are not surplusage, and whether, therefore, they had
9 better not be left out of the bill altogether.
10 The Hon. E. BARTON: The suggestion of the hon. member will be considered by the Drafting
11 Committee.
12 Amendment negatived.
13 END QUOTE
14
16 QUOTE
17 Mr. BARTON.-They do not require to get authority from home, for this reason: That the local
18 Constitutions empower the colonies separately to make laws for the peace, order, and good government
19 of the community, and that is without restriction, except such small restrictions as are imposed by the
20 Constitutions themselves, and, of course, the necessary restriction that they can only legislate for their
21 own territory. The position with regard to this Constitution is that it has no legislative power, except
22 that which is actually given to it in express terms or which is necessary or incidental to a power given.
23 END QUOTE
24
25 Here Mr Barton refers to “Local constitutions” being then Colonial and later State constitutions.
26 “peace, order, and good government of the community”.
27
28 This then brings us back to the issue of the alleged “climate change” and the denial of gas, etc.
29
30 It is all based because politicians are pursuing the globalist agenda of the W.E.F./U.N./WHO
31 none of which has any constitutional powers over the Commonwealth of Australia!
32
33 Hansard2-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates;
34 QUOTE Dr. QUICK.-
35 The Constitution empowers the Federal Parliament to deal with certain external affairs, among which
36 would probably be the right to negotiate for commercial treaties with foreign countries, in the same way as
37 Canada has negotiated for such treaties. These treaties could only confer rights and privileges upon the
38 citizens of the Commonwealth, because the Federal Government, in the exercise of its power, [start
39 page 1753] could only act for and on behalf of its citizens.
40 END QUOTE
41
42 This means that any treaty that the Commonwealth engaged in must be for the benefit of
43 Australians and cannot force them upon citizens unless the commonwealth has existing
44 legislative powers.
45
46 The High Court of Australia wrongly decided KOOWARTA V. BJELKE-PETERSEN (1982)
47 153 CLR 168, this as the Framers of the Constitution in regard of Ss51(xxvi) made it very clear:
48
50 QUOTE Sir SAMUEL GRIFFITH:
51 In addition to the powers to be exercised in that way, not interfering with the existing rights of states until the
52 federal legislature thinks it necessary to do so, it is proposed to give some exclusive powers to the legislature
53 of the commonwealth. One of them is to deal with the affairs of people of any race with respect to whom
54 it is deemed necessary to make special laws not applicable to the general community; but so that this
55 power shall not extend to authorise legislation with respect to the aboriginal native race in Australia
56 and the Maori race in New Zealand.
Page 16
1 END QUOTE
2
3 As such at time of Federation Aboriginals were actually recognised in the constitution and be
4 held equal to other Australians but then the 1967 Ss51(xxvi) con job referendum was held to
5 include Aboriginals as a “race”. Therefore any legislation in regard of Aboriginals could no
6 longer be used against the “general community”. It also means that the Racial Discrimination
7 Act 1975 was and remains to be unconstitutional as it is directed against the “general
8 community”. The problem is that in my view we have politicians dressed in black with a wig
9 who then are judges (political judges) rather than educated judges who understand and
10 comprehend the true meaning and application of the constitution.
11 One cannot have 2 opposing/contradiction provisions in a constitution and therefore the
12 Commonwealth never had any legislative powers as to racial discrimination legislation and
13 neither either as to “environment” this as the Framers of the Constitution specifically denied this
14 power.
15 This then leaves the State to prove that any ban on gas, etc, would be within “peace, order, and
16 good government of the community”!
17 What is the evidence, not illusionary, that the denial of using gas to residence is going to be for
18 the within “peace, order, and good government of the community”?
19 The truth is that Premier Daniel Andrews is pushing the W.E.F./WHO/U.N. globalist issue such
20 as ‘15 minutes/20 minutes cities’ to destroy farmers ability to grow their grain, etc, and people
21 are robbed of their rights to freely move about the Commonwealth of Australia, this even so this
22 too is a legal right embedded in the constitution as I over the decades have extensively written
23 about.
24
25 Farmers and other property holders should make a stand and demand that the State government
26 proves that the denial of using gas/petrol, et is actually for the best of the State citizens and fall
27 within the ambit of “peace, order, and good government of the community”. Failing that the
28 utter and sheer nonsense must be stopped.
29 Just ask, if all those politicians pursuing the “climate change” agenda being against gas, petrol
30 and whatever usage then will live their lives to prove they are genuine and will not wear any
31 clothing that contains any petroleum chemicals, do not use mobiles, computers, buildings, etc
32 because they all could be considered containing elements to violate their environmental mantra?
33
34 Reality is that as with the covid scam it had nothing to do with health but merely for the globalist
35 to enrich themselves and destroy the ordinary small businesses and in the process eliminate their
36 so called “useless eaters”!
37
38 The same is with the Fire Danger issues, when one consider the pure neglect by Buloke Sire
39 Council and I have kept a photographic record of this,, then what on earth is Buloke Shire
40 Council about when as I proved in court it had growth higher than my motor vehicle and pursues
41 me about some minor growth? Allegedly the legislation exclude councils and other government
42 agencies however the legal principles embedded in the constitution clearly requires all be
43 subjected to the same rule of law, no exceptions. As such it is absurd Buloke Shire Council to
44 leave along the highway where motor vehicles travel considerable fire dangers and soft should at
45 times do show there was a fire, while pursuing some property owner.
46
47 As my wife made clear in about 50 years the local council never bothered to keep the grass on
48 the nature strip short so what is the council on about? Nature strips are the obligation of a council
49 to mow, not some property owner!
50

