COV ECC ‘TOP SECRET apm Us top at\ Zuo foley bleh Nie eT: eB f ns cs = Ey 2 THOMAS ee apie) aeCOSMIC TOP SECRET THE FINAL COUNTDOWN DIGITAL EDITION THOMAS ANDERSON BOOK 8 NOTE: This digital version of the original book contains a unique pixel-matrix code within certain images to identify the purchaser, in the event of unauthorised filesharing.“Every man is independent of all laws except those prescribed by nature. He is not bound by any institutions formed by his fellow men without his consent.” Cruden v Neale "The root principle of the English law about jurisdiction is that the judges stand in the place of the Sovereign in whose name they administer justice, and that therefore whoever is served with the King's writ, and can be compelled consequently to submit to the decree made, is a person over whom the Courts have jurisdiction" Mobil Oil Australia Pty Ltd v Victoria [2002] HCA 27 “When justice is gone, there’s always force.” Laurie Anderson (Oh Superman) “The Laws of Nature are absolute and unchangeable. Everything else is foreign. They are merely the policies of private corporations and their controllers that I do not consent to.” Thomas Anderson (The Classified Files)INDEX 5. INTRODUCTION 10. THE COMING GLOBAL DEPRESSION 13. COLONIAL SLAVE OR FREEMAN 15. THE CROWN CORPORATION 26. OBEDIENT SERVANTS 29, WHAT STATE ARE YOU IN? 32. MICRO NATIONS 33, CORONATION CONTROVERSY 37. LETTER TO THE GOVERNOR GENERAL, 38, LETTER FROM WESTMINSTER ABBEY 42, REGISTRATION INVESTIGATION 43. KINGS BENCH 45. ORDER OF THE GARTER 47. KNIGHTS TEMPLAR AND THE BANKING SYSTEM 50. SECURITISATION 101 - STEP BY STEP GUIDE 62. BANK CLASS ACTIONS AND THE IMF 65. IS PPSR THE NEW UCC? 66. ABS AND CENSUS AUTHORITY 72. BIRTH CERTIFICATES VS MEDICARE, 75. OSWALD REVISITED 79. CLOUDBUSTING 90. ZION AND THE OLYMPIC DEVIL MASCOT 92. COSMIC TOP SECRET 99. 2012 - THE FINAL COUNTDOWN 100. THE MYSTERY OF PUMA PUNKU. 107: THE END 108. MAIL CERTIFICATION LETTER 109. BUMPER STICKERS AND T-SHIRTSDoes this look familiar to you? If so, then it’s time we all did something about this situation, however small the contribution is to the bigger picture of dissolving this reality and consciously creating an abundant world without wars, violence, oppression and control by the few over the many. This series of books came about because I could no longer sit back and say nothing. As a result, I had to take action, and this information has now reached thousands of people worldwide. Now it’s your turn, Please let your friends and family know what's really going on, because the more people that realise, the less control they have. Stop supporting this capitalist system. 4INTRODUCTION So here we are finally in 2012. It feels to me exactly like the image above, as though we are all standing on top of this structure wondering what to do, and what comes next. Of course there are many theories, however before we start, let me first ask you if you know how and why you came to be reading these words? There must have been a logical progression of events or triggers in your life that have brought you to this point in time. These are not random things, they have a deeper connectivity that runs parallel to our everyday superficial existence. Here I am typing these words into my computer, yet at the same relative time, you are reading them. As I keep typing, you can see that we are simultaneously experiencing them, although apparently separated by the notion of time. So I guess | had better keep typing so that you can continue reading, otherwise we might have a time-space continuum dilemma on our hands similar to The Philadelphia Experiment. Now, | really must apologise profusely for the delay in completing and releasing this final book in the series. Many of you requested it as far back as April 2011. There is of, course a good reason for this, however as you now know, there really is no such thing as time, only your perception of it.This past year has been chaotic to say the least, and we have seen some very interesting and important dates, events and catastrophes occur, perhaps more than | have experienced during my entire life on this planet. There was the Japanese earthquake, tsunami and nuclear meltdowns, the 11:11:11 convergence, the October 28 Mayan End date (predicted by lan Xel Lungold), the Euro crisis, US Debt Ceiling, the 10" Anniversary of 9/11, Comet Elenin passing, and so many more important things going on that I have lost track of them all. In fact most people I talk to agree that 2011 flashed by in the wink of an eye, and [ admit | feel as though | got very little done. That of course is perception, but we have all been weighed down by the incredible build-up of energetic tension and unsettled feelings, which have been fuelled by uprisings of all kinds around the world. Greece has been leading the way with it’s riots and protests which is sending a clear message to the powers that