Sie sind auf Seite 1von 10

5

Ted Baillieu Premier ted.baillieu@parliament.vic.gov.au


Cc: Simon Overlander Chief Commissioner of the Victorian Police C/o Victoria Police Centre, G.P.O Box 913 , Melbourne, VIC, 3001, AUSTRALIA heidelberg.uni@police.vic.gov.au Civic Compliance Victoria GPO Box 1916, Melbourne VIC 3001 Traffic_Inquiries@tenixsolutions.com Ethical Standards Department Victoria Police Unit, Victoria Police Centre, 737 Flinders Street, Melbourne 3005 Phone 1300 363 101, Facsimile 9247 3498

10-6-2011

10

15

Ref: Obligation Number 1106575301 Re: COMPLAINT Ted, As you were elected upon the platform of Law & Order would it then be too much to ask if you actually could ensure the State Government applies this? In past correspondences, way back to the 23 February 2011 correspondence, I did set out; 25
QUOTE As a CONSTITUTIONALIST I consider it essential that we do adhere to the constitution and so its true meaning and application as to do otherwise would invite dictatorship, tyranny and anarchy and surely the Victorian Police would not want to promote this? END QUOTE
.

20

30

As I indicated the State of Victoria was created within s106 of the constitution ( Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900 (UK) and by this is bound to apply all embedded constitutional legal principles of this constitution:
QUOTE 106 Saving of Constitutions The Constitution of each State of the Commonwealth shall, subject to this Constitution , continue as at the establishment of the Commonwealth, or as at the admission or establishment of the State, as the case may be, until altered in accordance with the Constitution of the State. END QUOTE
.

35

40

45

http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgibin/disp.pl/au/cases/cth/high_ct/1999/27.html?query=%22thi+act+and+all+law+made+by+the+parliament%22#fn50 QUOTE Constitutional interpretation The starting point for a principled interpretation of the Constitution is the search for the intention of its makers[51] . END QUOTE
.

50

HANSARD 17-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE p1 to 10-6-2011 COMPLAINT INSPECTOR-RIKATI about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD st A 1 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, by fax 0011 -61-3-94577209 or E-mail INSPECTOR-RIKATI@schorel-hlavka.com See also www.schorel-hlavka.com

Mr. BARTON.- Of course it will be argued that this Constitution will have been made by the Parliament of the United Kingdom. That will be true in one sense, but not true in effect, because the provisions of this Constitution, the principles which it embodies, and the details of enactment by which those principles are enforced , will all have been the work of Australians . END QUOTE
.

10

HANSARD 17-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE Mr. BARTON .- Having provided in that way for a free Constitution, we have provided for an Executive which is charged with the duty of maintaining the provisions of that Constitution; and, therefore, it can only act as the agents of the people. END QUOTE
.

15

See also as to the independence of State Courts, separation of powers of the judiciary: KABLE v.THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS FOR NEW SOUTH WALES FC 96/027 Commonwealth Constitution, High Court of Australia
.

20

Yet when I received an infringement notice and responded to this by way of my 23 February 2011 correspondence (12 pages), my 23 March 2011 correspondence (5 pages), and also by way of my 30 May 2011 correspondence (9 pages) I still received yet another document with in large letters written FINAL WARNING and with the wording: QUOTE
THIS INFRINGEMENT IS NOW OVERDUE AND WILL BE REFERRED TO COURT IF YOU FAIL TO PAY BY THE 15 JUN 2011.

25
IF REFERRED TO COURT THIS WILL ADD FURTHER COSTS TO THE OUSTANDING AMOUNT AND MAY LEAD TO AN ENFORCEMENT ORDER BEING ISSUED TO RECOVER THE OUSTANDING PENALTY COSTS.

30

END QUOTE Do note the word WILL I have placed in bold and in blue as to indicate that the court WILL and not that it MAY do so. In my view this constitutes a CONTEMPT OF COURT because it implies that the Government so its officers now dictate the court what it must do and no longer we have an independent judiciary. For this also this notification cannot be legally justified and is so to say worthless. No judicial officer could ever abide by this kind of terrorism/extortion upon the people that they are going to a Court not to obtain JUSTICE but for the Court to simply rubberstamp as it is being told by the Government. Why indeed have courts at all if they are merely rubberstamping what a Government Department dictates? In my view this is in direct violation with our constitutional guarantees and the whole notice is without legal justification because of this also.
.

