p1 16-11-2015 © 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

Email: admin@inspector-rikati.com. For further details see also my blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

ISSUE: Has the High Court of Australia blood on its hands? & the constitution

As a CONSTITUTIONALIST I am obviously aware of and considering the legal principles

embedded in the constitution. On 22 July 2002 I wrote to the then General Peter Cosgrove that for any

invasion he would need a DECLARATION OF WAR naming the country concerned from the

Governor-General published in the Gazette. I on 18 February 2003 sought to file an s75 application to

prevent the Australian armed forces invading Iraq without a DECLARATION OF WAR, which was

refused by the Deputy Registrar and the High Court of Australia on appeal refused to accept it for filing.

The Registrar then to alter the make-up, and made notes how to do so. I on 18 March 2003 sought to refile

it as per directions of the Deputy Registrar but it was refused to be accepted for filing. On Appeal the

High Court of Australia citing the 18 February 2003 application, and not the 18 March 2003 application

(Still outstanding), (again) refused to accept it for filing. That day the armed murderous invasion

commenced to bomb Iraq back into the Stone Age. HANSARD 10-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates

(Official Record of the Debates of the National Australasian Convention) Mr. BARTON (New South Wales).- QUOTE

Then, again, there is the prerogative right to declare war and peace, an adjunct of which it is that the Queen herself, or

her representative, where Her Majesty is not present, holds that prerogative. No one would ever dream of saying that the

Queen would declare war or peace without the advice of a responsible Minister. END QUOTE HANSARD 6-3-1891

Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE Mr. DEAKIN: We can make an exception in favour of imperial interests. We have

no desire to interfere with the imperial prerogative in matters of war and peace! END QUOTE

While we have Royal Commissions about unions, and bush fires, we had no Royal Commission about the

murderous unconstitutional invasion into Iraq. We were told that the world would be a safer place

without President Saddam Hussein. Well we had yet another murderous attack in Paris, with many

deaths, and one has to ask is the world really a safer place? Kevin Rudd, Julia Gillard and Tony Abbott

refused my request for a Royal Commission and yet we need it to establish if the armed murderous

invasion was constitutionally permissible and the High Court of Australia unconstitutionally denied my

s75 of the constitution application to be accepted for filing. Combined with the aluminium tubes and other

false/fabricated issues I view John Howard had a case to answer but I view the High Court of Australia

bowed to its political master and so to say sold us, We, the People out! In my view had John Howard not

been able to join the USA “regime change” for oil, etc, then the USA may not have gone ahead with the

invasion. The vacuum left by the removal of President Saddam Hussein has since been filled by ISIS/ISIL

and we all suffer the consequences of “The world being a safer place” that we are subjected as innocent

citizens to a range of so called draconic “anti-terrorism” legislation which in real terms is only to curtain

the rights and freedoms of innocent Australians. In my view the terrorist are those in the government and

aided and abetted by the courts. As I proved on 19 July 2006 in the Country Court of Victoria no valid

federal election was held in 2001, and as such we had no valid Federal Government. And, for the record

the Commonwealth didn’t challenge my evidence filed in court! They had the opportunity but as

weasels/gutless wonders left without challenging me! As such, it conceded my evidence was beyond

reproach. Why then are we not holding John Howard and his co-conspirators legally accountable for

treason, mass-murder, crimes against humanity, etc? Let’s be clear about it I filed my evidence in court

(Including that which I obtained under FOI!), and as such not merely made claims, and it was open to all

Attorney-Generals to challenge within s78B NOTICE OF CONSTITUTIONAL MATTERS what I had

filed. They didn’t but conceded! Too many people died directly or indirectly because of the Iraq invasion!

We must have a Royal Commission and without further delay! Are we waiting for a “Paris”

massacrer to occur in Australia before we finally will have matters investigated? Just then too late for

Australian victims! In my view the HCA has blood on its hands, and a case to answer!

This correspondence is not intended and neither must be perceived to state all relevant issues/details.

Awaiting your response, G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. (Gerrit)

MAY JUSTICE ALWAYS PREVAIL® (Our name is our motto!)