From Les McDonald to all MLC Paliament Victoria 4th May 2010
Subject: Now a public concern (victimless) Crime
To: gavin.jennings@parliament.vic.gov.au
Cc: greg.barber@parliament.vic.gov.au, candy.broad@parliament.vic.gov.au, andrea.coote@parliament.vic.gov.au, richard.dalla-riva@parliament.vic.gov.au, kaye.darveniza@parliament.vic.gov.au, david.davis@parliament.vic.gov.au, philip.davis@parliament.vic.gov.au, damian.drum@parliament.vic.gov.au, khalil.eideh@parliament.vic.gov.au, nazih.elasmar@parliament.vic.gov.au, bernie.finn@parliament.vic.gov.au, matthew.guy@parliament.vic.gov.au, peter.hall@parliament.vic.gov.au, colleen.hartland@parliament.vic.gov.au, jennifer.huppert@parliament.vic.gov.au, peter.kavanagh@parliament.vic.gov.au, david.koch@parliament.vic.gov.au, jan.kronberg@parliament.vic.gov.au, shaun.leane@parliament.vic.gov.au, john.lenders@parliament.vic.gov.au, wendy.lovell@parliament.vic.gov.au, justin.madden@parliament.vic.gov.au, jenny.mikakos@parliament.vic.gov.au, nathan.murphy@parliament.vic.gov.au, ward.o'donohue@parliament.vic.gov.au, donna.petrovich@parliament.vic.gov.au, inga.peulich@parliament.vic.gov.au, jaala.pulford@parliament.vic.gov.au, gordon.rich-phillips@parliament.vic.gov.au, johan.scheffer@parliament.vic.gov.au, robert.smith@parliament.vic.gov.au, adem.somyurek@parliament.vic.gov.au, brian.tee@parliament.vic.gov.au, gayle.tierney@parliament.vic.gov.au, matthew.viney@parliament.vic.gov.au, john.vogels@parliament.vic.gov.au
Received: Tuesday, 4 May, 2010, 12:05 PM
As a member of our Parliament, with the best interest of all Victorians at the forefront, I ask you to consider the following with an open and clear mind.
1982 The John Cain (Labour) Government placed Cannabis under the Drugs Poisons and Substance Act, now classed as a narcotic plant, However. the Australian Government Department of Health and Ageing, report National Drug Strategy Monograph Series.Part 4.1 "cannabis has been erroneously classified as a narcotic.."
At this point time the Victorian Parliament was largely dominated by members of private professional Club, that had sworn an oath unto them selves, the Legal profession, which left open to question a conflict of interest, concerning Public Health and solicitor wealth .
As to curb the public unrest. 1995 the Jeff Kennett Government formed The Primers Drug Advisory Council. and on the 31st May 1996 Chairman, Professor David Pennington presented the report to Parliament, which recommended (7.1) That possession less then 30 gram of cannabis and " Cultivation of up to five cannabis plants per household for personal use should no longer be an offence" As this would have caused a financial loss to the legal profession, Subsequently Parliament, rejected part 7.1 to 7.5 of the report.
1997 The Government announced the allocation of more then $59 million of the $100 million four year "Turning the Tide strategy" Victorian Police statistics showed on that around 10,000 Victorian citizen are charged with cannabis related charges each year, based on current arrest rate. between 1996 -2006 150, 000 Victorians were convicted for cannabis related offences. It estimated, by election time 2010, total offence concerning cannabis will pass 201,000 since labour was elected to Govern Victoria..
It is of interest to note " In one year alone (1996) Legal Aid spent $14 million on legal representation defending cannabis consumers that pleaded guilty" It appears that the Legal profession are the only real winners out of cannabis prohibition, which has caused an unnecessary burden on the people of Victoria
If we consider the many thousand of responsible citizens that are dragged before the criminal courts each year, (for a victimless crime) and now have a criminal record for the rest of their life, as you will be aware cannabis consumption is wide spread thru-out our today's society, Businesses people, trade, and. profession people, However, you may not be aware that there is no record of a lethal overdoes of cannabis recorded in humans world wide.
Consider the amount of Victorians that use cannabis on a regular bases, (as under 9%appeared before the Court) and then ponder over Professor David Pennington (1996) recommendation. It appears quite obvious to many, that thousands Victorians would not appear before the criminal justice system, saving court cost, also the high cost of legal Aid in Victoria. We don’t need to make convict s out of good, responsible people that prefer to use cannabis.
