Chapter 000X

Page 1

This email is in response to an article at: http://theconversation.edu.au/lost-professors-we-wont-need-academics-in-60-years6293?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Latest+from+The+Conversation+for+27+April+2012& utm_content=Latest+from+The+Conversation+for+27+April+2012+CID_d9d4477b06e34cb58751 0f7b1c86da47&utm_source=campaign_monitor&utm_term=Lost+professors+we+wont+need+acad emics+in+60+years 27 April 2012, 6.14am AEST Lost professors: we wont need academics in 60 years
From: G. H. Schorel-Hlavka <schorel-hlavka@schorel-hlavka.com> To: C.Lloyd@mbs.edu Cc: mayJUSTICEalwaysPREVAIL@schorel-hlavka.com Date: Friday, April 27, 2012 08:05 am Subject: Chris Lloyd Re Lost professors etc Attachments: Text version of this message. (17KB)

Chris, I am one of what one may call "unlettered" persons without a university degree and yet as a self-educated CONSTITUTIONALIST I hold there is a lack of proper education at universities, and many who are tutering at universities should be ashamed of doing so. . For sure, not having had any formal education in the English language and it neither being my native language I have many, including judges, picking upon this but what they forget is that despite this I can understand and comprehend better the English words used by the Framers of the Constitution then they proved to do. .

THE REFERRAL OF STATE POWERS COOPERATIVE FEDERALISM LIVES ?"

" Justice R S French

Federal Court of Australia PERTH WA

Here we have a judge, obviously with a law degree going on about s51(xxxvii) but as it appears to me failing to understand and comprehend how it really is applicable. You may obviously put the question to me, prove this, well just read the set out and you find that French J is referring to the State governments or their Premiers as if they can unilaterally do whatever they like rather than that he considers that the States are after all created from the former colonies within s106 of the constitution (the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900 (UK)) and by this they are not "sovereign" Parliaments but "constitutional" Parliaments and this means they can not amend their own State constitutions without approval of the State electors via State referendums! .
Hansard 8-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National Australasian Convention)QUOTE Mr. ISAACS.-We want a people's Constitution, not a lawyers' Constitution.END QUOTE

Hansard 31-1-1898 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National Australasian Convention) QUOTE Mr. SOLOMON.We shall not only look to the Federal Judiciary for the protection of our interests, but also for the just interpretation of the Constitution: END QUOTE .

Chapter 000X Page 1 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, by fax 001161-3-94577209 or E-mail INSPECTOR-RIKATI@schorel-hlavka.com See also www.schorel-hlavka.com

Chapter 000X

Page 2

Hansard 8-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE Sir JOHN DOWNER.-Now it is coming out. The Constitution is made for the people and the states on terms that are just to both. END QUOTE . HANSARD 17-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTEMr. BARTON.- We can have every faith in the constitution of that tribunal. It is appointed as the arbiter of the Constitution. . It is appointed not to be above the Constitution, for no citizen is above it, but under it; but it is appointed for the purpose of saying that those who are the instruments of the Constitution-the Government and the Parliament of the dayshall not become the masters of those whom, as to the Constitution, they are bound to serve. What I mean is this: That if you, after making a Constitution of this kind, enable any Government or any Parliament to twist or infringe its provisions, then by slow degrees you may have that Constitution-if not altered in terms-so whittled away in operation that the guarantees of freedom which it gives your people will not be maintained; and so, in the highest sense, the court you are creating here, which is to be the final interpreter of that Constitution, will be such a tribunal as will preserve the popular liberty in all these regards, and will prevent, under any pretext of constitutional action, the Commonwealth from dominating the states, or the states from usurping the sphere of the Commonwealth.END QUOTE. Hansard 20-4-1897 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE Mr. BARTON: I do not think it is a good thing under any circumstances that a judge under a Federal Constitution, at any rate, should have anything to hope for from Parliament or Government. Mr. KINGSTON: Hear, hear. Mr. BARTON: Where you have a sovereign Parliament, and the judge is merely the interpreter of the laws as they arise, and not the guardian of a Constitution in the same sense as a federal judge is, the same circumstances remain in part; but where you will have a tribunal constantly charged with the maintenance of the Constitution against the inroads which may be attempted to be made upon it by Parliament, then it is essential that no judge shall have any temptation to act upon an unexpected weakness-for we do not know exactly what they are when appointed-which may result, whether consciously or not, in biasing his decisions in favor of movements made by the Parliament which might be dangerous to the Constitution itself.END QUOTE . Hansard 1-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National Australasian Convention)QUOTE Mr. GORDON.-Well, I think not. I am sure that if the honorable member applies his mind to the subject he will see it is not abstruse. If a statute of either the Federal or the states Parliament be taken into court the court is bound to give an interpretation according to the strict hyper-refinements of the law. It may be a good law passed by "the sovereign will of the people," although that latter phrase is a common one which I do not care much about. The court may say-"It is a good law, but as it technically infringes on the Constitution we

Chapter 000X Page 2 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, by fax 001161-3-94577209 or E-mail INSPECTOR-RIKATI@schorel-hlavka.com See also www.schorel-hlavka.com