Page 17
1 Getting back to the “Australian citizenship” issue the fact that a parent tells a child that the Tooth
2 Fairy will replaced a tooth during the night with some money, doesn’t mean the Tooth Fairy
3 actually exist! The same when a parent tells a child the Sandman will sprinkle some sand in the
4 eyes and then the child will fall asleep. Not that there is such a Sandman, indeed it would be very
5 painful to have sand in the eyes. The same with “Australian citizenship” being an alleged
6 “nationality” is another illusion that never existed, at least constitutionally. This is because
7 Australians are “sovereigns” and “Subject of the British Crown”. Sovereigns because only the
8 electors can amend the constitution.
9
11 QUOTE
12 Mr. BARTON.-I did not say that. I say that our real status is as subjects, and that we are all alike
13 subjects of the British Crown.
14 END QUOTE
15 .
16 As I succeeded , representing myself, in both cases in AEC v Schorel-Hlavka on this issue also
17 there can be absolutely no doubt that I know what I am talking about as after all neither the
18 commonwealth and/or any of the 9 Attorney-Generals submitted any evidence to challenge me
19 on this!
20
21 Constitutionally “Australian citizenship” is what a native born child or a natural person achieves
22 when residing in a State/Territory as to the place of residence, regardless of any foreign
23 nationality possessed by the person.
24 Neither can the commonwealth of Australia be a “republic”!
25
27 QUOTE
28 Mr. SYMON ( South Australia ).-
29 In the preamble honorable members will find that what we desire to do is to unite in one
30 indissoluble Federal Commonwealth -that is the political Union-"under the Crown of the
31 United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland , and under the Constitution hereby
32 established." Honorable members will therefore see that the application of the word
33 Commonwealth is to the political Union which is sought to be established. It is not
34 intended there to have any relation whatever to the name of the country or nation which we
35 are going to create under that Union. The second part of the preamble goes on to say that it
36 is expedient to make provision for the admission of other colonies into the Commonwealth.
37 That is, for admission into this political Union, which is not a republic, which is not to be
38 called a dominion, kingdom, or empire, but is to be a Union by the name of
39 "Commonwealth," and I do not propose to interfere with that in the slightest degree.
40 END QUOTE
41
42 The Commonwealth of Australia is not a real country but rather a “political union”! One may
43 ask how many people ever are aware of this and the nonsense many politicians spruiting as to
44 become a “republic”.
45
46 Because the judges of the High Court of Australia would have to declare their own positions to
47 be valid this means the judges would be bias and couldn’t hear the matter.
48 Anyhow, even so I challenged the validity of the legislation that “compulsory” part of voting
49 was unconstitutional and so this too was ULTRA VIRES Ab Initio the AEC nevertheless
50 charged me again with FAILING TO VOTE in the 2004 federal election. On 4 August 2005 the
51 Prosecutor then submitted averment which I successfully opposed on that it violated the legal
52 principles embedded in the constitution (consider also Kable NSW case)

Page 18
1 Oh boy the Prosecutor then sought to argue that to file and serve evidence would involve truck
2 loads. The court made clear that was to be sorted out between the parties. The truth is that all
3 record (such as ballot papers) regarding the 2001 Federal election no longer existed and that the
4 ballot papers regarding the 2004 federal election were about to be destroyed.
5 The Prosecutor simply failed to serve any evidence! When then the matter returned on 16 & 17
6 November 2005 before the court then the magistrate made clear he was not going to deal with
7 previous orders and found me guilty in regard of both charges. I appealed this. The Appeal was
8 held on 19 July 2006 and I had filed a 409 pages (written submission) ADDRESS TO THE
9 COURT setting out constitutional and other legal issues. The Court upheld both appeals and
10 noted that no evidence was filed by the commonwealth. The Victorian Attorney-General Rob
11 Hulls advised it would accept the court’s decision. As such it is beyond further dispute. Res
12 Judicata.
13
14 Getting back to Carmody J I had absolutely no doubt that he likely was aware of the case and so
15 likely knew that I would succeed in any OBJECTION TO JURISDICTION where Carmody J
16 himself could not maintain to be validly a judge!
17
18 Buloke Shire Councils legal representatives (well they really couldn’t be that) had been violating
19 from onset what was to be done legally and now failed to alert Carmody J that he couldn’t
20 invoke jurisdiction without holding a jurisdictional hearing. They failed to do so and well legally
21 the subsequent hearings never existed!
22
23 What also eventuated was that I had claimed there had been trespass by Mr Wayne Wall and
24 well when he was giving evidence-in-chief (at Melbourne) he was asked by the Counsel
25 representing Buloke Shire Council if the GPS showed where each photo was made. Mr Wayne
26 Wall confirmed this. The photo’s were part of the Buloke Shire Council case. When it was my
27 turn to cross examine Mr Wayne Wall I commenced: Mr Wayne Wall I put it to you that you are
28 not telling the truth, are you? Upon which Carmody then commented; Are you saying he is
29 lying? I responded, let the witness say so himself. Mr Wayne Wall then maintained he was
30 telling the truth. I then took 2 of the photo’s that were claimed to have been made from the
31 positions of the GPS and asked him if he recognised the photos, etc. After that I asked Mr
32 Wayne Wall to look at the photos carefully that they showed a different cloth lines and different
33 house. He admitted then that one photo actually was not of my property. He didn’t even know
34 where other house was. And this means that the legal representatives for Buloke Shire Council
35 also had mislead the Magistrates Court previously upon using alleged evidence to issue its
36 orders.
37 Clearly Counsel in my view was misleading the Court that the GPS showed the positions where
38 the photos had been made as at least one photo was not at all as claimed.
39 Remarkably when the second witness for Buloke Shire Council was sworn in then he
40 commented in evidence-in-chief that everything Mr Wayne Wall had stated he agreed with.
41 Obviously unaware that Mr Wayne Wall during cross examination had changed his tune. This to
42 me underlined that they had conspired to pervert the course of justice.
43 I also showed to the court photos where the wild growth was higher than my vehicle, just that it
44 was council land. The Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900 (UK) has embedded
45 the legal principle that all native born persons and those naturalised are equal.
46
47 While the State government may have legislated as to fire issues that property owners can be
48 held legally accountable but not the Shire, etc, this obviously conflict with the legal principles
49 embedded in the constitution. If it is about real fire dangers than the legislation must not exclude
50 any one!
51
Page 19
1 There is a conflict of interest with councils as the Framers of the Constitution made clear that
2 “Central” government was to be the “Federal government” and “Local government” the “State
3 government” and councils albeit referred to as local governments really were corporations.
4 It is very clear that corporations cannot legislate!
5 Municipal/Shire Councils clearly as corporations cannot legislate nor create by-laws. They are
6 not in a separation of power structure, etc. all they can is make “rules” for the corporation and
7 well anyone who may disagree with those rules can hop out of the corporation. Corporations
8 obviously are bound by laws of the State, albeit can challenge the validity of State laws, as I
9 have been doing as a citizen. But corporations are equally bound by the State legislation as any
10 citizen.
11
12 END QUOTE
13 .
15 QUOTE
16 Mr. KINGSTON.-How would you define the word "citizen"?
17 Mr. SYMON.-I do not think that it is necessary to frame a definition of "citizen." A citizen is one who
18 is entitled to the immunities of citizenship. In short, a citizen is a citizen. I do not think you require a
19 definition, of "citizen" any more than you require a definition of "man" or "subject."
20 Mr. ISAACS.-Would you include a corporation in the term "citizen"?
21 Mr. SYMON.-Why not?
22 Mr. ISAACS.-Well, in America they do not.
23 Mr. SYMON.-I do not see why a corporation existing in one colony should not have the rights of a
24 corporation in another colony. Otherwise you defeat the objects of this Constitution.
25 [start page 1783]
26 Mr. ISAACS.-I agree that that ought to be so, but the word "citizen" will not include a corporation.
27 Mr. SYMON.-Well, in my opinion it should.
28 END QUOTE
29
30 It may be claimed that the State of Victoria purportedly legislated within the purported but
31 unconstitutional Victorian Constitution Act 1975 the ‘Local Government Act’ to make councils
32 a form of local government but this violates the legal principles embedded in the
33 Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900 (UK) as it provides for mere 3 levels of
34 Government being the UK, Commonwealth and the State governments. Also as the States cannot
35 create another level of Government it can merely have a council to act on its behalf. This would
36 however violate the council representation for property owners. Therefore, the so called by-laws
37 are no laws at all if they were purportedly made by some council!
38
39 When the Framers of the constitution drafted the constitution and so Ss51(xxvi) regarding
40 “races” it was referring to “alien” “inferior” “coloured” “races” and that no legislation could be
41 enacted against the “general community”! Aboriginals were specifically excluded in Ss51(xxvi)
42 because the Framers of the Constitution held they were equal as other Australians.
43 In 1950’s there was then a drive to include Aboriginals in Ss51(xxvi) but that was rejected that
44 Ss51(xxvi) had to much baggage and so it was not proceeded with. However, in 1967 Ss51(xxvi)
45 was amended as electors were informed it would give them citizenship.
46 This was a con-job referendum because Aboriginals had citizenship since federation and federal
47 franchise (Section 41) where their state had granted this. Australian citizenship never was nor
48 can be a “nationality”! Australians are and remain to be “Subject of the British Crown” and also
49 are and remain sovereigns.
50
51 Because of the Ss51(xxvi) con-job referendum the Commonwealth commenced to legislate but
52 wrongly from start.