I find it very disturbing the advise recently received, "That the Parliament of Victoria as no proper Act, that requires the Parliament to make laws for peace, order, and good Government for the people of Victoria. If this advise I received is in fact correct, must give reason to question if " the power to protect the people of Victoria is now to far removed from the peoples elected Parliament of Victoria" Surely, Accountability needs to be understood..
The greatest harm to consumers of cannabis is current law, and not feeling safe in their own home’s in Victoria. The are subject of their front doors being smashed down, (5am) the children terrified, by the armed police, parents forced to lay naked, on the floor, order to roll over put your legs apart, to be observed all the members of the raiding party, No doubt in search of cannabis. yes Victimless Crime.
With due respect, The passing of time has revealed that cannabis prohibition has not worked in the best interest of the public of Victoria, it has caused a division amougts the people, and created an unnecessary and future burden on the people of Victoria.
We feel it would be far better for all concerned Victorian, If you could consider, and if you see fit to do so, recommend to Parliament to issue yearly permits to registered consumers of cannabis, permitting them to comply with the recommendation 7.1 to 7.5 of the Professor David Pennington report to Parliament. 1996.
Change of registration-permits annual fee of $100.00 plus GST. Cost of cannabis reduced as many consumers of cannabis could make a beverage or add the herb cannabis as food supplements this removing the health risk of smoking cannabis.
Every person has the rights to feel safe in the state of Victoria in their home, the right to chose between good and bad, alcohol is the mayor cause of family violence in today's society. There must be a solution an alternative.
I thank you for your time and Patience It would be greatly appreciate to be informed of your future intention or opinion on any the issues raised
Yours faithfully
Les McDonald
Bebuybac
The Concerned Australians
Email (bebuybac@yahoo.com.au)
Ps. The Australian Government reports state that 55,OOO canabiss offence occure evey year national. If so many people are breaking the Law some thing must be wrong with the Law
Your personal comments would assit, for what is good or what is bad?
are Laws for peace order and good government? thinking of the future.
Wednesday, May 5, 2010
Friday, January 22, 2010
Lore and the Law,
Hi'The following relates to traditional ) Lore and British Law ?. The sentences/ parts marked with [ and end with] are from Northern Territory Law Reform Committee: Background Paper 2. We have included a number Questions, that need to be addressed, For society with out rules and lore, sovereignty is only fictitious.
[When land that was unoccupied by European powers began to be discovered by European nations, under various doctrines of international law, these nations allotted these territories among themselves. The function of these doctrines was to prevent European nations going to war against each other]
[European ideas of international law, at the time of settlement of Australia, recognised various modes of acquiring sovereignty over land, the most relevant being: occupation of land that was terra nullius (land belonging to no-one). The legal effect of British acquisition of sovereignty over the Australian land mass was the English law applied to Australia.]
Q.1 Considering the meaning of terra nullius, Did English law also apply to the natives
1875 The Pacific Islanders Protection Act 1875 came in to beings, s. 6. Power for Her Majesty to exercise jurisdiction over British subjects in islands of the pacific ocean. to erect a court of justice for British subjects in the islands of the pacific. to make ordinances.
"It shall be lawful for Her Majesty to exercise power and jurisdiction over her subjects within any islands and places in the Pacific Ocean not being within Her Majesty's dominions, nor within the jurisdiction of any civilized power, ...to make regulations for the Government of her subjects in such islands and places, and to impose penalties, forfeitures, or imprisonment's for the breach of such regulations"
"It shall be lawful for Her Majesty, by order in council to create a court of justice and civil, criminal and Admiralty jurisdiction over Her Majesty's subjects within islands and places to which the authority of the said High Commissioner shall extend, and with power to take cognizance of all crimes and offences committed by Her Majesty's subjects within any of the said islands and places, or upon the sea, or in any haven, river, creek, or place within jurisdiction of the Admiralty. and Her Majesty..." (The Pacific Islanders Protection Act 1875)
Q.2 Were the natives of this land civilized
Q.3 Did the natives have Lore, jurisdiction to make laws for their society people of this land
Q.4 Were courts created for the natives
[As a result of various native title cases, it is clear that Australian law now recognises that Aboriginal communities possessed sovereignty in the sense of having a legal system before 1788...While Australian law recognises that Aboriginal legal systems existed, and traditional law continues to exist, at the moment, it only recognises an Aboriginal legal system for the purpose of establishing native title rights with respect to land.]
