H J AMES J OHNSON

HUMAN RIGHTS § CIVIL RIGHTS § CORRUPTION § MEDIA

D EFA M AT I O N § P R O F E S S I O N A L N E G L I G E N C E L AW
1 S T F L O O R 1 4 1 O S B O R N E S T R E E T S O U T H YA R R A V I C T O R I A 3 1 4 1
TELEPHONE: +613 9279 3932 FA C S I M I L E : + 6 1 3 9 2 7 9 3 9 5 5

Friday 13 November 2009 *** IMPORTANT COMMUNICATION

Mr Bevan Werner
Managing Director
Victoria Legal Aid
GPO Box 4380
Melbourne Victoria 3001

By Facsimile: 9269 0250 (... pages)

Dear Mr Werner

VICTORIAN SUPREME COURT PROCEEDINGS 9665 OF 2007, 9263 AND 10222 OF 2008 AND 3731 AND
3766 OF 2009 : FOUR SEPARATE APPLICATIONS FOR LEGAL AID FUNDING

1. I refer to my two facsimiles of Tuesday of this week underscoring the public interest (and indeed the interest
of the Federal Government (communicated via the Hon Robert McLelland) and the Federal Opposition
(communicated via the Hon Malcolm Turnbull) in Victoria Legal Aid granting my four (at present) separate
legal aid funding applications.
2. I also refer to my first facsimile to you earlier today attaching another bundle of correspondences of 10 and
11 November 2009 further underscoring the overwhelming global, national, state and municipal public
interest grounds for Victoria Legal Aid to provide funds for all aspects of these proceedings.
3. I also refer to my second facsimile to you earlier today attaching a further set of materials further
underscoring (this time from the UK media and legal publishing sources) the overwhelming global, nationa,
state and municipa public interest grounds for Victoria Legal Aid to provide funds for all aspects of these
proceedings. one simple link on the world wide web namely http://www.thecustodyminefield.com/17.html.
4. I also refer to my third facsimile to you earlier today atatching a further set of information on the
unconstititonal family law court processes (as have spilled over into the state property courts) which, in
reversing the golden thred of 'innocence until proven guilty' and (as I have informed you in my case, which
is not an isolated example) perverted the defendant's right to a defence against false allegations into a mere
trifle of a privilege which the court (in my case a Supreme Court) can snuff out if it chooses on yet more
false and fanciful allegations.
5. Here I attach a fourth set of materials, this time from the Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly. You
can read this directly at hhtp://www.stopinjusticenow.com/News_0715.htm . Very simply, at least in the UK
 they are no longer in denial of the injustice being done in the UK family courts and property courts. Your
agency, and your State and Federal governments can no longer pretend plausible denial either.
6. The Text of the Parliamentary Assembly Motion of the Council of Europe reads:

“The Parliamentary Assembly recognises that human rights are

part of the Council of Europe’s key values. It recognises that
systems are needed for the protection of children when they are at
risk. The Assembly believes, however, that those who are tasked
with protecting children need to be accountable for their actions
and need to operate in a way which protects the human rights of
those people they are dealing with

The Assembly notes that there is substantial concern that the

secrecy of the Family Division of Courts in England and Wales
has caused the development of an environment in which
practitioners are not properly accountable. It notes that a
number of people have emigrated from England because they feel
persecuted by the authorities tasked with Child Protection.

The Assembly particularly notes the use of Section 54.4 of the

1999 Access to Justice Act by the Court of Appeal in England
which is preventing cases being considered by the Supreme Court
in England and the way in which this acts to undermine the rule
of law allowing the Family Division of Courts to operate in
isolation from the wider body of law.

The Assembly recognises that questions have been raised as to

whether the judicial proceedings in England’s Family Courts are
compliant with Article 6 of the European Convention on Human
Rights (the Right to a Fair Trial).
 The Assembly also recognises that questions have been raised as
to whether the system is also systematically uncompliant with
Articles 3, 8, 10, 11 and 12.

The Assembly suggests that the relevant committee of the

Assembly starts an examination of the system to which concerned
parties can submit evidence of Human Rights abuses in England
and Wales.”

7. The situation in England and Wales is just like it is in Victoria and every other State of Australia. Save that in
Europe (note the number of EEC delegates from non Anglo-WASP backgrounds since this is surely
significant) and the UK they are now no longer pretending and denying the injustice that goes on in the
family courts and the property courts.
8. It is absolutely in the public interests that these proceedings be funded and properly argued, so that basic
legal and human rights are reestablished in this municipality, state and nation and (hopefully by osmosis of
ideas and values) globally too.
9. For the fourth time today, I remind you that you, your agency and your so-called 'iindependent reviewer' are
on clear uncontrovertible notice that your agency (and erstwhile 'independent reviewer' have zero prospects
of mounting any plausible denial of public interest.
10. In the face of all of this 'overwhelming' I look forward to receiving four approvals of four llegal aid funding
within the first couple of days of next week.
11. Some of these four applications have been with you for some 9 months now. Another 9 days delays
are totally inexcusible and will have forseen unfortunate legal consequences for you personally,
your Agency and your Government under these human rights laws and other laws that I have been
patiently educating you about for these 9 months or more.

Regards

JAMES JOHNSON