be, that people power is a formidable force. It seems that consciousness has finally reached a point of critical mass and everyone is. talking about revolution and overthrowing corrupt governments. It has become obvious that we do not need wars to have freedom, but the war machine which is run by so few, and has it's own agenda's, has to be dismantled first. Have you also felt overwhelmed by all of this? For a very long time I considered the right moment to release this book, and I have waited until now simply because | believe 2012 is going to be one hell of a year in many ways. This year of course is the Solar Maximum, which alone could bring about many problems such as communications shutdown or other disasters. ‘The most important thing though, is that 2012 is the widely predicted end time of the Mayan Calendar, which I have dedicated a chapter to in this book. It’s possible we could see a collapse of the Euro, triggering a global recession or depression, plus we have the Queen's Diamond Jubillee, The 2012 Zion Olympics, and I feel more earthquakes, uprisings and massive shifting of energy will occur. The stage is also being set right now for armed conflict in Iran, and the US has already sent (among others) a 50 year old warship, the USS ENTERPRISE (no, not the Star Trek one) which was the world's first nuclear-powered aircraft carrier. It’s history dates back to the Cuban missile crisis in 1962 and the Vietnam War.It appears another false flag event such as the Mossad controlled Trade Centre demolition is about to be played out before our eyes. It remains to be seen whether this ship will be conveniently destroyed, and used as the catalyst for the US to declare war on Iran, Who do you think would benefit from that operation? Israel and Saudi Arabia. Those countries have deep connections and control over the US, and I'm sure they would love to see the US attacking their enemies. All they need is the justification to declare war and to sway public opinion through controlled media propaganda, Remember that most wars are about control of resources such as Oil, and the Strait of Hormuz is where one-fifth of the world’s oil shipments pass through. For all these reasons, 2012 is looking to be one of the most important years in recent history, so buckle up, as it could be a bumpy ride. But let’s rewind a moment and I'l! fill you in a bit more about how you and I came to be sharing this experience and knowledge. After all, this is not my real job, I was just compelled to share this info at this time. Back in 1995 I used to attend a small group of awareness seekers. We often had guest speakers, or just sat around and watched the latest videos available on alternative topics (such as Linda Thompson's America Under Siege) and discussed many and varied things, everything from HAARP to Fluoride, and from Hartwig’s Chinese Pyramids to Aliens and UFO's. Everything was open for discussion. I remember 2012 seemed such a long way away back then...home computers and the Internet were still in their early stages and Lady Di was still alive. In 1994 I had bought myself a Home Computer, which was a DX266 with 4mb of RAM (which I upgraded to 8mb for an extra $400). It was running DOS and Windows 3.11, and had a 256mb Hard Drive. | bought a 14,400 modem (which was the top dialup speed back then) for about $250 from Harvey Norman and entered a whole new world.By 1996 | had studied so many books on Internet security and protocols, and downloaded and played around with lots of software and warez including the infamous war diallers (which are named after the movie War Games). A wardialler is essentially a custom made computer program, which keeps dialling numbers in a specified area code to check for carrier signals. In the old days of dial up modems, you had to connect to a computer directly via a phone line, as there were no wireless networks. Even mobiles (cell phones) were relatively new, and of course, still on the analogue network. I recall the dealer telling me at the time they were about to bring in the digital network, that "you'll probably have a headache for a week or two until you get used to it’, and | thought to myself..this is obviously no good for anyone. | had already been plastering anti-EMF posters all over the place since 1996 saying “stop cooking your brain”, but this made me even more committed to not using them. To this day, since the digital phones were introduced in 2000, | still get a headache after about 30 seconds of use, and my head hurts for some time afterwards, That's why imit my calls to one minute, and only use the damn thing if really have to. It was also in 1995 that I was heavily into HAARP research, and during one of those experiments with war diallers, | happened upon a certain military computer system related to the project and decided to make a contribution to their files. I was able to log in without any password, and