Q.5 Should the Aboriginal lore system, be recognised for other purposes, then just "land title".
[When common law lawyers and judges, have looked for law in Aboriginal societies, there has been a tendency to treat law as divinely inspired revelations and not rules deriving their content and form from social needs; to treat law as religious rules, and not as dispute resolution mechanisms. Many would query the appropriateness of such a classification.... However, it is one that has appealed to the High Court]
Q.6 Is Aboriginal Lore, a religion with rules of (Law) Lore
[The notion of sovereignty of parliament means that, at any time, parliaments can pass laws
which extinguish forever native title rights and all the legal rights of all Australians, if they have constitutional power to do so.]
The 1967 referendum gave the Australian Government power to make Laws for peace order and good Government of the Aboriginal race. Still today many Australians refer to this referendum as the big con Job, deceiving the people, as the yes vote would give the rights for Aborigine's to Vote
Q.7 Did the Commonwealth of Australia, have power to make laws for the Aboriginal people before 1967
The Victoria Constitution Act 1975, assured that all laws within the realm of England on the 25th day of July 1826 shall be applied in the administration of Justice in courts of Victoria, so for as they can be applied within Victoria. and the Parliament shall have power to make laws in and for Victoria in all cases whatsoever. This Act makes no mention of the Aboriginal race. therefor has no standing or meaning the Aboriginal people of Victoria.
The Courts-the legal profession upheld the doctrine of terra nullius, till the High Court decision in Eddie Mabo case (1992). Which may be the reason that Aboriginals where not included or mentioned at that time. Today, still many Victorians regard this Constitution Act, as being invalid, not worth the paper it is written on, because it doe's not require the peoples referendum to change or amend it, and as required under the Australian Constitution 1901
Q.8 Should the Constitution be altered ,without any referendum being put to the people
[Generally speaking, the Commonwealth and States are recognised as sovereignty entities. However, it has not been the constitutional history of Australia to recognise Aboriginal communities as possessing sovereign rights." In the case of conquered or ceded lands, the general rule was that the laws of the country continued until those laws were altered by the British parliament, or the Crown under its prerogative powers]
The two way's for Aboriginal Traditional Lore can become extinct , (1) By the Australian Parliament saying so, (if it had the Constitutional power to do so) or (2) The Aboriginal people ceded, fails to uphold their Lore when applicable or abandons the practice of Lore .
Q.9 Should Aboriginal Traditional Lore be recognised by the Courts in all cases. and not Just Native Land title issues.
[It is clear from the consultations carried out by the Committee that Aboriginal law is the important regulator of life in many Aboriginal communities in the Northern Territory. In these communities people live their lives under traditional law, and many disputes are resolved in accordance with the Aboriginal legal system. For such people there is only one legal system and it is Aboriginal. The existence of Aboriginal legal systems in the Northern Territory and general discussion of their key features, is set out in the Committee's Background Paper 1:Aboriginal communities and Aboriginal law in the Northern Territory].
[It is sometimes said that an Aboriginal person can only be truly said to be bound by traditional law if he or she is living a wholly "traditional" lifestyle, that is, no electricity, no fridge and no gun for hunting. This point of view fails to recognise the right of Aboriginal people to determine how they will exercise their right to life. It is also contrary to the way the High Court looks at native title rights and interests.]
[A person does not cease to exercise a traditional right by exercising the traditional right in a contemporary way. Accordingly, traditional laws may still operate in Aboriginal communities that have electricity and other material manifestations of contemporary life]
Q.10 Should an Aboriginal person be denied the rights of protection and practice of traditional Aboriginal Lore, just because that person now lives in a city or suburb.
In the Southern state, Victoria it now appears that the Victorian Government has formed a body know as The Victorian Aboriginal Justice Advisory Committee (VAJAC) is the Government primary source of advice from, on justice related issues. However due to employment contracts which limits the rights to open raise issues that are solidly enshrined in Aboriginal Lore. but are in conflict with the legislated States laws, which have created an unnecessary burden on the Aboriginal people.
