With reference to Queen Victoria who died on the 21st day of January 1900, no new Letters Patent have been issued until August 1984, which is 4 Monarchs later.
The concealment continues with 2 more documents. The first being "The Letters Patent Relating to her Office of Governor-General of the Commonwealth of Australia" which
was gazetted on the 24th August 1984 after being signed 3 days earlier
at Balmoral in the United Kingdom. Under UK law, the writs of the
sovereign die with the sovereign. But
when Queen Victoria died on the 21st January, 1900, no new Letters
Patent were issued until August 1984! This was 4 (not 5) monarchs later.
These Letters Patent also had a clause to cover any 'invalid'
Commission or appointment or any action taken by someone so commissioned
or appointed without authority. This is the effect of clause VII.
The
next document(s) created to continue the concealment was the passage of
the Australia Acts (see web address for Australia Acts (Cth) &
(UK)) through both the UK and the Australian Parliaments, in 1985, to
commence in 1986. Contrary to international law, both of these Acts
attempted to infringe sovereignty of another nation, were not registered
as required under the Charter of the United Nations to have
extra-territorial effect, and consequently, can not be relied on in any
international forum. Notwithstanding the international status of the
Australia Act 1986 (Cth), the preamble and several clauses clearly
indicate that British colonial law was continuing in the sovereign
independent Australia, and that from the commencement of this Act, all
such colonial law, as well as the UK government, will have no effect. If
this was not the case, than there would not be any need to have an
Australia Act, let alone 2 of them.
There are several major structural problems associated with the Australia Act (Cth), and since it is continually referred to in judicial decisions, it is worthwhile noting these problems.
(1) First, it does not remove all existing British law used in Australia. It only refers to new British law. Any Australian lawyer can testify that the Commonwealth and State Statute books are pregnant with British law, the most obvious being the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900 (UK).
(2) Second, the termination of British law in Australia that is supposed to occur with this Act, when challenged, will be determined in a court which is dependent for it's existence on the very same British law!
(3) Thirdly, Australia continues to have a monarch who derives her power from the British Parliament, and she remains the Executive Head of Government of the six Australian States. So to exercise her power in those States, her power must be seen as an extension of power of the UK Parliament.
(4) Lastly, at the very time that the Australia Acts came into law in Australia to prevent the UK Government from interfering in Australian matters (see also Sue v Hill HCA 30 of 1999), the Letters Patent relating to the Governors of South Australia, Tasmania, Victoria, Queensland and Western Australia was signed off by none other than Sir Anthony Derek Maxwell Oulton, KCB, QC, MA, Ph.D., Permanent Secretary, Lord Chancellors Office, UK Parliament!
Recent confirmations establish invalidity of the political and judicial system currently being applied in Australia.
While
all of this is relevant and pertinent, it is as well to be aware that
on, 19th December 1997 the Office of Legal Council of the General
Secretariat of the United Nations volunteered and thus confirmed that Australia has been a sovereign State from the 24th October 1945 at the latest.
This was confirmed by letter dated 19th December 1997, from the Acting
Director and Deputy to the Under-Secretary-General, Office of the Legal
Counsel, under the hand of Paul C. Szasz.
On
the 5th November 1999, the UK Government through their High Commission
in Canberra, volunteered and thus confirmed that the UK British
Nationality Act 1948 legislated that Australia was not a protectorate of
the United Kingdom, so both the UN and the UK have confirmed that for
at least 53 years Australia has been an independent sovereign nation
State. This was confirmed by letter dated 5th November 1999, from the
Chief Passport Examiner, British High Commission, Canberra, under the
hand of Mrs Carole Turner.
As a consequence, under both international and UK law the UK Parliament’s ‘An Act to Constitute the Commonwealth of Australia’ has
been ultra vires in relation to Australia for at least 53 years. So,
for purposes of definition and resolution there is no fundamental need
to look any further back into history.
It
is also most pertinent to note that on the 6th November 1999 the entire
people of Australia, by referendum had for the first time, the
opportunity to have their say regarding the acceptance or otherwise of
the Constitution under which they are governed. They overwhelmingly
rejected the 'Preamble to the Constitution' question which included,
“We the Australian people commit ourselves to this Constitution”(The proposition was rejected in every State and Territory of Australia on a national basis of 60.66% to 39.34%. see end note.)
Thus
the question must now be asked: "How can present Australian parliaments
possibly continue to exist under the terms of a Constitution to which
the people have refused to be committed?"
With reference to documentation by Sir Harry Gibbs, Chief Justice of the High Court Australia, from 1970 - 1981.
No comments:
Post a Comment