create a new directory on their system, where | uploaded all my research on the subject. You can hardly call it hacking, More like automated stupidity really when | think about it It was an open modem line that was easily accessible at the time with no firewall and no security. So yes, times have changed and that mystical far away date of 2012 has somehow snuck up on us and we are now about to see what the fuss is all about. Perhaps we will finally find out exactly why John F. Kennedy had the number 26000 painted on the tail of Air Force One, and if the legends of floods and global cataclysms are based on factual, cyclical, and predictable earth changes or not. I'd like to take this opportunity to thank all of you who have supported my research and read all of my previous books. We have sent literally thousands of copies worldwide to almost every country over the past three years, and they have inspired many groups, movements, researchers and individuals to take control of their lives and do something. In this final book I wanted to explore some of the areas I haven't touched on before, and give you as much information as | can that | think is the most relevant for what you need to know now. Many of you still have Bank issues and are struggling with court cases, but I fee! all of this will come to a head as the Banking System falls apart, and it’s very roots are shaken by the exposure of it's fraudulent ponzi schemes. To assist those people, I have included a step-by-step guide on how to do your own Securitisation investigations, and where to look for those elusive Trust documents. I am honoured that some of my illustrations and phraseology have been featured videos and lectures by John Harris and was very exited to learn that my research helped inspire the very clever "Meet your Strawman” animation which you can find on Youtube. There is also a direct link to it on our official website. 8Ne oul - STRAWMAN Recently I sent Jordon Maxwell a complete set, and he very kindly recommended them to one of his friends, which was very encouraging, For that and alll that has transpired, | am eternally grateful. After all, the messages in this book are not mine to claim ownership of. They are everywhere right now in the subconscious and conscious minds of men and women around the world who want to see an end to control and oppression, and live in peace and abundance. | wish you well, and hope that you will do whatever it is you feel you need to do this year to ensure your family’s safety and survival no matter what happens. Best Thomas AndersonTHE COMING GLOBAL DEPRESSION ; trates Australian share market tumbles after RBA rat decision ares plummet,in bear market after US downgrade + y Japan Futures, Australi Reacts ia Shares Fall on Japanese Stock Futures, Australia Shares Rise on Recovery Hopes Japan Stock’ Futures, Australia Shares Rise on Europe Progress;~ Australian sifaremarket dives after Wall pStreat tumbles on recession fears Asia stocks tumble on euro zone downgrades; Nikkei drops 1.4% Japanese Futures, Australia Shares Fall ‘on Europe Debt Concern Australian.shares sink ahead of US data Shares rise. as Europe fears recede Renewed Europe fears weigh on stocks Japanese Stock Futures Climb on Europe Debt Talks, Australian Shares Rise You might be wondering what happened to the big financial collapse that we have all been expecting and many like Gerard Celente, predicting for the past three years? Ihave been advising people since 2009 to close their accounts, get all their money out of the banks and buy gold and silver. We bought gold at just over $1000 an ounce and Silver at $630 a Kilo ($16 an ounce). Many people laughed when I said Gold would hit $2000+, but recently we saw it peak over $1900. That threat has not gone away, rather is has only been delayed somewhat by two massive attempts at propping up the market to try and prevent the inevitable collapse. 10QE1 and QE2 refer to Quantative Easing. A fancy term for printing trillions in flat money backed by nothing, having no effect other than inflating the already enormous balloon market that is soon likely to pop. Again, nothing happens, except by design. Looking back at what occurred in the lead up to the Stock Market Crash of 1929, margin requirements were only 10%. Brokerage firms, in other words, would lend $9 for every $1 an investor had deposited. When the market fell, brokers called in these loans, which could not be paid back. Banks began to fail as debtors defaulted and depositors attempted to withdraw their deposits en masse, triggering multiple bank runs. Government guarantees and Federal Reserve banking regulations to prevent such panics turned out to be ineffective or not used. Bank failures led to the loss of billions of dollars in assets. In 1933 the United States declared bankruptcy, as expressed in Roosevelt's Executive Orders 6073, 6102, 6111, and 6260. (NB: Corporations can continue operating even though they are bankrupt, as long as enough interest payments are made to satisfy the creditors) If the creditors deem it to be in their best interests, they allow operations to continue during the bankruptcy reorganisation. Under the Federal Reserve System, the Compound Interest Rate meant that government debt would grow exponentially. The amount of dollars in circulation was greater than the amount of physical gold in the US treasury, which guarantees an eventual default. Countries all around the world are now on the precipice of falling headfirst into this vast debt cavern that is opening up under their feet. When that happens, the whole world will change forever. qtExecutive Order Of April 5, 1933 UNDER EXECUTIVE ORDER OF PRESIDENT Issued April 5, 1933 All persons are required to deliver ON OR BEFORE MAY 1, 1933 all GOLD COIN, GOLD BULLION, AND GOLD CERTIFICATES ‘ow owned by them to a Federal Reserve Bank, branch or agency, or to any member bank of the Federal Reserve System. EXECUTIVE ORDER FORBIDDING THE HOARDING OF GOLD COIN, GOLD BULLION, AND GOLD CERTIFICATES By virtue of the authorty vested in me by Section 5(b) of the Act of October 6, 1917 as. ‘amended by Section 2 of the Act of March 9, 1933, entitled "An Act to Provide Relist in the Existing Emergency in Banking, and for other purposes" in which Amendatory Act Congress. declared that a serious emergency crises, |, Frankiin D. Roosevelt, President of the United States of America, do declare that said national emergency stil continues to exist, and pursuant to said Section do hereby prohibit the hoarding of gold coin, gold bullion, and gold certificates within the continental United States by individuals, partnerships, associations and corporations, and hereby prescribe the following regulations for carrying out the purposes of this Order. ‘Section 1. For the purposes of this reguiation the term “hoarding” means the withdrawal ‘and withholding of gold coin, gold bullion or gold certificates from the recognized and customary channels of trade. The term "person’ means any individual, partnership, association or corporation. Section 2, All persons are hereby required to deliver on or before May 1, 1933, to a Federal Reserve Bank or branch or agency thereof or to any member bank of the Federal Reserve System all gold coins, gold bullion or gold certificates now owned by them or coming, into their ownership on or before April 23, 1893, except the following: (a) Such amount of gold as may be requited for legitimate and customary use in industry, professions, or art within a reasonable time, excluding gold prior to refining and stocks of gold in reasonable amounts for the usual true requirements of owners mining and refining such gold. (b) Gold coins and gold certificates in an amount not exceeding in the aggregate $100 belonging to any one person; and gold coin having a recognized special value to collectors or rare and unusual coins. (6) Gold coin and bullion earmarked or held in trust for a recognized foreign government (or foreign central bank or the Bank for International Settlements) (@) Gold coin and bullion licensed for other proper transactions (not involving hoarding) including gold coin and bullion imported for re-export or held pending action on pplication for export licenses. Back then, people didn’t immediately demand to exchange their dollars for gold, simply because they didn't understand that they had been cheated. It wasn't obvious until the banking crisis in 1933. Could this be a possible scenario again when the financial system collapses? You would have to be insane to hand over your gold or silver to the International Bankers if it did. Let their system collapse, as it deserves to. We can create a new system based on a fair day's wage for a fair day's work, without taxation or rates or oppressive man-made policies. At the moment we have seen a five percent drop in the property market in Australia over 2011, but | feel that needs to drop at least another forty five percent to get back to a more realistic and affordable level, 1 think the housing sector is in for a big shock soon, but let's take a look at how we got here first. 