Page 20
1 Ss51(xxvi) was designed since federation to DISCRIMINATE against a race and couldn’t be
2 used against the “GENERAL COMMUNITY”. Meaning, that the about $40 billion dollars a year
3 to all kinds of Aboriginal organisations are not constitutionally valid.
4 Moreover the States have no legislative powers to legislate as to any race issue other than
5 Section 25 as to exclude a race from voting.
6 Meaning that the purported hand over is and remains unconstitutional!
7
8 https://www.news.com.au/technology/environment/sustainability/handed-over-ten-victorian-
9 councils-blindsided-by-sweeping-aboriginal-land-rights-deal/news-
10 story/6760aea4ee5b59ea3572b0207fdd4df5
11 ‘Handed over’: Ten Victorian councils blindsided by sweeping Aboriginal land rights deal
12 QUOTE
13 An Aboriginal group would be given “unprecedented” control over 10 Victorian councils
14 under sweeping proposals in a secret deal signed by the Andrews government.
15 END QUOTE
16
17 We appear to have had that WA legislated as to heritage Act that Aboriginals, regardless of land
18 nothing to do with them, a property owner had to pay about $160 an hour plus travelling cost for
19 an Aboriginal to investigate if say a farmer could put a post into the ground beyond a certain
20 debt. I have no doubt that this is utter and sheer nonsense and unconstitutional.
21 Not even the Commonwealth has such legislative powers!
22
23 Much of the problems were caused way back in 1904 when the High Court of Australia was
24 prohibiting the usage of the Hansard Constitutional convention Debates so they could twist and
25 infringe what the constitution stood for.,
26
27 In Sydney Council v Commonwealth it was claimed that the council was acting on behalf of the
28 State to levy State land taxation. This to me is utter and sheer nonsense, because councils being a
29 corporation cannot charge taxation. If it were to do so for and on behalf of a state then the
30 monies should have been put into the State Consolidated Revenue Funds, this never eventuated.
31 Moreover, when the Commonwealth on 11 November 1910 commenced to legislate as to
32 Commonwealth land taxation the States no longer had “concurrent” legislative powers as it now
33 became “exclusive” Commonwealth legislative powers.
34
36 QUOTE
37 Mr. BARTON (New South Wales).-If this is left as an exclusive power the laws of the
38 states will nevertheless remain in force under clause 100.
39 Mr. TRENWITH.-Would the states still proceed to make laws?
40 Mr. BARTON.-Not after this power of legislation comes into force. Their existing laws
41 will, however, remain. If this is exclusive they can make no new laws, but the necessity of
42 making these new laws will be all the more forced on the Commonwealth.
43 END QUOTE
44
46 QUOTE Mr. HOWE.-
47 My only desire is to give power to the Federal Parliament to achieve a scheme for old-age
48 pensions if it be practicable, and if the people require it. No power would be taken away
49 from the states. The sub-section would not interfere with the right of any state to act in the
50 meantime until the Federal Parliament took the matter in hand.
51 END QUOTE
52

Page 21
1 While the Commonwealth abolished land taxation the ordinary legal principle that when
2 legislation is abolished then it is as if it never existed cannot and doesn’t apply to this instance,
3 for the very reasons that once the Commonwealth legislated as to land taxation it no longer was a
4 “concurrent” legislative power but a “exclusive” commonwealth power. There is no provision
5 within the constitution to revert back to the States. Hence, all and any State land taxation is and
6 remains unconstitutional.
7
9 QUOTE
10 Mr. BARTON.-I was going to explain when I was interrupted that the moment the
11 Commonwealth legislates on this subject the power will become exclusive.
12 END QUOTE
13
14 QUOTE 20110308-Premier Kristina Keneally-Re STATE LAND TAX - etc
15 Premier Kristina Keneally 8-3-2011
16 <thepremier@www.nsw.gov.au>
17 .
18 Cc: * Mr Ted Baillieu Premier ted.baillieu@parliament.vic.gov.au
19 * Tony Newbury Chief Commissioner of State Revenue C/o peter.geffroy@osr.nsw.gov.au
20 * Mr Robert Pincevic <roblp@bigpond.com> PO Box 15 Luddenham NSW 2745
21 .
22 Re: State Land tax - etc
23 AND TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN
24 .
25 Kristina,
26 your office for having provided me with a 13 September 2010 response (in regard of my
27 31 August 2010 correspondence to you regarding the unconstitutional State land taxes:
28 QUOTE
29 CMU10-16940
30 13 September 2010
31 Mr Gerrit Schorel-Hlavka
32 schorel-hlavka@schorel-hlavka.com
33
34 Dear Mr Schorel-Hlavka
35 I write in response to your recent email to the Premier concerning land tax.
36 As the matter you have raised concerns the administration of the Treasurer, the Hon
37 Eric Roozendaal MLC, your email has been forwarded to the Treasurer for attention.
38 You may be sure that your letter will receive close consideration.
39 Yours sincerely
40 David Swain
41 for Director General
42 END QUOTE
43 .
44 I received on 8-3-2011 a response dated 2-3-2011 from Barry Collier MP Parliamentary
45 Secretary Assisting the Treasurer on behalf of the Treasurer he responded.
46 Section 107 he refers to is very clear that for example “Income Tax” albeit was a Colonial and
47 later State legislative power the moment the Commonwealth legislated upon “Income Tax” then
48 the power became an exclusive Commonwealth power and the States had to retire from this.
49 Once it became an exclusive power then the constitution doesn’t permit it to return to become a
50 “concurrent” power, as I have set out in past correspondence. The legislative powers on the
51 particular field is forever an exclusive power of the Commonwealth!
52 In regard of the State Land Taxes the same applies. Once the Commonwealth commenced to
53 legislate as to “Land taxes” then it became by this an exclusive legislative power and as such the
54 State no longer had concurrent legislative powers on Land taxes matters.
55 The States were created out of the former colonies and as s.106 of the (federal) constitution
56 makes clear “subject to this constitution” and this clearly provides in s51 for concurrent
Page 22
1 legislative powers to become exclusive Commonwealth legislative powers. It is not relevant if