For example, the traditional Lore, (translated) "if it came for the Earth. and grew in your country, it was yours to do as you please" Unfortunately, some Victorian Aboriginal organisation disregard the old lore, and support the state legislated laws, that has created an unnecessary has burden on the Aboriginal people of Victoria. Now 2010 the issue is now before the Courts of Victoria.
Q.11 If a state law, has or is causing an unnecessary hardship on the Aboriginal people, then should traditional lore be considered, as the supreme Law for the Aboriginal people.
[The common law has always recognized the existence of certain "customs" as "local common law", that is, the common law of a particular part of England, even if it is inconsistent with the general common law. Courts, applying the common law, have a long history of recognising native "custom" as part of the common law itself. A number of specific rules have developed. Courts decline to apply a native custom if it is inconsistent with English law notions of "natural justice" Customs are not assumed to be frozen in time. They can change as long as they retain their essential]
[Under the common law there is a well defined process for ascertaining the content of espect of Papua New Guinea, while it was a territory of Australia. Indeed since 1976 the Aboriginal Land Commissioners have been setting out tests for finding Aboriginal law.... However, Australian courts have not recognised any traditional law under the law of custom].
Q.12 Should the Australian courts recognised traditional Lore, as an old custom
I thank you taking the time to read this so far, it would be appreciated in the reply, if you type in under the Q ? Yes - No or Don't know. The (the last) Aboriginal at the Top End now find need of support the maintain their tradition lore and custom. in reply you will be forwarded some further questions, that need to be addressed.
Complied by
Les McDonald,
Chief Lore Officer
Aboriginal Embassy Victoria
Email aboriginalembassyvic@yahoo.co.an
[When land that was unoccupied by European powers began to be discovered by European nations, under various doctrines of international law, these nations allotted these territories among themselves. The function of these doctrines was to prevent European nations going to war against each other]
[European ideas of international law, at the time of settlement of Australia, recognised various modes of acquiring sovereignty over land, the most relevant being: occupation of land that was terra nullius (land belonging to no-one). The legal effect of British acquisition of sovereignty over the Australian land mass was the English law applied to Australia.]
Q.1 Considering the meaning of terra nullius, Did English law also apply to the natives
1875 The Pacific Islanders Protection Act 1875 came in to beings, s. 6. Power for Her Majesty to exercise jurisdiction over British subjects in islands of the pacific ocean. to erect a court of justice for British subjects in the islands of the pacific. to make ordinances.
"It shall be lawful for Her Majesty to exercise power and jurisdiction over her subjects within any islands and places in the Pacific Ocean not being within Her Majesty's dominions, nor within the jurisdiction of any civilized power, ...to make regulations for the Government of her subjects in such islands and places, and to impose penalties, forfeitures, or imprisonment's for the breach of such regulations"
"It shall be lawful for Her Majesty, by order in council to create a court of justice and civil, criminal and Admiralty jurisdiction over Her Majesty's subjects within islands and places to which the authority of the said High Commissioner shall extend, and with power to take cognizance of all crimes and offences committed by Her Majesty's subjects within any of the said islands and places, or upon the sea, or in any haven, river, creek, or place within jurisdiction of the Admiralty. and Her Majesty..." (The Pacific Islanders Protection Act 1875)
Q.2 Were the natives of this land civilized
Q.3 Did the natives have Lore, jurisdiction to make laws for their society people of this land
Q.4 Were courts created for the natives
[As a result of various native title cases, it is clear that Australian law now recognises that Aboriginal communities possessed sovereignty in the sense of having a legal system before 1788...While Australian law recognises that Aboriginal legal systems existed, and traditional law continues to exist, at the moment, it only recognises an Aboriginal legal system for the purpose of establishing native title rights with respect to land.]
Q.5 Should the Aboriginal lore system, be recognised for other purposes, then just "land title".
[When common law lawyers and judges, have looked for law in Aboriginal societies, there has been a tendency to treat law as divinely inspired revelations and not rules deriving their content and form from social needs; to treat law as religious rules, and not as dispute resolution mechanisms. Many would query the appropriateness of such a classification.... However, it is one that has appealed to the High Court]
Q.6 Is Aboriginal Lore, a religion with rules of (Law) Lore
[The notion of sovereignty of parliament means that, at any time, parliaments can pass laws
which extinguish forever native title rights and all the legal rights of all Australians, if they have constitutional power to do so.]