12COLONIAL SLAVE OR FREEMAN 13The word Colony comes from the Latin word coldnia, which in turn is derived from the word coldnus. Now, we all know that Australia was originally a Penal colony, but I was interested in finding out the meaning and origin of the term. A colonus was apparently a type of Roman peasant farmer, and this term was carried into the Medieval period through much of Europe. Coloni worked on large Roman estates called "latifundia" and were never allowed to leave them. The coloni raised sheep and other types of cattle as well as farming the land, They paid rent to the owner of the latifundium, which usually consisted of a portion of their harvest, labor, or money. This tied the peasants to the land, and reduced them to a serf-likes status. Although technically still free, Coloni could be hunted or flogged if they left the latifundium, therefore they were still obviously in a servant-master relationship. Increasing numbers of people were forced to become coloni due to the decreasing number of slaves to support the economy because of Rome's apparent failure to win battles. All those original terms are still in use today, such as rent, tenant, penalty, colonial, ete and we use them without any real knowledge of their meaning. This is one of the problems with the legal language and government policy we have today, in that the words they use have a specific meaning within the system, yet we are led to believe they are not worth paying much attention to. It is a common case of blind acceptance, which is a bit like not reading the fine print on a contract. Do so at your own risk. 14THE CROWN CORPORATION COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA (0000805157) SIC: 8880 - American Depositary Receipts State location: DC | Fiscal Year End: 0630 Business Address 1601 MASSACHUSETTS AVE NW C/O AUSTRALIAN EMBASSY WASHINGTON DC 20036 “Ratings agency Fitch Rating has upgraded the state of New South Wales’ long- term foreign currency rating to AAA. The move by Fitch lifts NSW's credit rating ‘from AA+ to AAA and comes after state was placed on the rating watch positive. The upgrade also sees NSW's outlook lifted to stable, affirms all of the state's other ratings, Fitch said in a statement. Fitch said the upgrade of NSW's long-term foreign currency rating reflected Australia's rating upgrade.” At the same time, the ratings also reflect NSW's stable and diversified economy, adequate operating margins in relation to its responsibilities, strong liquidity as well as the support provided by the Commonwealth funding system,” the agency said in a statement. The Crown is treated as a legal person, capable of owning property and subject to other rights and liabi This term is not taken to refer to the monarch personally, but rather to refer to individuals and institutions exercising the executive functions of government. In its broadest sense it can encompass the whole system of government, that is, the executive, legislative and judicial arms. However, when referred to in legislation, ‘the Crown’ is usually understood only to refer to the executive arm of government. Australia is also a Federal Monarchy. ‘The Queen or her representative forms part of each Australian Parliament, the Queen or her representative assents to legislation, law courts administer justice in the name of the Queen and the Queen or her representative is the formal head of both. The Australian Constitution does not include a Bill of Rights. The Statute is of historical importance because it legally made the dominions independent countries, either immediately or upon ratification. The residual constitutional powers retained by the Westminster parliament have now largely been superseded by subsequent legislation. 15Queen Elizabeth II signs the Proclamation of the Australia Act on 2 March 1986 at Government House, Canberra, with David Reid, Secretary to the Executive Council (left) and Prime Minister Bob Hawke, ‘The Crown is a corporation sole that, in the Commonwealth realms and any provincial or state sub-divisions thereof, represents the legal embodiment of governance, whether executive, legislative or judicial. The Crown in each of the Commonwealth realms is a similar but separate legal concept and entity. You and I are considered the collateral or “stock” that the corporation owns and controls. 16BASE PROSPECTUS (replacing the Base Prospects dated Sth July, 2006) 20th December, 2006 orp New South Wales Treasury Corporation A$15,000,000,000 Global Exchangeable Bond Programme for the issue of guaranteed global exchangeable bonds exchangeable into ‘New South Wales Treasury Corporation Inscribed Stock. payment of principal and interest guaranteed by The Crown in Right of New South Wales Arranged by UBS Investment Bank Panel Members ABN AMRO and New Zealand Banking Group Limited Commonwealth Bank of Australia ‘Macquarie Bank Limited RBC Capital Markets UBS Investment Bank Austr ABN AMRO Incorporated Citigroup Deutsche Bank National Australia Bank Limited TD Securities ‘Westpac Banking Corporation 17The Australian Government, on it's own website, describes the legal status of the country as follows: “Australia became an independent nation on 1 January 1901. The British Parliament passed legislation allowing the six Australian colonies to govern in their own right as part of the Commonwealth of Australia. The Commonwealth of Australia was established as @ constitutional monarchy. ‘Constitutional’ because the Commonwealth of Australia was established with a written constitution, and ‘monarchy’ because Australia's head of state was Queen Victoria.” “The