2 the Commonwealth, as like with the 1952 abolition land taxes were to abolish “income tax”
3 because it would still remain an exclusive Commonwealth legislative power. As for s5 of the
4 Constitution Act 1992 (NSW) it cannot override any Commonwealth exclusive powers and as it
5 clearly is subject to the Commonwealth constitution it therefore cannot be perceived it somehow
6 gives legislative powers no longer permissible by the Commonwealth Constitution to be
7 exercisable by a state.
8
9 .
10 Critical might be the claim:
11 QUOTE
12 Land taxes were imposed by the States prior to federation. They were introduced at the federal level in 1910.
13 In 1952, the Commonwealth Government abolished land tax. This did not have the effect of preventing the
14 States from imposing land tax, but rather returned taxation powers back to them. Accordingly, the NSW
15 Government introduced the land Management Act in 1956.

Page 23
1 END QUOTE
2
3 Obviously, contrary to what was claimed by Barry Collier MP the Commonwealth Government
4 has no constitutional powers to abolish any legislation as it being the Executive it can refuse to
5 enforce legislative provisions but cannot abolish an act of Parliament. As such it is the
6 Commonwealth Parliament that can only abolish legislation.
7 What may be noted is the wording “but rather returned taxation powers back to them” as
8 such this is a concession that in fact since 1910 land taxes were an exclusive Commonwealth
9 legislative power. The question then is how does one “return” a legislative power to any State,
10 not just NSW, where the Constitution never provided for this? Clearly Barry Collier MP didn’t
11 clarifyy within what constitutional powers, if any, a reversal of legislative power could eventuate
12 and quite frankly the Framers of the Constitution made clear that once a legislative power was a
13 Commonwealth legislative power then this was the end of the States dealing with the subject.
14 .
15 Hansard 27-1-1898 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National
17 QUOTE
18 Mr. DEAKIN.-My point is that by the requests of different colonies at different times you may arrive at a
19 position in which all the colonies have adopted a particular law, and it is necessary for the working of that
20 law that certain fees, charges, or taxation should be imposed. That law now relates to the whole of the
21 Union, because every state has come under it. As I read clause 52, the Federal Parliament will have no
22 power, until the law has thus become absolutely federal, to impose taxation to provide the necessary
23 revenue for carrying out that law. Another difficulty of the sub-section is the question whether, even
24 when a state has referred a matter to the federal authority, and federal legislation takes place on it, it
25 has any-and if any, what-power of amending or repealing the law by which it referred the question? I
26 should be inclined to think it had no such power, but the question has been raised, and should be
27 settled. I should say that, having appealed to Caesar, it must be bound by the judgment of Caesar, and
28 that it would not be possible for it afterwards to revoke its reference.
29 END QUOTE
30 .
32 QUOTE Mr. GORDON.-
33 The court may say-"It is a good law, but as it technically infringes on
34 the Constitution we will have to wipe it out."
35 END QUOTE
36 .
38 QUOTE Mr. ISAACS (Victoria).-
39 In the next sub-section it is provided that all taxation shall be uniform throughout the Commonwealth.
40 An income tax or a property tax raised under any federal law must be uniform "throughout the
41 Commonwealth." That is, in every part of the Commonwealth.
42 END QUOTE
43 .
45 QUOTE
46 Mr. MCMILLAN: I think the reading of the sub-section is clear.
47 The reductions may be on a sliding scale, but they must always be uniform.
48 END QUOTE
49 And
51 QUOTE
52 Sir GEORGE TURNER: No. In imposing uniform duties of Customs it should not be necessary for the
53 Federal Parliament to make them commence at a certain amount at once. We have pretty heavy duties in
54 Victoria, and if the uniform tariff largely reduces them at once it may do serious injury to the colony. The
55 Federal Parliament will have power to fix the uniform tariff, and if any reductions made are on a
56 sliding scale great injury will be avoided.
57 END QUOTE

