Page 1

1
2
3 Banyule City Council & Mayor Cr Melican & Ors (Australia, Victoria date) 22-12-2023
4 enquiries@banyule.vic.gov.au
5
6 Cc: Cr Tom Melican Mayor tom.melican@banyule.vic.gov.au
7 Alison Champion alison.champion@banyule.vic.gov.au
8 Cr Fiona Mitsinikos fiona.mitsdinikos@banyule.vic.gov.au
9 Cr Elizabeth Nealy elizabeth.nealy@banyule.vic.gov.au
10 Cr Mark Di Pasquate mark.dipasquale@banyule.vic.gov.au
11 Cr Alida McKern alida.mckern@banyule.vic.gov.au
12 Cr Peter Dimarelos peter.demarelos@banyule.vic.gov.au
13 Cr Rick Garotti rick.garotti@banyule.vic.gov.au
14 Cr Peter Casteldo peter.castaldo@banyule.vic.gov.au
15 Jan Richardson enquiries@banyule.vic.gov.au
16 Janet Redgrave Team Leader Development Planning enquiries@banyule.vic.gov.au
17 Mr RomanWojtkowski enquiries@banyule.vic.gov.au
18
19 Re: 20231222-Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to Banyule City Council Mayor Cr Tom Melican and Ors-
20 TRESPASS, etc-Supplement 19
21 NOT RESTRICTED FOR PUBLICATION
22 COMPLAINT
23 Sir & Ors,
24 further to my already provided COMPLAINT and supplements, I add the following.
25
26 I yesterday lodged a complaint with Mr Shane Patten, Chief Commissioner of the Victorian
27 Police as after all he is legally responsible for the Victorian Police.
28
29 With the covid scam the Victorian Police claimed to act by the direction of then Chief Health
30 Officer Brett Sutton, albeit as I already pointed out in April 2020 the State of Victoria had no
31 legislative, executive and/or administrative powers regarding mandates, etc. It often takes years
32 before a case filters through to the courts and the issue is always to prepare for a case long before
33 it actually is before the courts.
34 I, more than a decade ago, represented a party against a council, and so very successfully, where
35 a council had actually approved a building to be built according to required building
36 requirements but they litigated as if it had not.
37 There are ample of Authorities (meaning judgments) where the courts held that a police officer
38 cannot merely enter any property when a property owner/occupier has indicated by a sign or
39 otherwise to deny access to the property. At most a police officer can then petition a court to
40 issue a WARRANT to allow the police officer to enter the property. The Court however cannot
41 issue a WARRANT unless it first has heard both sides and then upon the evidence before the
42 court makes a determination.
43
44 In the purported NOTIFICATION OF NOTICE OF ENTRY is claims:
22-12-2023 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 QUOTE
2 Pursuant to Section 137 of the Act, any person who without lawful excuse obstructs an
3 Authorised person or a member of the Police Force in taking any action, which is
4 authorised under the Act, is guilty of an offence.
5 END QUOTE
6 What this section makes clear that a person must be “Authorised” and it also differentiate
7 between an “Authorised person” and a member of the Police force. A police officer cannot
8 authorise anyone to trespass upon a property where the police officer himself/herself would
9 require a WARRANT to enter a property against the objections of the property owner/occupier.
10 The police therefore cannot Authorise any other person to do something it cannot do itself.
11 This then means that unless the “Authorised person” is actually validly “Authorised” the police
12 is totally powerless to do anything. A person cannot merely “assume” to be ‘Authorise” merely
13 as to go onto some fishing expedition to try to find some alleged evidence.
14
15 The purported NOTIFICATION OF NOTICE OF ENTRY claims:
16 QUOTE
17 The purpose of the inspection will be to determine any breaches of the Banyule
18 Planning Scheme. Pursuant to Section 135 of the Act, it may include:
19 a. The taking of photographs or measurements: and
20 b. The making of sketches or recordings: and
21 c. C. The taking or removal of samples.
22 END QUOTE
23
24 As I have set out in my previous writings this applies where a person had been found “guilty” by
25 a court and the Governor-in-Council” had issued an “Order”. There is a difference between the
26 usage of “Governor” and “Governor-in-Council”. A Governor exercises royal prerogative
27 whereas a “Governor-in-Council” acts upon the advice of the State executives.
28 Because of the separation of powers between the legislators, the executives and the judiciary the
29 executive (government) cannot act as if it is a judiciary and therefore cannot interfere with the
30 rights of citizens merely because it desires to do so. If the “Governor-in-Council” were to act
31 upon the advice of the State executives but in violation of the law then the “Governor-in-Council
32 purported “Order” has no legal validity and anyone who were to act upon such invalid “Order”
33 could be liable for damages, etc. Without a “guilty” judgment by a court the “Governor-in-
34 Council” cannot issue any “Order”. As the legislation requires a “guilty” judgment then you need
35 to ensure that there actually was such judgment on record and not merely skip this legal
36 requirement. Because a court cannot find someone “guilty” merely because some council may
37 desire that, but must rely upon validly obtained evidence and the opponent party having been
38 provided with a proper opportunity to oppose any order then kindly inform me when Banyule
39 City council litigated in court against me and allegedly obtained a judgment of “guilty” against
40 me and my wife.
41 It should be understood that when a person pursues to build a residence with or without a garage
42 then where a council issue a planning permit this is active until the council approves of the
43 buildings that were created. As such, the “approval” finish any planning permit application.
44 As Banyule City Council seems to refer to Planning Scheme then kindly advice me what permit
45 is currently applicable it relies upon, as neither my wife or are have any knowledge of any
46 outstanding permit in existence. Failing any active planning permit to be in existence and neither
47 any court “guilty” judgment and “Order” of the “Governor-in-Council” then like it or not but any
48 entrance upon our property is and remains unlawful. It means that Section 134, 135 and 137
49 Banyule City Council seeks to rely upon have no legal application whatsoever.
50
51 I have so far written extensively about the issues at hand, as I used to do for example in AEC v
52 Schorel-Hlavka this as part of litigation! Banyule City Council and also every councillor can be
22-12-2023 Page 2 © 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 3