Australian Constitution is the most important document in Australian government history. It established the Commonwealth Government (now known as the Australian Government), defined its structure, powers and procedures, and defined the rights and obligations of the states in relation to the Commonwealth.” “The Constitution was brought into existence through a British Act of Parliament, the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act. This Act granted permission to the six Australian colonies, which were still then subject to British law, to form their own Commonwealth government in accordance with the Constitution. The text of the Constitution (which was clause 9 of the Act) was written by representatives of the six colonies during a series of conventions in the 1890s, and accepted by a referendum in each colony.” “Under the Constitution, the reigning British monarch is also the Australian monarch, and therefore Australia’s head of state. The Constitution grants the monarch - currently Queen Elizabeth II - certain governing powers that place them above all other levels of the government. Because of the large distance between Australia and Britain, the monarch is permitted to appoint a Governor-General who can exercise the monarch's powers in their absence.” 18A page from the journal of Captain James Cook in which he states: “In the Name of His Majesty King George the Third, I now took possession of the whole Eastern Coast, by the name of New South Wales”. Cook wrongly declared the land to be unoccupied even though he had seen several people. 19Sir William Blackstone once wrote that “the rights to territory of hunter-gatherers or herders lasted only while they were physically present on the land”. The first person to use the land “acquired therein a kind of transient property, that lasted so long as he was using it, and no longer or, to speak with greater precision, the right of possession continued the same time only that the act of possession lasted.” The ground was common, and no part of it was the permanent property of any man in particular; yet whosoever was in the occupation of any determined spot of it, for rest, for shade, acquired for the time a sort of ownership, from which it would have been unjust and contrary to the law of nature to have driven him by force. The moment that he ceased the use or occupation of it however, another might seize it without injustice. In an 1845 decision of the Supreme Court of New South Wales, Chief Justice Stephen was in no doubt that the Crown owned all the lands in the colony, under the feudal system of tenure. While the doctrine was accepted to be something of a legal fiction in England itself, it was different in a settled colony such as New South Wales because as stated by the Attorney-General (NSW) v Brown (1847) 1 Legge 312), “There is no other proprietor of such lands.” Australian law was founded on the economically convenient concept of “Terra Nullius’, that is, on the fiction that Australia was unoccupied at the time of colonisation. This obviously false legal basis and the injustice that stemmed from it, has been challenged from the very earliest days of colonisation by the Aboriginals. Remember I discussed in my earlier books that the prefix “Ab” means “not”. So whoever created that term, obviously wanted to portray the indigenous people as “not originat”. Very clever. On the 3rd of June, 1992, after a decade of litigation, the High Court ruled that the land title of the Indigenous Peoples, the Aborigines and Torres Strait Islanders, is recognised at common law. This Indigenous Peoples’ land title, or native title, stems from the continuation within common law of their rights over land which pre-dates European colonisation of Australia, In the absence of an effective extinguishment by the crown, this title presents through inheritance the original occupants right to possession of their traditional lands in accordance with their customs and lores. The judgement rejected the "Terra Nullius" legal fiction. Aboriginal ownership of land has also been recognised by International Law, to which Britain is a party from before its colonisation of Australia. In spite of the British recognition of Aboriginal land ownership, the colonists in Australia managed to officially disregard such recognition, The following sections are taken from Joosse & ANOR v Australian Securities and Investment Commission M35/1998 (15 December 1998) and shows the way the courts apply whatever meaning they feel is necessary to protect the system. Keep in mind the statement made on the previous page. Remember, these are man-made laws. “It is necessary to note the distinction between sovereignty in international law and sovereignty in the sense described by Hart as "the supreme legislative authority recognised in this system" (Hart, The Concept of Law, (1961) at 218.) 