Page 24
1 .
3 QUOTE Mr. BARTON.-
4 But it is a fair corollary to the provision for dealing with the revenue for the first five years after the
5 imposition of uniform duties of customs, and further reflection has led me to the conclusion that, on the
6 whole, it will be a useful and beneficial provision.
7 END QUOTE
8 And
10 QUOTE Mr. BARTON.-
11 On the other hand, the power of the Commonwealth to impose duties of customs and of excise such as it may
12 determine, which insures that these duties of customs and excise would represent something like the average
13 opinion of the Commonwealth-that power, and the provision that bounties are to be uniform throughout
14 the Commonwealth, might, I am willing to concede, be found to work with some hardship upon the states
15 for some years, unless their own rights to give bounties were to some extent preserved.
16 END QUOTE
17
19 QUOTE Sir SAMUEL GRIFFITH:
20 2. Customs and excise and bounties, but so that duties of customs and excise and bounties shall be uniform
21 throughout the commonwealth, and that no tax or duty shall be imposed on any goods exported from one
22 state to another;
23 END QUOTE
24
26 QUOTE The CHAIRMAN.-
27 Taxation; but so that all taxation shall he uniform throughout the Commonwealth, and that no tax or duty
28 shall be imposed on any goods passing from one state to another.
29 END QUOTE
30 .
32 QUOTE
33 Mr. BARTON.-I am saying now that I do not think there is any necessity for clause 95 in its present form.
34 What I am saying however, is that it should be made certain that in the same way as you provide that the
35 Tariff or any taxation imposed shall be uniform throughout the Commonwealth, so it should be
36 provided with reference to trade and commerce that it shall be uniform and equal, so that the
37 Commonwealth shall not give preference to any state or part of a state. Inasmuch as we provide that
38 all taxation, whether it be customs or excise duties, or direct taxation, must be uniform, and inasmuch
39 as we follow the United States Constitution in that particular-in the very same way I argue that we should
40 protect the trade and commerce sub-section by not doing anything which will limit its effect. That is the real
41 logical position.
42 END QUOTE
43 .
44 Hansard 3-3-1897 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National
46 QUOTE
47 Mr. ISAACS (Victoria).-What I am going to say may be a little out of order, but I would like to draw the
48 Drafting Committee's attention to the fact that in clause 52, sub-section (2), there has been [start page 1856] a
49 considerable change. Two matters in that sub-section seem to me to deserve attention. First, it is provided
50 that all taxation shall be uniform throughout the Commonwealth. That means direct as well as indirect
51 taxation, and the object I apprehend is that there shall be no discrimination between the states; that an
52 income tax or land tax shall not be made higher in one state than in another. I should like the Drafting
53 Committee to consider whether saying the tax shall be uniform would not prevent a graduated tax of any
54 kind? A tax is said to be uniform that falls with the same weight on the same class of property, wherever it is
55 found. It affects all kinds of direct taxation. I am extremely afraid, that if we are not very careful, we shall get
56 into a difficulty. It might not touch the question of exemption; but any direct tax sought to be imposed
57 might be held to be unconstitutional, or, in other words, illegal, if it were not absolutely uniform.
58 END QUOTE
59 .
60 It should be clear that a “UNIFORM” law under the Commonwealth cannot somehow revert
61 back to a non-uniform law merely because of the States desiring to pursue their own kind of land
Page 25
1 taxation. As such, on this basis also the State land taxes are floored (and so also any Territorial
2 land taxes).
3 .
5 QUOTE
6 Mr. ISAACS.-The court would not consider whether it was an oversight or not. They would take the
7 law and ask whether it complied with the Constitution. If it did not, they would say that it was invalid.
8 They would not go into the question of what was in the minds of the Members of Parliament when the law
9 was passed. That would be a political question which it would be impossible for the court to determine.
10 END QUOTE
11 .
12 As I previously indicated the Commonwealth could have allowed the States to collect under its
13 authority land taxes but it still would have to be uniform through the Commonwealth and as such
14 all States and Territories (quasi States) would be bound to have the same land taxes application
15 and not different rates. This then would clearly be a waste of exercise as why allow different
16 States/Territories to collect taxes when one federal office can do the same?
17 The issue then is of the Commonwealth somehow could enact legislation to retrospective provide
18 for legislation for the States/Territories to have collected land taxes on its behalf. Again, the first
19 hurdle is that retrospective legislation would be invalid where so to say it makes the conduct of a
20 honest man to be a criminal conduct. Further, where the States raised different levels of land
21 taxes then it cannot be uniform. One couldn’t accept that a person of one State having paid less
22 then in another State now suddenly was to pay more by some kind of retrospective legislation
23 and neither that some who paid more now were going to receive a refund of any land taxes paid
24 above that of other States. After all commercial entities are based upon overhead cost, including
25 land taxes, etc, and as such a business enterprise might be determined where the lowest taxation
26 is available. Changing the system after the contracts are already in operation would make a
27 mockery of the reliability of State provisions.
28 I have indicated for years that what is needed is an OFFICE-OF-THE-GUARDIAN which