35

40

On the reverse side it states:


QUOTE DO NOT IGNORE THIS NOTICE

45
Your Infringement is still outstanding. If you do not pay this infringement by the due date the matter will be lodged with the court and the penalty will increase significantly due to court costs.

50

If this infringement continues to remain unpaid, a warrant will be issued which may result in your personal property being seized and/or your vehicle being seized. If this infringement is not paid and sufficient property is not able to be seized you may be jailed. END QUOTE
.

55

Again the word will denies the Court any impartial adjudication and to me is a kind of extortion/terrorism upon the people that they better pay up no matter what as the court are bound to act like a puppet on a string to issue orders it is told to issue regardless if the person against whom the infringement notice was issues is innocent of any alleged wrongdoings. And dont we
p2 to 10-6-2011 COMPLAINT INSPECTOR-RIKATI about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD st A 1 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, by fax 0011 -61-3-94577209 or E-mail INSPECTOR-RIKATI@schorel-hlavka.com See also www.schorel-hlavka.com

know that numerous alleged infringement notices are cancelled because of errors? So, when you terrorist/extort those innocent people upon the basis that the Courts will have to follow whatever gospel the government presents, then we no longer have a democratic society but government sponsored terrorism/extorsion!
.

The following will also make clear that the Framers of the Constitution intended to have CIVIL RIGHTS and LIBERTIES principles embedded in the Constitution; 10
HANSARD 17-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates ( Official Record of the Debates of the National Australasian Convention ) QUOTE Mr. CLARK.for the protection of certain fundamental rights and liberties which every individual citizen is entitled to claim that the federal government shall take under its protection and secure to him. END QUOTE
.

15

20

HANSARD 18-2-1898 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National Australasian Convention ) QUOTE Mr. ISAACS .The right of a citizen of this great country, protected by the implied guarantees of its Constitution , END QUOTE
.

HANSARD 27-1-1898 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE Mr. BARTON .-Our civil rights are not in the hands of any Government, but the rights of the Crown in prosecuting criminals are.

25

END QUOTE
.

30

Hansard 1-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National Australasian Convention) QUOTE Mr. HIGGINS.-But suppose they go beyond their power? Mr. GORDON.-It is still the expression of Parliament. Directly a Ministry seeks to enforce improperly any law the citizen has his right. END QUOTE
.

35

40

45

I am a CONSTITUTIONALIST and also Author of books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI series on certain constitutional and other legal issues and can assure you that as the States are created within s106 of the Commonwealth Constitution Act 1900 (UK) then this kind of government sponsored terrorism upon me isnt going to work. As the Framers of the Constitution made clear that DUE PROCESS OF LAW is where there is a judicial determination after both parties have been heard! As such, it is not relevant what alternative legal processed the Parliament of Victoria may have provided for because no Parliament can overrule the constitution! Now, if you got some police wanting to take the matter to court then that is up to the police concerned but unless and until they do so I have no legal responsibilities as the Imperial Act Interpretation Act 1980 prohibits a fine before conviction and certainly increasing a fine before conviction.
.

Imperial Acts Application Act 1980 No. 9426 of 1980 (Vic) QUOTE

50

11. And excessive fines have been imposed; and illegal and cruel punishments inflicted. 12. And several grants and promises made of fines and forfeitures, before any conviction or judgement against the persons, upon whom the same were to be levied. All which are utterly and directly contrary to the known laws and statutes, and freedom of this realm:

55

END QUOTE

And
p3 to 10-6-2011 COMPLAINT INSPECTOR-RIKATI about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD st A 1 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, by fax 0011 -61-3-94577209 or E-mail INSPECTOR-RIKATI@schorel-hlavka.com See also www.schorel-hlavka.com

Imperial Acts Application Act 1980 No. 9426 of 1980 (Vic) QUOTE 12. That all grants and promises of fines and forfeitures of particular persons before conviction, are illegal and void.