Chapter 000X

Page 3

will have to wipe it out." As I have said, the proposal I support retains some remnant of parliamentary sovereignty, leaving it to the will of Parliament on either side to attack each other's laws. END QUOTE HANSARD 10-03-1891 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE Dr. COCKBURN: All our experience hitherto has been under the condition of parliamentary sovereignty. Parliament has been the supreme body. But when we embark on federation we throw parliamentary sovereignty overboard. Parliament is no longer supreme. Our parliaments at present are not only legislative, but constituent bodies. They have not only the power of legislation, but the power of amending their constitutions. That must disappear at once on the abolition of parliamentary sovereignty. No parliament under a federation can be a constituent body; it will cease to have the power of changing its constitution at its own will. Again, instead of parliament being supreme, the parliaments of a federation are coordinate bodies-the main power is split up, instead of being vested in one body. More than all that, there is this difference: When parliamentary sovereignty is dispensed with, instead of there being a high court of parliament, you bring into existence a powerful judiciary which towers above all powers, legislative and executive, and which is the sole arbiter and interpreter of the constitution.END QUOTE . So, ask yourself why have some 43,000 professors or academics if not a single one of them tutoring in constitutional law has a clue that States cannot amend their own constitutions and cannot refer its legislative powers to the Commonwealth unless by State referendum approval of the State electors? . As such, I view, I would in that regard be a more suitable lecturer at universities as at least I research matters first. Perhaps because of my lack of formal education in the English language and English not being my native language it is that I read the English wording better than those who assume what they read..A clear example is where once in litigation the opponent barrister was objecting to my filed material as it being too close type written as the legislation demanded "6mm between the lines" and he held I had failed to do so. Well, at the end of the day the court ruled in my favour that "6mm between the lines' must be between base line to base line and not between the words themselves and I will explain this why by a simple example:.Line 1: I was on the street and saw the Line 2: moon . Line 1: I was on the street and saw the Line 2: hoon It must be clear, as the judge found also, that changing the letter from "moon" to "hoon" if measured from the bottom of line 1 to the top of line two letters then the lines would be jumping all over. Yet, we find there are some 87,000 lawyers in Australia and they still are "double spacing" as to achieve a "6mm between the lines" and even if forgetting about the environment of using double the paper they otherwise need they are charging ample per page and so doubling the cost to a client! . What is now my daughter in law she too discovered that when I was representing an opposing party I defeated her comprehensively. After I married her mother she later admitted I was the better of the two in litigation, despite her various law degrees. . When we look at the Colosimo case then we found a law lecturer and barrister representing Mr Colosimo that he ended up being placed under administration and warned by a judge that he could
Chapter 000X Page 3 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, by fax 001161-3-94577209 or E-mail INSPECTOR-RIKATI@schorel-hlavka.com See also www.schorel-hlavka.com

Chapter 000X

Page 4

face up to 5-years imprisonment for CONTEMPT OF COURT, etc. The Victorian Legal Aid Commission in their correspondence to Mr Colosimo advised he better purge his contempt. The Office of the Public Advocate was also against Mr Colosimo and in fact advised the members of the medical proffession that Mr Colosimo was convicted of CONTEMPT OF COURT. The members of the medical profession then provided their evidence that Mr Colosimo should be placed under administration and so he was. In the end Mr Colosimo requested me to represent him as a Professional Advocate, this I did PRO BONO. My first issue was to check what charge was made out against Mr Colosimo, and I discovered that during the 5 previous CONTEMPT hearings the trail judge at no time read out the charge. So, Victorian Legal Aid advised for Mr Colosimo to purge his contempt, even so no charge was known? The Office of the Public Advocate accused Mr Colosimo of being convicted of contempt even so he never was even formally charged let alone convicted. the members of the medical profession were providing "expert" evidence Mr Colosimo required to be placed under administration because he didn't recognise being convicted of contempt, etc. Well, in the end all orders, including those of administration, were set aside, but fancy all those experts with their university degrees getting it so wrong? More than 20 lawyers were involved in the case and not a single one did their basic work to check the obvious what was contained in the charge? . If getting a university education is the we get this kind of result then forget about a univeristy degree. . Let's look at an other issue; "Australian citizenship". Throughout the workld "australian citizenship" is recognised as Australian nationality, even so constitutionally it is nothing more or less than belonging as a resident in a State and having obtained the political rights of a citizen. . It must be clear that the terminology used by the Framers of the Constitution are; British subject, to make persons subjects of the British Empire., with the consent of the Imperial authority, What is meant is a dual citizenship in Mr. Trenwith and myself. That is to say, I am a citizen of the state and I am also a citizen of the Commonwealth; that is the dual citizenship., we are all alike subjects of the British Crown. We have a High Court of Australia that appears to me being political motivated to try to alter the Constitution by stealth by endorsing a substitute Constitution! Hansard 1-4-1891 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National Australasian Convention) QUOTE Mr. MUNRO: I do not see the necessity for considering the hon. member's proposal at the present time. I am proud of being a citizen of the great British empire, and shall never fail to be proud of that position. I have no desire to weaken a single link binding us to that empire, whether as regards the appointment of a governor-general or anything else. END QUOTE . Hansard 2-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE Mr. SYMON.-Very likely not. What I want to know is, if there is anybody who will come under the operation of the law, so as to be a citizen of the Commonwealth, who would not
Chapter 000X Page 4 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, by fax 001161-3-94577209 or E-mail INSPECTOR-RIKATI@schorel-hlavka.com See also www.schorel-hlavka.com