1 personally sued for any harm inflicted upon my wife and myself. And, I can assure you I have
2 every intent to do so. Where you as a mayor/councillor despite of my writings have this kind of
3 unlawful conduct continuing then you are deprived of any legal protection as acting in violation
4 of legal requirement means you are not protected by being a mayor/councillor.
5 This is why I view it was darn stupid for anyone to ignore my writings because ultimately the
6 legal consequences will haunt you. No excuse will be making go away the harm that was in
7 particularly inflicted upon my wife.
8
9 I used for 37 years conduct a special lifeline service regarding people contemplating suicide,
10 murder and even mass murder and the general thread was that they suffered at the hands of
11 wrong doers and simply had been unable to obtain JUSTICE. Well, I am well aware how at
12 times judges seek to railroad a party and for this would urge a party to follow every possible step
13 that may be needed.
14
15 For example, a man was served with his wife affidavit and I urged him to go to the registry
16 and make a copy of the wife’s Affidavit. He did and made known to me this was a sheer
17 waste of time as they were identical. He then filed his response. Affidavit. A few weeks
18 later I asked the man to again make a copy of the wife’s affidavit on court file. OK he held
19 I was giving him a run around but in the end he did so. And then he discovered that the
20 wife’s Affidavit had numerous unauthorised changes. Because he had obtained a copy of
21 the court file Affidavit it was clear the changes were made After he filed his Affidavit in
22 response. And he was able to prove this in court so the judge could not argue that somehow
23 the lawyers had served a wrong copy upon him. It is a legal trickery I know too well many
24 lawyers engage in that result that the trial judge has a different version unbeknown to the
25 other party, and then this party may lose a case as result.
26
27 This is the kind of careful conduct lawyers I understand ordinary totally ignore. Likewise judges
28 may use a so called CRISTAL BALL kind of judgment. Hence, it is important to avoid that also
29 as much as possible.
30
31 A judge may question a party did he/she did whatever as to seek to railroad the parties
32 opportunity to have orders in his/her favour. Hence, I pursue to notify opponents about
33 everything and well aware that the fools generally cannot bother to read and consider my
34 writings but then when it comes to a court hearing are so to say standing with their pants down,
35 because they never actually bothered to learn what the case was about. This too was with the
36 AEC v Schorel-Hlkavka.
37
38 Each and every councillor can look forwards to being sued by me as after all I provided them
39 with copies of my writings and if they ignore it well then suffer the legal consequences for this.
40
41 Do you even understand that the Banyule City Council Planning Scheme is not at all a “law”.
42 Citizens grow up and assume that whatever some council may claim is because of being laws,
43 whereas I am the kind of person who makes clear that Banyule City Council has the onus to
44 prove it to be a law in the first place and also that the part of the law is actually legally
45 applicable.
46 Without conceding that this purported NOTIFICATION OF NOTICE OF ENTRY is legally
47 applicable let alone enforceable, you also got the problem that there was this purported
48 NOTIFICATION OF NOTICE OF ENTRY for 1 December 2023 followed by one for 8
49 December 2023 and now one for 3 January 2024. A court may just ask: Where is the sanity of
50 this all! Is this going to become some ongoing modus operandi for years to come? No court can