13. And that for redress of all grievances, and for the amending, strengthening, and preserving of the laws, parliaments ought to be held frequently. And they do claim, demand, and insist upon all and singular the premisses, as their undoubted rights and liberties; and that no declarations, judgements, doings or proceedings, to the prejudice of the people in any of the said premisses, ought in any wise to be drawn hereafter into consequence or example. To which demand of their rights they are particularly encouraged by the declaration of his highness the prince of Orange, as being the only means for obtaining a full redress and remedy therein. END QUOTE
.Ass

10

15

20

I indicated in my previous correspondence that the Infringement Act 2006 is unconstitutional and while this may not be properly understood by lawyers it means that from the date (30 May 2011) when I made this claim it was not just unconstitutional in regard of what I claimed AB INITIO but so it applied to everyone else also as there is no such thing as a law being unconstitutional for one person but not for another. Either it is constitutionally valid or it is not and as I challenged the constitutional validity of the Infringement Act 2006 then from that moment the legislation is no more unless and until, if ever at all, a competent court of jurisdiction declares the legislation to be INTRA VIRES.
.

Hansard 1-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE

25 And

Mr. SYMON.-It is not a law which is ultra vires. END QUOTE Hansard 1-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE

30

Mr. SYMON.-Do you think acquiescence would make a law if the law passed by the Commonwealth Parliament was ultra vires ? Mr. GORDON.-It would until the law was impugned. If the state did not impugn that law it would remain in force. It is a law, and it could be allowed to be valid by the force of acquiescence. END QUOTE

35

And
Hansard 1-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE Mr. SYMON.-It is not a law if it is ultra vires. Mr. GORDON.-It would be law by acquiescence. It would remain a law until it was attacked. END QUOTE

40

And
Hansard 1-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE Mr. HIGGINS.- But suppose they go beyond their power?

45

Mr. GORDON.-It is still the expression of Parliament. Directly a Ministry seeks to enforce improperly any law the citizen has his right. END QUOTE

And 50
Hansard 1-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE Mr. GORDON.p4 to 10-6-2011 COMPLAINT INSPECTOR-RIKATI about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD st A 1 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, by fax 0011 -61-3-94577209 or E-mail INSPECTOR-RIKATI@schorel-hlavka.com See also www.schorel-hlavka.com

Once a law is passed anybody can say that it is being improperly administered, and it leaves open the whole judicial power once the question of ultra vires is raised. END QUOTE
.

Hansard 8-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE Mr. GLYNN.-I think they would, because it is fixed in the Constitution. There is no special court, but the general courts would undoubtedly protect the states. What Mr. Isaacs seeks to do is to prevent the question of ultra vires arising after a law has been passed.

10

[start page 2004] Mr. ISAACS.-No. If it is ultra vires of the Constitution it would, of course, be invalid. END QUOTE
.

15

What should now be considered is that all and any infringement payments so far extorted or otherwise obtained under terrorism must be refunded to the people concerned because where this legislation is ULTRA VIRES then so was any previous payments or other monies collected within those provisions.
.

20

Hansard 15-2-1898 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE Mr. HIGGINS.-With all respect, no. The Governor-General in Council, as the honorable member knows as well as any one, has to obey the law as well as every one else. Mr. SYMON.-But suppose the Governor-General in Council grants the bonus, and suppose its operation derogates from freedom of trade, then the Federal High Court will sit in judgment on an act of the Governor General in Council which involves a question of policy. Mr. HIGGINS.-Does not the honorable member recognise that even the legislation of the Federal Parliament is subject to the decision of the Federal High Court? Mr. SYMON.-But not a question of executive administrative policy.

25

30

Mr. HIGGINS.-The Federal High Court goes still further than that. It has the function of deciding whether the Acts of the Parliament are valid or not, and why should it not have the function of deciding whether the acts of the Ministry are valid or not? Mr. SYMON.-That was not the intention in determining the functions of the Federal High Court. Mr. HIGGINS.-Our British system is that every official under Her Majesty is amenable to the lawthat everybody is under the law.