20For present purposes, what is critical is: what is the extent of the supreme legislative authority recognised in this system and what are the rules for recognising what are its valid laws? ( Hart, The Concept of Law, (1961) at 97-120) When one examines the history of Australia since 1788 it is possible to identify the emergence of what is now a sovereign and independent nation. Opinions will differ about when sovereignty or independence was attained. (China Ocean Shipping Co v South Australia (1979) 145 CLR 172 at 181 per Barwick C), 194 per Gibbs |, 208-214 per Stephen , 240 per Aickin J; Nolan v Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs (1988) 165 CLR 178 at 184 per Mason Cj, Wilson, Brennan, Deane, Dawson and Toohey JJ, 192- 192 per Gaudron J.) Some steps along that way are of particular importance, not least the people of the colonies agreeing "to unite in one indissoluble Federal Commonwealth under the Crown of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland and under the Constitution’. (Constitution - Preamble) But when it is said that Australia is now a "sovereign and independent nation" the statement is in part a statement about politics and in part about what Stephen J in China Ocean Shipping Co v South Australia (1979) 145 CLR 172 at 209 called "the realities of the relationship this century between the United Kingdom and Australia’. What those realities were in 1900 can be gauged from the fact that the delegates negotiating with the Imperial authorities in 1900 about the terms in which the Imperial Parliament was to enact the Constitution were well content to seek to persuade the Colonial Office that "the Commonwealth appears to the Delegates to be clearly a ‘Colony (Quick and Garran, Annotated Constitution of the Australian Commonwealth, (1901) at 352.) As the century moved on, further attention was given to the place of Imperial legislation in the self-governing dominions. The Imperial Parliament enacted the Statute of Westminster in 1931 but it was not until 1942 that the Commonwealth Parliament enacted legislation adopting the Statute of Westminster (Statute of Westminster Adoption Act (Cth)). And then in 1986 the Australia Acts were passed. All these Acts deal with the place of Imperial legislation in Australia. Each can be seen as reflecting the then current view of the relationship between Australia and the United Kingdom. In large part, then, each deals with an aspect of political sovereignty. Similarly, the way in which Australia has engaged in international dealings can be seen to have changed since federation. And it may be that the Treaty of Versailles or some other international instrument can be seen as according Australia a place in international dealings which it may not have had before the instrument was signed. But what is significant for the disposition of the present applications is not whether the Westminster Parliament could now, or at some earlier time might have been expected to, pass legislation having effect in Australia, Neither is it whether Australia is treated by the international community as having a particular status. The immediate question is what law is to be applied in the courts of Australia. The former questions about the likelihood of Imperial legislation and of international status can be seen as reflecting on whether Australia is an independent and sovereign nation. But they do so in two ways: whether some other polity can or would seek to legislate for this country and whether Australia is treated internationally as having the attributes of sovereignty. 21Those are not questions that intrude upon the immediate issue of the administration of Justice according to law in the courts of Australia. in particular, they do not intrude upon the question of what law is to be applied by the courts. That question is resolved by covering cl 5 of the Constitution. It provides: "This Act, and all laws made by the Parliament of the Commonwealth under the Constitution, shall be binding on the courts, judges, and people of every State and of every part of the Commonwealth, notwithstanding anything in the laws of any State’. Itis, then, to the Constitution and to laws made by the Parliament of the Commonwealth under the Constitution that the courts must look. And necessarily, of course, that will include laws made by the States whose Constitutions are continued, the powers of whose parliaments are continued, and the existing laws of which were continued (subject, in each case, of course, to the Constitution) hy ss 106, 107 and 108 of the Constitution. It is not relevant to the enquiry required by covering cl 5 to enquire how Australia has been treated by other nations in its dealings with them or to enquire whether the But, again, it turns on what is meant by "sovereignty" in this context and there is a deal of writing, One begins from Hart, one goes through Wade's absolutely seminal piece in 1955 Cambridge Law