The 1967 referendum gave the Australian Government power to make Laws for peace order and good Government of the Aboriginal race. Still today many Australians refer to this referendum as the big con Job, deceiving the people, as the yes vote would give the rights for Aborigine's to Vote
Q.7 Did the Commonwealth of Australia, have power to make laws for the Aboriginal people before 1967
The Victoria Constitution Act 1975, assured that all laws within the realm of England on the 25th day of July 1826 shall be applied in the administration of Justice in courts of Victoria, so for as they can be applied within Victoria. and the Parliament shall have power to make laws in and for Victoria in all cases whatsoever. This Act makes no mention of the Aboriginal race. therefor has no standing or meaning the Aboriginal people of Victoria.
The Courts-the legal profession upheld the doctrine of terra nullius, till the High Court decision in Eddie Mabo case (1992). Which may be the reason that Aboriginals where not included or mentioned at that time. Today, still many Victorians regard this Constitution Act, as being invalid, not worth the paper it is written on, because it doe's not require the peoples referendum to change or amend it, and as required under the Australian Constitution 1901
Q.8 Should the Constitution be altered ,without any referendum being put to the people
[Generally speaking, the Commonwealth and States are recognised as sovereignty entities. However, it has not been the constitutional history of Australia to recognise Aboriginal communities as possessing sovereign rights." In the case of conquered or ceded lands, the general rule was that the laws of the country continued until those laws were altered by the British parliament, or the Crown under its prerogative powers]
The two way's for Aboriginal Traditional Lore can become extinct , (1) By the Australian Parliament saying so, (if it had the Constitutional power to do so) or (2) The Aboriginal people ceded, fails to uphold their Lore when applicable or abandons the practice of Lore .
Q.9 Should Aboriginal Traditional Lore be recognised by the Courts in all cases. and not Just Native Land title issues.
[It is clear from the consultations carried out by the Committee that Aboriginal law is the important regulator of life in many Aboriginal communities in the Northern Territory. In these communities people live their lives under traditional law, and many disputes are resolved in accordance with the Aboriginal legal system. For such people there is only one legal system and it is Aboriginal. The existence of Aboriginal legal systems in the Northern Territory and general discussion of their key features, is set out in the Committee's Background Paper 1:Aboriginal communities and Aboriginal law in the Northern Territory].
[It is sometimes said that an Aboriginal person can only be truly said to be bound by traditional law if he or she is living a wholly "traditional" lifestyle, that is, no electricity, no fridge and no gun for hunting. This point of view fails to recognise the right of Aboriginal people to determine how they will exercise their right to life. It is also contrary to the way the High Court looks at native title rights and interests.]
[A person does not cease to exercise a traditional right by exercising the traditional right in a contemporary way. Accordingly, traditional laws may still operate in Aboriginal communities that have electricity and other material manifestations of contemporary life]
Q.10 Should an Aboriginal person be denied the rights of protection and practice of traditional Aboriginal Lore, just because that person now lives in a city or suburb.
In the Southern state, Victoria it now appears that the Victorian Government has formed a body know as The Victorian Aboriginal Justice Advisory Committee (VAJAC) is the Government primary source of advice from, on justice related issues. However due to employment contracts which limits the rights to open raise issues that are solidly enshrined in Aboriginal Lore. but are in conflict with the legislated States laws, which have created an unnecessary burden on the Aboriginal people.
For example, the traditional Lore, (translated) "if it came for the Earth. and grew in your country, it was yours to do as you please" Unfortunately, some Victorian Aboriginal organisation disregard the old lore, and support the state legislated laws, that has created an unnecessary has burden on the Aboriginal people of Victoria. Now 2010 the issue is now before the Courts of Victoria.
Q.11 If a state law, has or is causing an unnecessary hardship on the Aboriginal people, then should traditional lore be considered, as the supreme Law for the Aboriginal people.
[The common law has always recognized the existence of certain "customs" as "local common law", that is, the common law of a particular part of England, even if it is inconsistent with the general common law. Courts, applying the common law, have a long history of recognising native "custom" as part of the common law itself. A number of specific rules have developed. Courts decline to apply a native custom if it is inconsistent with English law notions of "natural justice" Customs are not assumed to be frozen in time. They can change as long as they retain their essential]
[Under the common law there is a well defined process for ascertaining the content of espect of Papua New Guinea, while it was a territory of Australia. Indeed since 1976 the Aboriginal Land Commissioners have been setting out tests for finding Aboriginal law.... However, Australian courts have not recognised any traditional law under the law of custom].