35

Mr. SYMON.-But this is a question of Ministerial responsibility. Mr. HIGGINS.-Of course it is; but supposing the Ministry were to consent to a bonus or bounty which interfered with freedom of trade, then the Federal High Court could be asked to interfere, and it therefore has the ultimate decision of the matter. If the court decided against a bonus or bounty, I rather think that the money would have to be refunded.

40

END QUOTE
.

45

Again, it must be clear you cannot have a government unconstitutionally collecting monies by terrorism/extortion and then not to refund the same because then the constitution (the will of the People) will be worthless!
.

50

Hansard 1-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE Mr. WISE.-If the Federal Parliament chose to legislate upon, say, the education question-and the Constitution gives it no power to legislate in regard to that question-the Ministers for the time being in each state might say-"We are favorable to this law, because we shall get 100,000 a year, or so much a year, from p5 to 10-6-2011 COMPLAINT INSPECTOR-RIKATI about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD st A 1 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, by fax 0011 -61-3-94577209 or E-mail INSPECTOR-RIKATI@schorel-hlavka.com See also www.schorel-hlavka.com

the Federal Government as a subsidy for our schools," and thus they might wink at a violation of the Constitution , while no one could complain. If this is to be allowed, why should we have these elaborate provisions for the amendment of the Constitution? Why should we not say that the Constitution may be amended in any way that the Ministries of the several colonies may unanimously agree? Why have this provision for a referendum? Why consult the people at all? Why not leave this matter to the Ministers of the day? But the proposal has a more serious aspect, and for that reason only I will ask permission to occupy a few minutes in discussing it. END QUOTE
.

10

Within our democratic system a citizen is entitled to be INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY and no court could operate otherwise then enforce this legal principle. Article 11 of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights provides:
QUOTE "Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which she/he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence." END QUOTE

15

20

25

30

My fundamental rights, as that of any other citizen, is to have a judgement of a Court after it heard both parties, of an IMPARTIAL judicial decision and not one that is of the outlawed STAR CHAMBER COURT . Hence, we must never tolerate that any government can abuse and misuse its powers, regardless if so sanctioned by the parliament, to interfere with the impartiality of the judicial system It cannot be doubted that the material now provided to me by this FINAL WARNING clearly is what I deem a CONTEMPT OF COURT because it professes that the Courts now are to do as they are told by a Government Department, and to me this is a very serious matter. It undermines the integrity of the courts as we know them, to be courts of law. Purported laws that are ULTRA VIRES of the constitution obviously are not laws at all! . This has been in my view a conspiracy by various government officials to seek to terrorise me and so to extort from me monies upon the basis also that no matter my innocence the courts will be bound to follow what the government officials dictate and my innocence, or that of anyone else, no longer is an issue. Well, I got news for you because like hell will I permit you to undermine our constitutional rights! Our is as in We, the People!
.

35

The legal doctrine of ex turpi causa non oritur action denies any remedy to a litigant (including a prosecutor) who does not come to court with clean hands. If your own action is very unlawful and very unethical, if you come to court with Dirty Hands best not to question others legality, morality, and ethics!
.

40

The various penalty Notices have also caused considerable problems to my 78-year old wife because she fears what the courts may do not being directed by the government to perhaps wheel lock or otherwise impound our motor vehicle as she escaped from a communist regime to enjoy the LIBERTY and CIVIL RIGHTS in Australia only now to be subjected to the same or worse.
.

45

50

Hansard 1-2-1898 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National Australasian Convention), QUOTE Mr. OCONNER (New South Wales).Because, as has been said before, it is [start page 357] necessary not only that the administration of justice should be pure and above suspicion, but that it should be beyond the possibility of suspicion; END QUOTE
.