29 would advise the government, the parliament, the people and the Courts as to constitutional
30 meanings and application as a constitutional council. This is what is missing in Australia and as
31 result we have sport stars and singers and whatever elected to the parliament and basically no
32 one understands let alone comprehend the meaning and application of the constitutions.
33 .
34 It is obviously of concern to me that it took a massive 6 month period (from 31 August 2010 till
35 2 March 2011) to present this kind of response that doesn’t appear to me to indicate to be any
36 well researched response.
37 .
38 Obviously I will pass on the 2-3-2011 response and my reply to those concerned with the issue.
39 .
40 EITHER WE HAVE A CONSTITUTION OR WE DON’T!
41 .
42
43
MAY JUSTICE ALWAYS PREVAIL®
.
44 Our name is our motto!

45 .
46
47 Awaiting your response, G. H. Schorel-Hlavka (Gerrit)
48 END QUOTE 20110308-Premier Kristina Keneally-Re STATE LAND TAX - etc
49

Page 26
1 Then let us consider the covid scam issue where people were one way or another forced to have
2 the “gene therapy” DEPOPULATION bioweapon jab. Only a fool would hold that this is a
3 “vaccine’.
4
5 This part F DOMICIDE 2.0 that I view provides enough details to have politicians and
6 their collaborators charged, and if convicted be awarded the death penalty. This, as the evil
7 doers otherwise will escalate their evil conduct.
8 You can download the document from:
9 https://www.scribd.com/document/661643038/20230728-Mr-G-H-Schorel-Hlavka-O-W-B-to-R-
10 Kershaw-Chief-Commissioner-of-AFP-Suppl-101F-DeMOCIDE-2-0
11 QUOTE 20230728-Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to R Kershaw Chief Commissioner of AFP-Suppl 101F-
12 DEMOCIDE 2.0
13
14 1974/12/10 – Secretary of State Henry Kissenger’s national
15 Security Study Memorandum 200 (NSSM 200) study
16 completed as the Kissinger Report, establishing global
17 depopulation as US geopolitical strategy.
18
19
20 1975/11/26 – President Gerald Ford endorsed the Kissinger Report’s depopulation plan
21 through National Security Decision Memorandum 314
22
23
24
25 Let us first therefore look at the (USA) DoD DEPOPULATION plan:
26
27 Let us look as Deagel.com (http://www.deagel.com/country/forecast.aspx) population forecast
28 of 2017 and in particular, the current countries hit with COVID-19!
29
30 Name Country 2017 2025 Reduction %
31
32 United Kingdom 65,650,000 14,517,860 51,132,140 77.886%
33 Ireland 5,010,000 1,318,740 3,691,260 73.678%
34 Germany 80,590,000 28,134,920 52,455,080 65.089%
35 Spain 48,960,000 27,763,280 21,196,720 43.294%
36
37 France 67,100,000 39,114,580 27,985,420 41.707%
38 Switzerland 8,240,000 5,342,540 2,897,460 35.163%
39 Denmark 5,600,000 3,771,760 1,828,240 32.647%
40 Belgium 11,490,000 8,060,900 3,429,100 29.844%
41
42 Italy 62,140,000 43,760,260 18,379,740 29.578%
43 Austria 8,750,000 6,215,000 2,535,000 28.971%
44 Ukraine 44,030,000 31,628,980 12,401,020 28.165%
45 Norway 5,320,000 3,833,960 1,486,040 27.933%
46
47 Portugal 10,840,000 8,113,860 2,726,140 25.149%
48 Poland 38,480,000 33,230,780 5,249,220 13.641%
Page 27
1
2 TOTALS 462,200,000 254,807,420 207,392,580 44.871%
3
4 United States of America 326,620,000 99,553,100 227,066,900 69.520%
5
6 Australia 23,230,000 15,196,600 8,033,400 34.582%
7
8 And to silence critics they went on to pay handsomely the media (albeit also unconstitutionally)
9 as I understood was what Event201 October 2019 was indicating, as to prevent others to become
10 aware of their murderous DEPOPULATION scam. The eSafety Commissioner, Ombudsman,
11 Human Rights Commissioners were simploy AWOL (Absent Without Leave) and if anything
12 not just refused to enforce constitutional rights but rather supported this TREASONOUS
13 conduct and let DICTATORSHIP & TERRORISM be the rule of the day.
14
15 So, the USA in 1974 legislated to DEPOPULATE the world and Australian politicians are going
16 along with this. Well I did not and do not and my blog at https://www.scribd.com/inspectorrikati
17 has published ample of details about it all.
18
19 https://www.dfat.gov.au/trade/organisations/g20
20 QUOTE
21 The members of the G20 are: Argentina,
22 Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, Republi
23 c of Korea, Mexico, Russia, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, Türkiye, the United Kingdom,
24 the United States, the African Union and the European Union.
25 END QUOTE
26
27 https://www.zerohedge.com/political/g20-announces-plan-impose-digital-currencies-and-ids-
28 worldwide?utm_source=&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=1827
29 G20 Announces Plan To Impose Digital Currencies And IDs Worldwide
30 QUOTE
31 BY TYLER DURDEN
32 THURSDAY, SEP 14, 2023 - 08:30 PM
33 Authored by Bryan Jung via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),
34 The Group of 20 leaders have agreed to a plan to eventually impose digital currencies
35 and digital IDs on their respective populations, despite fears that governments will use
36 them to monitor their peoples' spending and crush dissent.
37 END QUOTE
38
39 In Netherlands, USA, Canada and other countries farms are being closed down all allegedly for
40 climate change. And I understand that Australian politicians desire the Digital Currencies and ID
41 so they can then control every citizen. They can simply determine if a farmer should has his
42 finances suspended if it is deemed he spend too much on certain chemicals, etc. Just that the
43 Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900 (UK) has the following provision:
44
45 115 States not to coin money
46 A State shall not coin money, nor make anything but gold and
47 silver coin a legal tender in payment of debts.
48
49 Meaning that the State is bound to provide for gold and silver coins!
50 The Commonwealth therefore cannot prevent the use of cash monies, albeit in my view too
51 many judges are crooks and will do whatever to deny citizens their constitutional rights.
52