Q.12 Should the Australian courts recognised traditional Lore, as an old custom
I thank you taking the time to read this so far, it would be appreciated in the reply, if you type in under the Q ? Yes - No or Don't know. The (the last) Aboriginal at the Top End now find need of support the maintain their tradition lore and custom. in reply you will be forwarded some further questions, that need to be addressed.
Complied by
Les McDonald,
Chief Lore Officer
Aboriginal Embassy Victoria
Email aboriginalembassyvic@yahoo.co.an
Wednesday, January 20, 2010
"U" be the judge " County Court 30/12/09
The Accused response, Re: County Court report Transcript , Tuesday 10th November 2009
First by way of relevant background:-
On the 8th April 2008 before Magistrate Cappel, a requested to the Court, to clarify the Jurisdiction of the Courts over the Aboriginal people of Victoria, As the Victorian Constitution Act makes no mention of the Aboriginal people of Victoria therefore has no standing or meaning to the Aboriginal people of Victoria. and requested any documents, Acts of any papers that contradicts the claim.
In support the Defendant has filed and placed before the Honourable Court copies of the following correspondence:-
6th August 1996 Aboriginal Embassy Victoria to Scrutiny of Acts and Regulations Committee, "I write to request a copy of the "Current Act" the gave the Victorian Government power to make laws for peace order and good government for the Indigenous people. and in reply
On 26 August 1996 from the Scrutiny of Acts and Regulations Committee, to Les McDonald Chief Justice, Aboriginal Embassy Victoria, " I am unaware of any Act which gives the Victorian Government the Power to make laws for peace, order and good government for indigenous people. Signed Helen M. Mason Executive Officer."
10th November 2009 Ballarat County Court (Conference) Her Honour remarked "I've been told, several times, as far as the State of Victoria is concerned, the Act it enacts, it doesn't have to specify that it applies to Aboriginal people, because it applies to all people in the State" and further stated :-"There is no such documents. My understanding is, there is no such documents, Mr McDonald, The trial won't be held up waiting for a document that doesn't exist. That's my understanding , there will be no such document".
Further on, The Office of Public Prosecutions, Mr.Cordy, raised "Given that he's self-represented. The Matters that he's requested that the Victoria Government or the Attorney General ...Has the Victorian Parliament, proper legislated power to make laws for the Aboriginal race of Victoria? considering that the Victorian Constitution Act 1975 does not mention the Aboriginal race of Victoria and, Two. If the court's Jurisdiction is questioned in the Magistrates" court, should the matter then be transferred to the Supreme Court of Victoria to address the Jurisdiction issue,?
'Now I can tell Your Honour that no material of the nature, sought by Mr. McDonald, is going to be provided to him and really, his recourse is to legal advice or run this argument on his own if he sees that is the appropriate way to go, but at the end of the day, He's not going to get the sort of advice that he wants and I think he encapsulated it when he said to Your Honour, he wants a piece of paper that says that the Laws of Victoria apply to Aboriginal people".
"The position of the office of Public Prosecutions, is that the laws of Victoria apply to all people in Victoria, as your Honour has pointed out to him. That's the prima facie position and if he wants to challenge that, that's his right. But it would be better for him and, indeed, anyone else if he sought proper legal advice in relation to the matter, because if he's right, and he might be, I don't know, but if he's right, it's a matter that needs to litigated very carefully, rather than just doing it in an ad hoc fashion.."
Now as to help clarify the position of the Aboriginal people and to assist the Court I offer the following as byway of some relevant background:-
On the 12th October 1786 King George of England declared war on all lands held by the Dutch including New Holland which Australia was known as at that time. They chose to treat New Holland as terra nullius, meaning an uninhabited land open for settlement. Since the Privy Council had held that uninhabited lands settled by English subjects would be governed by the laws of England, there was no place for Aboriginal native title to land, nor for the recognition of Aboriginal custom or law.
1875 The Pacific Islanders Protection Act 1875 came in to beings, s. 6. Power for Her Majesty to exercise jurisdiction over British subjects in islands of the pacific ocean. to erect a court of justice for British subjects in the islands of the pacific. to make ordinances.