55

As set out above the material provided to me do make it very clear we no longer have any impartial judicial system but the courts are now like puppets on a stings to do what it is dictated by the Government officials.
p6 to 10-6-2011 COMPLAINT INSPECTOR-RIKATI about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD st A 1 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, by fax 0011 -61-3-94577209 or E-mail INSPECTOR-RIKATI@schorel-hlavka.com See also www.schorel-hlavka.com

How on earth indeed could any court enforce something that is in clear violation of the constitution where for example the constitution provided for the Federal parliament to legislate as to Section 51 (xv) weights and measures; (Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900 (UK) where the Commonwealth Parliament enacted legislation and the States therefore require to retire of the same? .
Hansard 21-1-1898 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE Mr. REID The object is this, that for some time to come it will not be possible for the Federal Legislature to pass laws on these subjects, and it is necessary to have some laws on them-the state laws if they exist-until federal laws are enacted; but the moment a federal law is passed on any one of these subjects, under the provision under the head of "States" the federal law prevails over the state law.

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

END QUOTE . Hansard 22-9-1897 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE The Hon. R.E. O'CONNOR (New South Wales)[3.18]: The moment the commonwealth exercises the power, the states must retire from that field of legislation. END QUOTE . Hansard 30-3-1897 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE Mr. REID: We must make it clear that the moment the Federal Parliament legislates on one of those points enumerated in clause 52, that instant the whole State law on the subject is dead. There cannot be two laws, one Federal and one State, on the same subject. But that I merely mention as almost a verbal criticism, because there is no doubt, whatever that the intention of the framers was not to propose any complication of the kind. END QUOTE . Hansard 30-3-1897 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE The Hon. R.E. O'CONNOR (New South Wales)[3.18]: We ought to be careful not to load the commonwealth with any more duties than are absolutely necessary. Although it is quite true that this power is permissive, you will always find that if once power is given to the commonwealth to legislate on a particular question, there will be continual pressure brought to bear on the commonwealth to exercise that power. The moment the commonwealth exercises the power, the states must retire from that field of legislation. END QUOTE . Hansard 2-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE Mr. OCONNOR.-Directly it is exercised it becomes an exclusive power , and there is no doubt that it will be exercised. END QUOTE
.

50

55

Therefore the speed measuring equipment that were used must conform to Federal laws and be tested in accordance to federal legislation and be approved as such. Where I then from onset challenged this in my 23 February 2011 correspondence and then purportedly fined for this as if I didnt respond then to me this is not only an utter disgrace but a conspiracy to pervert the course of JUSTICE to try to blackmail me and terrorise me to give up my constitutional rights and use extortion in the process to achieve this outcome to prevent me to stand up for my constitutional rights. . Well if this is your interpretation of Law & Order to be appropriately applied then let me tell you it may be your interpretation but it hold no value when it comes to the constitution as the
p7 to 10-6-2011 COMPLAINT INSPECTOR-RIKATI about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD st A 1 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, by fax 0011 -61-3-94577209 or E-mail INSPECTOR-RIKATI@schorel-hlavka.com See also www.schorel-hlavka.com

10

15

20

constitution doesnt belong to politicians, government department or even the courts as it belongs to We, the People. . Your kind of terrorism/extortion you can be assured upon isnt going to work upon me because I will not seel out my constitutional rights. As I have indicated so often in the past and as Author of books published in the INSPECTORRIKATI series on certain constitutional and other legal matters that we should have an OFFICE-OF-THE-GUARDIAN (Dont forget the hyphens!) that advises the court, the government, the People and the Parliament as to the true meaning and application of the constitution. . Obviously the FINAL WARNING document hasnt been just printed for me but must have been used against numerous citizens already and I have grave concerns in that regard that the courts already have been so to say turned into STAR CHAMBER COURTS rather then being courts where judicial decisions are med impartially of any government policy/dictatorship upon the evidence before it. . I can assure you that any prosecutor who were to get it in his/her head to bring me before the Courts may face I pursue CONTEMPT OF COURT against him/her for daring to pursue me in such deplorable circumstances to participate in conspiracy to pervert the course of JUSTICE.
.