22-12-2023 Page 3 © 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 4

1 accept that even if the relevant legislation was applicable then to repeat the same time and time
2 again would be an abuse of legal processes. All this besides the many trespassing issues, etc.
3 The court may inquire what happened on each occasions and if Banyule City Council did not
4 proceed on any particular day why not and did it withdraw the purported NOTIFICATION OF
5 NOTICE OF ENTRY and if not why not? Also, can the purported NOTIFICATION OF
6 NOTICE OF ENTRY to be withdrawn without invoking that this means Banyule City Council
7 acknowledged there was no evidence to pursue.
8
9 Section 135 does clearly state: “The purpose of the inspection will be to determine any
10 breaches of the Banyule Planning Scheme” which means that Banyule City Council is no more
11 but on a fishing expedition to try to establish if there is any possible evidence it can obtain. Oh
12 boy, would the police love this kind of nonsense that they can trespass and then claim they did so
13 to obtain evidence they could obtain to charge a person. I got news for you, if you rely upon the
14 rule of law then you cannot misuse or otherwise ignore the rule of law.
15 Just in case you may overlook this, when a court finds that Banyule City Council and councillors
16 acted unlawfully then it may consider what, if any, attempt the wrongdoers may have engaged in
17 to stop the rot. Also how long it has been going on as to aggravated compensation, etc.
18 Any legislation that exist can only be used for the purpose it was enacted and not otherwise. For
19 example the police may issue an infringement notice to a person who is what is referred to as
20 jaywalking, when for example ignoring to use a pedestrian crossing but simply walks in an
21 uncalled dangerous manner across a street. However, the police couldn’t say issue aqn
22 i9nfringment notice say against me for jay walking when walking within my property to my
23 motor vehicle, this, as my private property doesn’t fall within the provisions of such legislation
24 and wouldn’t have any pedestrian crossing either.
25 The same with this purported Planning & Environment Act 1987 provisions. The issue would be
26 if the purported legislation actually is applicable at all in the circumstances pursued by Banyule
27 City Council. If not then neither Banyule City Council or for that the Victorian Police would
28 have any legal supported powers to seek to enforce the provisions of such a claimed legislation.
29 It means that any person of Banyule City Council and/or police officer are not at all acting within
30 their respective employment, etc, but are acting as a “private person” and can be held legally
31 accountable in their personal capacity. It is not mine concern if such person acting as a “private
32 person” did so having obtained any legal advice of a lawyer, because a lawyer doesn’t decide the
33 rule of law but merely can give “legal advice” that may or may not be correct. Therefore any
34 alleged “legal advice” would be an issue for the “private person” as to consider if it is likely
35 appropriate or not, and perhaps seeking a so called second opinion. A “private person” who seek
36 to rely upon certain “legal advice” would also leave himself/herself open to be required to
37 provide disclosure of what ordinary is deemed client-lawyer privileged information as after all a
38 lawyer may have provided “legal advice” upon whatever the client may have communicated to
39 the lawyer and this may be considerably different then upon what the lawyer actually was
40 purportedly relying upon.
41 It should not be ignored either that when Angela O’Brien and her male accomplish was caught
42 so to say red handed in the back of our property and had clearly trespassed not just onto the
43 property but also through the gazebo by what I consider breaking and entry, and never even
44 apologised for this then considering the serious health problems also caused upon Olga (my
45 wife) that she was fearing the male accomplish was trying to break into our house, this matter
46 has gone far beyond any belated excuse in particular where Angela O’Brien persisted with yet
47 another 2 versions of the purported NOTIFICATION OF NOTICE OF ENTRY.
48
49 It appears to me very clear that Angela O’Brien and her male accomplish are so to say loose
50 cannons, who are terrorising residents as if they are above the rule of law. The fact that the
51 Victoria Police appears to me have failed to take appropriate legal action against them I view
52 makes them accomplish of the criminal conduct Banyule City Council (including its staff and
22-12-2023 Page 4 © 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 5