Chapter 000X

Page 5

also be entitled to be a citizen of the state? There ought to be no opportunity for such discrimination as would allow a section of a state to remain outside the pale of the Commonwealth, except with regard to legislation as to aliens. Dual citizenship exists, but it is not dual citizenship of persons, it is dual citizenship in each person. There may be two men-Jones and Smith-in one state, both of whom are citizens of the state, but one only is a citizen of the Commonwealth. That would not be the dual citizenship meant. What is meant is a dual citizenship in Mr. Trenwith and myself. That is to say, I am a citizen of the state and I am also a citizen of the Commonwealth; that is the dual citizenship. That does not affect the operation of this clause at all. But if we introduce this clause, it is open to the whole of the powerful criticism of Mr. O'Connor and those who say that it is putting on the face of the Constitution an unnecessary provision, and one which we do not expect will be exercised adversely or improperly, and, therefore, it is much better to be left out. Let us, in dealing with this question, be as careful as we possibly, can that we do not qualify the citizenship of this Commonwealth in any way or exclude anybody [start page 1764] from it, and let us do that with precision and clearness. As a citizen of a state I claim the right to be a citizen of the Commonwealth. I do not want to place in the hands of the Commonwealth Parliament, however much I may be prepared to trust it, the right of depriving me of citizenship. I put this only as an argument, because no one would anticipate such a thing, but the Commonwealth Parliament might say that nobody possessed of less than 1,000 a year should be a citizen of the Federation. You are putting that power in the hands of Parliament. Mr. HIGGINS.-Why not? Mr. SYMON.-I would not put such a power in the hands of any Parliament. We must rest this Constitution on a foundation that we understand, and we mean that every citizen of a state shall be a citizen of the Commonwealth, and that the Commonwealth shall have no right to withdraw, qualify, or restrict those rights of citizenship, except with regard to one particular set of people who are subject to disabilities, as aliens, and so on. END QUOTE Well it seems the High Court of Australia acting within its powers as persona designata then in Sue v Hill decided otherwise! Just by what constitutional authority you may ask as the High Court of Australia had no such constitutional powers.! . HANSARD 25-2-1898 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National Australasian Convention) QUOTE Mr. SYMON.When we have done this it follows that as there is an element of policy, the existence of which no one can deny, it will be even more necessary than in the case of the Federal High Courtwhich is not to deal with matters of policy, or matters tainted with policy, to use the expression of another speaker-that the tribunal which we are creating should be above the breath of political intrigue. END QUOTE 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 Well, you may just realise that if the masses nevertheless accept this nonsense, as they did with the
Chapter 000X Page 5 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, by fax 001161-3-94577209 or E-mail INSPECTOR-RIKATI@schorel-hlavka.com See also www.schorel-hlavka.com

Chapter 000X

Page 6

con-job referendum in 1967 regarding s51(xxvi) then I for one can only feel sorry for the masses that despite so many having all kinds of degrees from universities none seem to be able to understand and comprehend what is really important to them, and that is their constitutional rights, etc. . Perhaps not having those academics is not so bad after all if all they are doing is lecturing nonsense to upcoming lawyers, etc? . I am proud to be an "unlettered" person as at least I can understand and comprehend the constitution better then those lettered persons seems to do! Gerrit . Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.BB. . 27-4-2012 Well you can always read up in my published book in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI series on certain constitutional and other legal issues or just check out my blog at http://www.scribd.com/InspectorRikati and learn what your identity really is about. . (Snail) Mail to: Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. MAY JUSTICE ALWAYS PREVAIL 107 Graham Road, Viewbank, Vic 3084, Australia Email: mayJUSTICEalwaysPREVAIL@schorel-hlavka.com See also Http://www.scribd.com/InspectorRikati (Also to download documents) & http://www.schorel-hlavka.com/ Consultant (CONSTITUTIONALIST) to FOYLEYS LAWYERS, Wagga Wagga Email: Foleys
Lawyers <admin@foleyslawyers.com.au>

CONSTITUTIONALIST & Author of books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI series on certain constitutional and other legal issues. . A GOVERNMENT BY THE PEOPLE FOR THE PEOPLE! . INSPECTOR-RIKATI & What is the -Australian way of life- really. A book on CD on Australians political, religious & other rights ISBN 0-9751760-2-1 . Notification: THIS CORRESPONDENCE IS FORWARDED WITHOUT PREJUDICE

Chapter 000X Page 6 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, by fax 001161-3-94577209 or E-mail INSPECTOR-RIKATI@schorel-hlavka.com See also www.schorel-hlavka.com