Page 28
1 As I started about “The straw that broke the camel’s back.” I have my own statement “All a
2 lawyer needs to do is sleep with the Registrar.” I started this way back in about 1985 when a
3 judge issues a certain court order. Next I received 4 different versions of the same order meaning
4 I had 5 different versions. I contact the Registrar if this was an error, and was informed not at all
5 as after the judge makes his order then staff members in the Registry may change the wording to
6 ensure it is ‘grammatically’ in proper English, I questioned how it could be ‘grammatically’
7 Better English to change “each weekend” to every second weekend”? I was given the response
8 that the Registrar simply held this was a better version. Meaning, you could litigate a case before
9 a judge and the judge issues orders but then somehow various persons in the Registry simply
10 then change the terms of orders. Hence my slogan: “All a lawyer needs to do is sleep with the
11 Registrar.”. Not meaning they (lawyer and registrar) actually are sleeping together physically,
12 as like the “The straw that broke the camel’s back.” It is merely a saying, this as one doesn’t
13 actually mean to use a straw and hit a camel. Just that in Buloke v Schorel-Hlavka Carmody J
14 commented it was shameful that I had alleged this 23 year old female solicitor having slept with
15 the Registrar. I did not make such specific claim, but Carmody J himself claimed this. After all, I
16 was not aware if the lawyer who attended to the Magistrates Court was a male or female, old or
17 young and the same about the Registry staff.
18 In about 4 decades of experiences in numerous cases, and I know too well that often before a
19 case is hear the judge already has made some arrangements as to which party is to succeed and
20 the hearing is no more but to select whatever evidence and twist it to suit the intended judgment.
21 I even proved a judgement and orders were issued a day before the judge pronounced them
22 during a court case! Solicitors and Councils are making false and deceptive claims. Let say a
23 Counsellor is realising he is likely to lose the case, and so suddenly he comes up with say Buloke
24 Shire Council v Alexander Hamilton and start then state a fabricate statement. Alexander
25 Hamilton was a Framer of the American Constitution in the USA, and obviously nothing to do
26 with Buloke Shire Council but a judge who doesn’t want to acknowledge that he is taken for a
27 ride and lack any knowledge and common sense then will go along with this and well the
28 deceiving lawyer wins his case. That is why generally I obtain the transcript and check whatever
29 an opponent Counsel claimed, and on numerous occasions exposed the Counsel fabricated a
30 version!
31 Many lawyers, even if they are aware that the opponent party is making false and misleading
32 claims that may cost their client the case, they rather remain in general silent because they
33 themselves may do so also. The message being always che3ck whatever lawyers are stating!
34
35 The Department of Human Services took the mother of one of my daughters to court regarding
36 her boyfriend’s sexual abuse, and well I then exposed the Department neglect of my daughter
37 and succeeded to get custody of her. I for this in 1987 commenced to purchase a property
38 (actually 2) in Berriwillock, and as I already had given away to my former wife all rights to the
39 property we then owned jointly, I had to start from scratch. Just that the locals somehow had no
40 respect for a single father and over the years whenever I was away from home they vandalised
41 the house, breaking in, wrecking my car that I had purchased new, wrecked my water tank, killed
42 my daughters dog, stole all tools and equipment, even a large pool table, etc. There was a young
43 lady Debbie who had a key for the house and would at times spend the evening with my
44 daughter and myself. It was a pure platonic friendship, and at no time did we ever mentioned
45 any intimately issues. There is absolutely nothing wrong with a man to show appropriate respect
46 for a young woman in such manner. Then one day Debbie asked if she could discus something
47 with me and I agreed and well she explained she was pregnant but didn’t want to marry the
48 father. What were my views about abortion. I explained that I would respect her if she kept the
49 child, etc. Debbie did so. But as soon as locals became aware about Debbie being pregnant I
50 copped tirades of verbal abuses, even in Alan Mills general store (a woman who’s family owned
51 various stores in Sea Lake) that they should break my legs, run me out of town and others also
Page 29
1 made clear they might just burn down my house, etc. I could not have conducted myself more
2 honourable to a young woman and yet became the outcast for what actually I never did!
3
4 From time to time locals, when it was dark, would visit me and explain they merely went along
5 as otherwise they be ousted also, and I assisted them in legal issues (FREE OF CHARGE) and
6 also avoiding suicide, etc. No woman in the town or in the surrounding area ever could claim I
7 made any proposition to them, because I was simply not interested to get involved with a woman
8 at that time. I was researching constitutional and other legal issues and conducting a special
9 lifeline service “MAY JUSTICE ALWAYS PREVAIL” when people contemplated suicide,
10 murder and even mass murder, as well as caring for my children! Assisting also people in the
11 township and surrounding areas! I as a constitutionalist and a Professional Advocate was
12 assisting/representing parties in court, including solicitors and barristers but always refused to
13 charge for my services and refused also to accept monies to compensate me for my out of pocket
14 expenses.
15 Over the years I also gained custody of some of my other children, I just had no time to hang
16 around a pub! Unlikely are they now going to fix up the residence they so much vandalised and
17 return all stolen items to it. They, in a way, show precisely the kind of attitude many politicians
18 are showing not to care less about any undue harm they inflicted, including killings, as long as
19 they can increase their powers or imagine to do so. In the end I remarried, but it was after I
20 actually did meet my lawyer stepdaughter at the bar table when we represented opposing parties.
21 Years, later she made known “You were the better lawyer of the day”.
22 And my wife (in considerable ill health) is in no condition to spend time at the property where
23 the house has been vandalise, hot water system stolen, etc, etc.
24 With the experiences I had in this township it might be logic for me to hold that I couldn’t care
25 less about them, but I am glad I am not like that. I learned to respect farmers how hard their lives
26 are to never know if they could harvest or have a sudden rainfall destroying their crop, etc.
27 It appeared to me from my own legal studies that farmers, etc, were wronged, but when I stood
28 for State election the locals rather voted for a political party candidate, regardless they were so to
29 say being sold out.
30 If anything, so to say, people in the township should fall over each other to want to look after the
31 property considering the harm they wrongly inflicted, etc. One couple moved into township and
32 later moved out again but we became very good friends, and still are. I conducted for some 37
33 years a special lifeline service “MAY JUSTICE ALWAYS PREVAIL”, always without
34 charging for my services, and no doubt many thousands of people are still alive today because of
35 my work. Actually about 6 months before 6 people were murdered in Bourke Street, Melbourne I
36 wrote to then PM Malcolm Turnbull and Premier Daniel Andrews warning them to install
37 bollards in Bourke Street Mall to prevent a mass murder, and repeated the same in December but
38 both disregard this and in January then the 6 people were murdered, that I view could have been
39 prevented. Never mind the politicians were falling over each other for phot opportunities never
40 revealing that had been pre-warned by me and could likely have avoided it all! I had to stop the
41 special lifeline service in 2019 when my wife was about to die, and I then rushed her to hospital
42 and was able to get her through. Since then at times there were close calls, including in 2022
43 when she called me into the bathroom and the floor was covered with blood as blood was
44 spurring out from a vein in her lower leg. I used a towel around her leg and then she fell into my
45 arms, eyes wide open, mouth wide open and it looked as if she had died due to blood loss. I kept
46 calmly asking her to sit down and after about 15 minutes she whispered “I can’t”. I knew then I
47 was winning the battle, this as her mind was still going. It took another 2 hours to get her into
48 bed. No ambulance could be called, because we are not jabbed with the “gene therapy”
49 DEPOPULATION bioweapon, and the hospital previously refused to provide required services
50 to her. I very much pursue this covid scam because it could have cost my wife her life.