1 councillors) engaged in. The Victorian Police cannot choose and pick when they will take
2 appropriate action against any criminal offender as it is bound to enforce the rule of law without
3 any bias. This I wrote about also in my complaint of 21 December 2023 to Mr Shane Patton the
4 Chief Commissioner of the Victorian Police.
5
6 In AEC v Schorel-Hlavka as to FAILING TO VOTE I for example relied upon the legal
7 principles embedded in the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900 (UK) that the
8 “council rates” (purportedly being State land taxation) is unconstitutional. Likewise that the
9 deployment of Australians ar5my into Iraq likewise was unconstitutional. I representing myself
10 in both cases successfully defeated the Commonwealth and 9 Attorney-Generals in both cases
11 unchallenged. Plenty of lawyers claimed I would never succeed but in the end I did. No court can
12 overrule the constitution and this is why I so much rely upon the legal principles embedded in
13 the constitution.
14 If the King cannot enter my castle without my permission then for sure Banyule City Council
15 can neither! Our constitution contains our Bill of Rights regardless most lawyers will claim we
16 do not have a Bill of Rights, as they simply were never properly trained, as after all I succeeded
17 that the “compulsory” part of voting was unconstitutional despite about every Australian
18 (including lawyers/judges) goes to vote because it allegedly is “compulsory”.
19 A court can only issue a WARRANT to override my constitutional and other rights AFTER
20 having heard both sides and only if there is any validity in an applicant’s petition to the court. As
21 I indicated that Banyule City Council has so to say not a leg to stand on and a court could only
22 throw out of the window any petition and then it is my time to pursue Banyule City Council and
23 its collaborators for damages!
24
25 https://www.westernjournal.com/former-ag-pens-jaw-dropping-letter-supreme-court-jack-smiths-appointment-
26 special-counsel-wasnt-legal/?ff_source=Email&ff_medium=conservative-brief-
27 WJ&ff_campaign=dailypm&ff_content=western-journal
28 Former AG Pens Jaw-Dropping Letter to Supreme Court: Jack Smith's Appointment as
29 Special Counsel Wasn't Legal
30 QUOTE
31 The brief asserted that Jack Smith did not acquire his purported authority as special
32 counsel in a legal or constitutional manner and therefore lacks standing to represent the
33 United States in front of a federal court.
34 END QUOTE
35
36 What has got this article to do with Banyule City Council issues? Well, as I have made clear that
37 I (representing myself) succeeded in both AEC v Schorel-Hlavka appeals unchallenged which
38 means that the Commonwealth and the 9 Attorney-Generals accepted my written submissions
39 ADDRESS TO THE COURT of some 409 pages to be correct. This included that there is
40 constitutionally no such thing as nationality being “Australian Citizenship”. The High Court in
41 Sue v Hill purported there was but the High Court of Australia lacks any judicial powers to
42 amend the meaning of the constitution! As such, only what is constitutionally appropriate can be
43 applied. Meaning that anyone purportedly appointed based upon holding a nationality of
44 “Australian citizenship” violates the legal principles embedded in the constitution. This means
45 we do not have validly appointed judges, lawyers, police officers, politicians, etc.
46
47 Without conceding that Section 137 of the purported Planning & Environment Act 1987 is
48 applicable or even legally valid, the reference to a police officer would be limited to a duly and
49 properly appointed police officer and not one pretending to be so but never was.
50 Keep in mind that Banyule City Council cannot re-litigate this matter purportedly acting as an
51 agent for the State Government because at the time R Hulls Attorney-General for the State of
52 Victoria made clear to accept the court’s ruling. (Res Judicata)
53
54 Hansard 27-1-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
22-12-2023 Page 5 © 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 6

1 QUOTE
2 Mr. BARTON.-I was going to explain when I was interrupted that the moment the
3 Commonwealth legislates on this subject the power will become exclusive.
4 END QUOTE
5
6 Hansard 27-1-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
7 QUOTE
8 Mr. BARTON (New South Wales).-If this is left as an exclusive power the laws of the
9 states will nevertheless remain in force under clause 100.
10 Mr. TRENWITH.-Would the states still proceed to make laws?
11 Mr. BARTON.-Not after this power of legislation comes into force. Their existing laws
12 will, however, remain. If this is exclusive they can make no new laws, but the necessity of
13 making these new laws will be all the more forced on the Commonwealth.
14 END QUOTE
15
16 Hansard 7-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
17 QUOTE Mr. HOWE.-
18 My only desire is to give power to the Federal Parliament to achieve a scheme for old-age
19 pensions if it be practicable, and if the people require it. No power would be taken away
20 from the states. The sub-section would not interfere with the right of any state to act in the
21 meantime until the Federal Parliament took the matter in hand.
22 END QUOTE
23
24 Also the purported “Planning & Environment Act 1987” itself in questionable as to its
25 constitutional validity because if the Federal Parliament can exercise such powers then the States
26 lack such legislative powers. Now a court needs to find a legitimately appointed judge and then
27 the court has to determine who constitutionally actually has the legislative powers regarding
28 issues pursued by Banyule City Council. Constitutionally “State Governments” are “Local
29 Governments” and the constitution doesn’t provide for 2 levels of “Local governments”!
30
31 I am the one who have experienced how the trespassing and vandalising of Olga’s Ford AU
32 caused such a stress that Olga no longer can walk unaided, and also need now to use a
33 wheelchair. Well, I am determent to hold Banyule City Council and its collaborators legally
34 accountable!
35

36
37
38 We need to return to the organics and legal principles embed in of our federal constitution!
39
40 This correspondence is not intended and neither must be perceived to state all issues/details.
41 Awaiting your response, G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. (Gerrit)

42 MAY JUSTICE ALWAYS PREVAIL®

43 (Our name is our motto!)
22-12-2023 Page 6 © 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