25

30

35

40

45

We all are bound to respect the impartiality of the judiciary and we do not want to end up with a system where the government can use tyranny and extortion and blackmail to bring down citizens to their knees as the government manipulate the court system. The Government, as like any other party before the court has no greater standing then any other litigant. It is bound by the legal provisions that are applicable as to anyone else. It cannot make demands upon others not applicable to itself. The Courts are there specifically to be impartial adjudicators between warring parties be it if they are or are not part of the government. The Courts cannot tolerate any party in litigation or in a lead up to litigation to harass (STALK) another party as a way to give up its legal rights. Indeed, the courts are bound to ensure that if such conduct did eventuate in the lead up to litigation then it must throw out the case of the party that used such kind of conduct, as to do otherwise could undermine the integrity of the court. The courts never can sanction such kind of unconstitutional conduct by orders because the moment it would do so it would undermine its own authority, and acknowledge that the Government of the Day and so its officials dictate the court how to adjudicate and in what terms. Why indeed have judicial officers if they are merely to rubberstamp whatever government official demands/dictates? . In my view the proper course of action would have been that when a duly and proper authorised person did hold the view that I exceeded the speed limit then the matter should have been placed before the courts and then the so to say warring parties could have sorted it out before an INDEPENDENT arbitrator upon basis of law. No extortion/terrorism/blackmail is fitted in this kind of lawful litigation! . QUOTE
THIS INFRINGEMENT IS NOW OVERDUE AND WILL BE REFERRED TO COURT IF YOU FAIL TO PAY BY THE 15 JUN 2011.

50
.

IF REFERRED TO COURT THIS WILL ADD FURTHER COSTS TO THE OUSTANDING AMOUNT AND MAY LEAD TO AN ENFORCEMENT ORDER BEING ISSUED TO RECOVER THE OUSTANDING PENALTY COSTS.

END QUOTE
p8 to 10-6-2011 COMPLAINT INSPECTOR-RIKATI about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD st A 1 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, by fax 0011 -61-3-94577209 or E-mail INSPECTOR-RIKATI@schorel-hlavka.com See also www.schorel-hlavka.com

On the reverse side it states:


QUOTE DO NOT IGNORE THIS NOTICE

Your Infringement is still outstanding. If you do not pay this infringement by the due date the matter will be lodged with the court and the penalty will increase significantly due to court costs. If this infringement continues to remain unpaid, a warrant will be issued which may result in your personal property being seized and/or your vehicle being seized. If this infringement is not paid and sufficient property is not able to be seized you may be jailed. END QUOTE
.

10

The wording ADD FURTHER COSTS TO THE OUSTANDING AMOUNT, indicates that the Court is bound to enforce the alleged penalty and add further cost upon it. And the wording If you do not 15
pay this infringement by the due date the matter will be lodged with the court and the penalty will increase significantly due to court costs. also indicates that the Court has no option at all to dismiss the claim

20

but is bound to increase the cost so far demanded. .Excuse me, but from which planet did you come from as I for one do not accept that the Courts are bound to apply anything!
.

HANSARD 31-1-1898 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE Mr. WISE (New South Wales).-The only class of cases contemplated by this section are offences committed against the criminal law of the Federal Parliament, [start page 354] and the only cases to which Mr. Higgins' amendment would apply are those in which the criminal law of the state was in conflict with the criminal law of the Commonwealth; in any other cases there would be no necessity to change the venue, and select a jury of citizens of another state. Now, I do not know any power, whether in modern or in ancient times, which has given more just offence to the community than the power possessed by an Executive, always under Act of Parliament, to change the venue for the trial of criminal offences, and I do not at all view with the same apprehension that possesses the mind of the honorable member a state of affairs in which a jury of one state would refuse to convict a person indicted at the instance-of the Federal Executive. It might be that a law passed by the Federal Parliament was so counter to the popular feeling of a particular state, and so calculated to injure the interests of that state, that it would become the duty of every citizen to exercise his practical power of nullification of that law by refusing to convict persons of offences against it. That is a means by which the public obtains a very striking opportunity of manifesting its condemnation of a law, and a method which has never been known to fail, if the law itself was originally unjust. I think it is a measure of protection to the states and to the citizens of the states which should be preserved, and that the Federal Government should not have the power to interfere and prevent the citizens of a state adjudicating on the guilt or innocence of one of their fellow citizens conferred upon it by this Constitution. END QUOTE