Page 30
1 Councils were seemingly going along with this covid scam and used property owner’s monies to
2 pay for their nonsense.
3 The mere fact that the State had no constitutional, executive and/or administrative powers to
4 issue the mandates somehow seemed to have been ignored by councils. My blog at
5 https://www.sscribd.com/inspectorrikati has a huge amount of information about it all!
6
7 http://tex.parliament.vic.gov.au/bin/texhtmlt?form=jVicHansard.dumpall&db=hansard91&dodraft=0&house=ASSE
8 MBLY&speech=23716&activity=Second+Reading&title=SAFE+DRINKING+WATER+BILL&date1=7&date2=
9 May&date3=2003&query=true%0a%09and+%28+data+contains+'safe'%0a%09and+data+contains+'water'+%29
10 QUOTE
11 Mr ANDREWS (Mulgrave)- It is a pleasure to speak in support of the Safe Drinking Water Bill.
12 This bill forms part of the government's strategic approach to water management, with
13 specific attention being paid to water quality and risk management as matters of public
14 health. It is worth noting that this is a debate about public health and about making
15 sure that each community across our state has access to the highest quality water. It is
16 also worth noting that this bill has been introduced by the Minister for Health as a matter
17 of public health.
18 The bill has four specific objectives. Before going on to those I welcome the support
19 shown by the Liberal and National parties for this bill. Every endeavour has been made to
20 try to provide as much information as possible.
21 END QUOTE
22
23 Well GWMWater still has not provided “safe drinking water” to various area’s this even so it
24 was clai9med that they would receive funding to perform the upgrade from untreated water to
25 safe drinking water and water service providers could engage other water service providers to
26 assist in performing the required work.
27 One then has to ask what happened to the monies?
28 I disputed the water charges and in 2014 the Victorian Ombudsman held it was a legal issue.
29 GWMWater therefore only alternative was to litigate against me. They never did but purportedly
30 keep increasing their alleged claims against me.
31 Last year I made an extensive submission and have been advised that GWMWater now intends
32 (finally) to upgrade the water supplies from untreated to safe drinking water. Currently it is still
33 violating legal requirement!
34 I, some years ago, did write to Buloke Shire Council as to this being clearly a “health” issue but
35 nothing came from it. Why not?
36
37
38 The shown web site no longer operates as such)
39 What we have is that parents may have been working hard to provide for the family unaware that
40 the water they were using may have been extremely dangerous for the child(ren).
Page 31
1
2 The same with the sickening mandates. Let it be clear that Brett Sutton as I understand it as a
3 Chief Health Officer was NOT a medical doctor, and apparently had not even any scientific
4 basis to justify any mandates, besides they were unconstitutional.
5
6 How many parent may be aware that many of the school children vaccinations may be
7 unconstitutional and often can cause harm such as SIDS, AUTISM, etc? My blog has
8 considerable information about it all. And I do NOT charge for anyone to download it.
9
10 As I stated at the time during the State election when I was a candidate, at Wycheproof, that the
11 land-rights against farmers is not acceptable. No other candidate was addressing this issue.
12 While Aboriginals claim to have been in Australia for some 65,000 year the information I
13 published at my blog indicates if to be about 4,000 years and before them numerous other races
14 resided in what is now known as the Commonwealth of Australia. The Dutch were the first
15 Europeans to settle in what was then called New Holland and in 1658 New Holland was claimed
16 for the Dutch. No land-rights to my knowledge were granted to Aboriginals. As such, the High
17 Court of Australia in the MABO case overlooked this completely.
18
19 Farmers who had their ancestors working hard to create their farms were pestered with litigation
20 by Aboriginals who simply saw it as an easy way to make monies, as the government was paying
21 their bills, not that of the farmers.
22 In my view all and any land-right decision are unconstitutional and I have set this out at my blog.
23
24 You have to ask what on earth has Buloke Shire Council been doing to stand up for the rights of
25 property owner’s? Well it seems to me it has sold itself to the State Government and couldn’t
26 care less about the harm inflicted upon property owners.
27
28 There is an excellent article:
29
30 https://www.wnd.com/2023/09/americas-tower-babel-
31 moment/?ff_source=Email&ff_medium=wnd-
32 breaking&ff_campaign=breaking&ff_content=breaking
33 TRUTH & REALITY
34 America's Tower of Babel moment
35 QUOTE
36 I'd be more convinced of that if we had a substantively operative legacy media that would
37 actually report legitimate findings to the people. The reason they won't is that we have
38 already been morphed (or built) into a fascist country where the "public-private
39 partnership" runs the show through greed. The networks won't report the truth, or the large
40 corporations who pay their bills via advertising dollars will stop buying ad time. The
41 executives don't want to give up their gravy train, or they're so steeped in debt because of
42 their overly lavish and sin-laced lifestyle that they cannot speak the truth
43 END QUOTE
44
45 What is needed is to essentially throw out all politicians and elect fresh blood, those who are not
46 merely serving the W.E.F./U.N./WHO corrupt system for 15/20 minute cities, etc, to rob people
47 of their farms, freedom, etc.
48
49 I understand they used to say “Australia is built on the sheep’s back”. Well it now might be
50 more “Australia is built on the sheeple’s back”. Those who follow and collaborate what the
51 traitors and terrorist demand
52
Page 32
1 The following links have further details as well as legal authorities quotations referri9ng to the
2 above stated.
3
4 We have a municipal council taking the law into its own hands disregarding
5 trespassing signs and climbing over a fence and harass me, well this time they picked
6 upon the wrong person!
8 https://www.scribd.com/document/670522560/20230911-Mr-G-H-Schorel-Hlavka-O-W-
9 B-to-Banyule-City-Council-Mayor-Cr-Castaldo-and-Ors-TRESPASS-Etc
10
11
12 My 90 year old wife (suffering ill health) and I desire to enjoy the peace and
13 tranquility our FEE SIMPLE property offers, and we are legally entitled upon, while
14 it appears to me Banyule City Council conspired to deny us those rights.
17 B-to-Banyule-City-Council-Mayor-Cr-Castaldo-and-Ors-TRESPASS-Etc-Supplement-1
18
19
20 When Banyule City Council, is harassing a 90 very sick woman and vandalize her
21 car, that is legally parked, then this may just indicate the New World Order kind of
22 conduct we may all face.
25 B-to-Banyule-City-Council-Mayor-Cr-Castaldo-and-Ors-TRESPASS-Etc-Supplement-2
26
27 We have all kinds’ organisations charging “interest” but where is the constitutional validity of
28 this? Banks are regulated by the Commonwealth and interest is part of its business, even if one
29 may not agree with it, but the State of Victoria has no State Bank and so cannot apply interest to
30 anyone, likewise so councils as corporations, etc.
31
32 Buloke Shire Council is charging me for General rates, which really is purported State land
33 Taxation on properties that are Estate in FEE SIMPLE.
34 I previously wrote FEE SIMPLE but one of my readers alerted me to that I really should write it
35 correctly.
36
37 Then there is this Municipal Charge for what?
38
39 Then there is this “Garbage Charge” when at least for a decades no garbage was collected and
40 the local tip has been closed.
41 Then there is this “Fire Service Levy Residential” allegedly increased by the Capital Improved
42 Value. Well, as I understand it Capital Improved Value has nothing to do with the Fire levy. I do
43 not have an issue with the fire levy as after all it appears to me to be a legitimate charge but it
44 should be kept at the $125 charge and not increased as I view being a robbery by Buloke Shire
45 Council.
46
47 Just consider the terrorism upon children having to wear utterly useless mask that may over the
48 years show the harm that was inflicted and this all because politicians want to serve foreign
49 enemy organisation “You own nothing and be happy”. Well, it is time that Australians all are
50 making clear: No more!
51
Page 33
1 My suggestion to Buloke Shire Council is to provide me with the legal set out of each and every
2 charge it makes against me. In the meantime, I am not having an issue to pay the $125 fire levy
3 and any other monies I am willing to pay into a trust account where the monies is held for
4 maximum 2 years and failing Buloke Shire Council to prove their legal rights to any of the
5 monies then it be refunded. I am certainly not having my monies used for Aboriginals to have an
6 easy income and neither do I view farmers, etc, should have some Aboriginal lurking around as
7 to if a fence post might be somehow deemed unacceptable and the farmer for this could face
8 thousands of dollars cost. As I made clear farmers have a hard life to make a living and keep
9 Australians being fed and they can do well without the political absurdity Daniel Andrews
10 engages in, which is a forebode how this communist Voice would be to deny property owners
11 their Estate in FEE SIMPLE, etc.
12
13 I do not accept that Buloke Shire Council (or for that any other council) has to incur cost as to
14 provide for Aboriginals to dictate what they desire and neither that property owners end up
15 paying for this unconstitutional requirement!
16
17 If Buloke Shire Council desires to litigate against me it should understand that all matters I
18 raised in AEC v Schorel-Hlavka are beyond litigation as they are settled. Res Judicata. Meaning
19 the citizenship issue cannot be re-argued as the State of Victoria made clear to abide by the court
20 decision and it did not, neither others, seek to appeal the court’s decisions!
21
22 DISCLOSURE: One of my daughter’s first female cousin is the mother of 5 children of her
23 marriage to an Australian of Aboriginal descent, which resulted that I over the decades had
24 considerable communication with Aboriginals Elders. My understanding is they just desire to be
25 left alone, do not support the communist Voice crap and desire others to respect them as equal
26 Australians! Constitutionally, Ss51(xxvi) must apply to all persons of a race in regard of which
27 the Commonwealth legislated, and why should Aboriginals, many doctors, lawyers, etc, be
28 subjected to special legislation at all instead of living their lives as any Australian?
29
30
31
32 We need to return to the organics and legal principles embed in of our federal
33 constitution!
34
35 This correspondence is not intended and neither must be perceived to state all issues/details.
36 Awaiting your response, G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. (Gerrit)
37 MAY JUSTICE ALWAYS PREVAIL®

38 (Our name is our motto!)
39


20230916-Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. To Buloke Shire Council & Ors

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

20230916-Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. To Buloke Shire Council & Ors

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Page 1

1 services to Australians in general, in particularly property holders in Buloke! Previously Buloke

16-9-2023 Page 5 © Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.

1 England’s Office for National Statistics.

1 HANSARD18-2-1898 Constitution Convention Debates

16-9-2023 Page 13 © Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.

16-9-2023 Page 16 © Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.

16-9-2023 Page 17 © Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.

16-9-2023 Page 19 © Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.

16-9-2023 Page 20 © Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.

1 legislative powers to become exclusive Commonwealth legislative powers. It is not relevant if

16-9-2023 Page 22 © Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.

16-9-2023 Page 23 © Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.

44 Our name is our motto!

16-9-2023 Page 25 © Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.

16-9-2023 Page 27 © Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.

16-9-2023 Page 29 © Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.

37 MAY JUSTICE ALWAYS PREVAIL®

16-9-2023 Page 33 © Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.

You might also like