Journal, Winterton has written on it, and what emerges with stark clarity is that the word “sovereignty” is bandied about by many lawyers without understanding the context in which it is being used. Sovereignty in international law is one thing. But the question we are concerned with, at least at the moment, it seems to me, is not a question of Australia's international status; it is concerned with what laws bind within Australia. The attack that is made, as 1 understand it, in each of these applications is an attack on the validity of certain laws. The question is: do those laws bind? Now, you can analyse that in terms of sovereignty if you like, but sovereignty is a very slippery concept. Westminster Parliament could or could not pass legislation that has effect in Australia. Covering cl 5 provides that the Constitution and the laws made by the Parliament of the Commonwealth under the Constitution are binding on the courts, judges, and people of every State and of every part of the Commonwealth. None of the points that the applicants seek to make touches the validity of any of the laws that are in question or would make those laws any the less binding on the courts, judges, and people. As I have noted earlier, the second of the three themes identified by the applicants relies on the Royal Style and Titles Act. As I understand it, the principal burden of the argument is that an Act of Parliament, changing the style or title by which the Queen is to be known in Australia, worked a fundamental constitutional change. The fact is, it did not. So far as Commonwealth legislation is concerned, it is ss 58, 59 and 60 of the Constitution that deal with the ways in which the Royal Assent may be given to bills passed by the other elements of the Federal Parliament. So far as now relevant, ss 58 governs. 22It provides that the Governor-General “shall declare, according to his discretion, but subject to this Constitution that he assents in the Queen's name". And there is no material that would suggest that has not been done in the case of each Commonwealth Act that now is challenged. The third element in the submissions made by the applicants, and the one to which greatest significance was given in oral argument, asserts that significance is to be attached to certain of Australia's international dealings. These contentions fail to take account of certain basic principles. First, provisions of an international treaty to which Australia is a party do not form part of domestic law unless incorporated by statute. (Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs v Teoh (1995) 183 CLR 273; Victoria v The Commonwealth (Industrial Relations Act Case) (1996) 187 CLR 416 at 480-481 per Brennan CJ, Toohey, Gaudron, McHugh and Gummow JJ.) It follows that what one of the applicants referred to as various human rights instruments do not of themselves give rights to or impose obligations on persons in Australia. Similarly, the Charter of the United Nations does not have the force of law in Australia. (Bradley v The Commonwealth (1973) 128 CLR 557 at 582 per Barwick CJ and Gibbs J.) Next, in so far as this limb of the argument sought to make some point about “sovereignty” it is again necessary to note the distinction between sovereignty in international law and sovereignty in the sense described by Hart as “the supreme legislative authority recognised in this system" (Hart, The Concept of Law, (1961) at 218) The points which the applicants seek to make are points touching the first of these matters, not the second. It is the second that is the critical question in the courts and it is the second that is resolved by having regard to covering cl 5. Lastly, it is necessary to deal with the contentions about the Commonwealth Electoral Act. These contentions depend entirely upon acceptance of one or other of what I have earlier called the three main themes of argument. Because I consider that they are not arguable, no separate question arises about the Commonwealth Electoral Act. Nevertheless, it may be noted that it was established very early in the life of the federation that if there are any defects in the election of a member of a house of the Parliament the proceedings of that house are not invalidated by the presence of a member without title. (Vardon v O'Loughlin (1907) 5 CLR 201 at 208 per Griffith C), Barton and Higgins JJ.) Moreover, there are at least some circumstances in which invalidating defects in the Commonwealth Electoral Act will not invalidate the elections held under it. (Attorney- General (Cth); Ex rel McKinlay v The Commonwealth (1975) 135 CLR 1 at 53 per Gibbs J. (See also the statement as to the effect of the order in these matters recorded at (1975) 7 ALR 593 at 651.) For these reasons, the points which it is sought to agitate in this Court have insufficient merit to warrant the orders that are sought. Each application is dismissed. 23