25

30

35

40

45

50

In case you may not realise this it applies to State Courts and nullification can be applied by a judicial officer and/or jury. So, here we have you and so your department officers dictating to the courts it must increase the infringement notice cost that was already previously increased by allegedly no response, despite my extensive 23 February 2011 response and further correspondence, but in any event I t was my view that it is upon an IMPARTIAL judicial officer to determine upon the basis of the evidence presented to the court by either party as to what, if any, cost is to be ordered. I can assure you that any court order obtained to the contrary to what is constitutionally permissible will be of no LEGAL FORCE
Re Wakim; Ex parte McNally; Re Wakim; Ex parte Darvall; Re Brown; Ex parte Amann; Spi [1999] HCA 27 (17 June 1999) QUOTE For constitutional purposes, they are a nullity. No doctrine of res judicata or issue estoppel can prevail against the Constitution. Mr Gould is entitled to disregard the orders made in Gould v Brown . No doubt, as Latham CJ said of invalid legislation, "he will feel safer if he has a decision of a court in his favour". That is because those relying on the earlier decision may seek to enforce it against Mr Gould. END QUOTE p9 to 10-6-2011 COMPLAINT INSPECTOR-RIKATI about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD st A 1 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, by fax 0011 -61-3-94577209 or E-mail INSPECTOR-RIKATI@schorel-hlavka.com See also www.schorel-hlavka.com

55

Therefore if the government turns courts into some STAR CHAMBER COURT then so be it but I can assure you it will have no validity in any orders it issues. And let it be known I will defend my constitutional rights. Your government and its officers may for long have gotten away with this modus operandi of terrorism upon citizens but it is well overdue this is stopped.
.

10

QUOTE Sorell v Smith (1925) Lord Dunedin in the House of Lords In an action against a set person in combination, a conspiracy to injure, followed by actual injury, will give good cause for action, and motive or instant where the act itself is not illegal is of the essence of the conspiracy . END QUOTE
.

15

20

Obviously, where there is more then one person involved to issue the infringement notices and litigate against me then this constitutes a conspiracy regardless if the persons involved may not actually utter a single word as it is their conduct that is relevant. And as shown above officials who participate in this elaborate scam to undermine citizens their rights, etc, will be able to be sued in their own rights without any protection of their office they hold! How can one section of the police, supposing crime fighters well that is against ordinary citizens, tolerate another part to be involved in extortion, terrorism and blackmail of the kind set out above one may well ask? Is the Police above the RULE OF LAW?
.

25

30

35

40

As for any consideration to cancel the infringement notice and claim it no longer applies, this will not remove the extortion/terrorism/blackmail perpetrated upon me because after all the attempts to extort monies from me in itself in my view is already constituting criminal offences. The wording ADD FURTHER COSTS TO THE OUSTANDING AMOUNT, indicates to me that regardless of the Infringement notice being withdrawn the Court will nevertheless still use this amount shown on the Infringement Notice as add cost to it. Well, doesnt this show that this is not about impartial court adjudication, upon the evidence presented before the court but a concocted judicial process that is to apply the infringement cost no matter what and add further cost to it! And you call this Law & Order ? Well I might have been an alien from The Netherlands who had no formal training in the usage of the English language but I can assure you Law & Order has no such meaning as to constitute dictatorship, terrorism, blackmail, etc. Just move to a country where it might be permissible but do not try to use it in the State of Victoria. As Dixon CJ made clear that if lawyers didnt keep abreast of legal issues then an alien from outer space may prove to do better. Have you ever considered getting some proper advice of those who really understand and comprehend the constitution rather then those who might have so to say have been given their law degree for free with a packet of margarine? I urge you to immediately take action to stop the rot (referred to above), and well you may just do better to seek my assistance to address these and other unconstitutional issues.
.

MAY JUSTICE ALWAYS PREVAIL


.

45
.

Our name is our motto!)


G. H. Schorel-Hlavka

Awaiting your response,

p10 to 10-6-2011 COMPLAINT INSPECTOR-RIKATI about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD st A 1 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, by fax 0011 -61-3-94577209 or E-mail INSPECTOR-RIKATI@schorel-hlavka.com See also www.schorel-hlavka.com