"It shall be lawful for Her Majesty to exercise power and jurisdiction over her subjects within any islands and places in the Pacific Ocean not being within Her Majesty's dominions, nor within the jurisdiction of any civilized power, ...to make regulations for the Government of her subjects in such islands and places, and to impose penalties, forfeitures, or imprisonment's for the breach of such regulations"
"It shall be lawful for Her Majesty, by order in council to create a court of justice and civil, criminal and Admiralty jurisdiction over Her Majesty's subjects within islands and places to which the authority of the said High Commissioner shall extend, and with power to take cognizance of all crimes and offences committed by Her Majesty's subjects within any of the said islands and places, or upon the sea, or in any haven, river, creek, or place within jurisdiction of the Admiralty. and Her Majesty..."
Considering that the above Act, which is still valid and adhered to by the Courts of Victoria only relates to Her Majesty Courts jurisdiction over her Majesty's subjects, and does not include the natives, Aboriginal people of this land. being a civilisation that had it own rule of Lore to guide, direct, protect and control their society at that time.
The law of Australia consists of the Australian common law (which is based on the English common law), federal laws enacted by the Parliament of Australia, and laws enacted by the Parliaments of the Australian states and territories. The most important law of Australia is the Constitution of Australia, which describes Australia's system of constitutional monarchy, and forms the basis for the government of Australia.
All of the States and territories of Australia that are self-governing are separate jurisdictions, and have their own system of courts and parliaments. The systems of laws in each State are influential on each other, but not binding. Laws passed by the Parliament of Australia apply to the whole of Australia.
The reception of English law was clarified by the Australian Courts Act 1828, which provided that all laws and statutes in force in England at the date of the enactment of the legislation should be applied in the courts of New South Wales and Van Diemen's Land (Tasmania) so far as they were applicable. Since Queensland and Victoria were originally part of New South Wales, the same date applies in those States for the reception of English law. South Australia adopted a different date for reception, as did Western Australia.
The Victoria Constitution Act 1885 and 1975 and direct to
3. Laws of England to be applied in the administration of Justice. (1) Subject to the Imperial Acts application Act 1922. all laws and statutes in force within the realm of England on the 25th day of July, 1828 (not being inconsistent with any law now in force) shall be applied in the administration of justice in the courts of Victoria, so far as they can be applied within Victoria. then to
Part 11- The Parliament.- Division 1. Constitution and Powers
16. Legislative power of Parliament, The Parliament shall have power to make laws in and for Victoria in all cases whatsoever"
As it now appears, the Courts and the Office of Public Prosecution has relied on the Victoria Constitution Act 1975. to prop up the claim That the Victorian Parliament has power to make Law for the Aboriginal people of Victoria and the Courts have jurisdiction over the Aboriginal people of Victoria
It has been cited over the years, (1) that the Victorian Constitution Act.. came into being without Her Majesty Queen Victoria, assent to establish a Constitution in and for Colony Victoria. and (2) It also has been raised that the Constitution Act does not require any public referendum to alter or amend the Constitution Act, as required by and under, Australian Constitution 1901. Which leaves open to question, if the Constitution Act. is in fact a lawful, valid Act it's self.
I pray that this Honourable Court if it see fit to do so, as to clarify the above points (1), and (2) being in best interest of Justice, the Courts and the people of Victoria.
I reiterate, that the Victoria Parliament has no proper legislated power to make Laws for peace order and good Government for the Aboriginal people of Victoria.
and that the Courts of Victoria has no jurisdiction over the Aboriginal people of Victoria as they Courts are established for Her Majesty subjects. (as aforesaid)
Complied by Les McDonald Chief Lore Officer, Aboriginal Embassy Victoria;being on behalf of the accused. in the matter County Court Ballarat, No. CR-08-01796
Dated this day, Wednesday 30th December 2009
First by way of relevant background:-
On the 8th April 2008 before Magistrate Cappel, a requested to the Court, to clarify the Jurisdiction of the Courts over the Aboriginal people of Victoria, As the Victorian Constitution Act makes no mention of the Aboriginal people of Victoria therefore has no standing or meaning to the Aboriginal people of Victoria. and requested any documents, Acts of any papers that contradicts the claim.
In support the Defendant has filed and placed before the Honourable Court copies of the following correspondence:-
6th August 1996 Aboriginal Embassy Victoria to Scrutiny of Acts and Regulations Committee, "I write to request a copy of the "Current Act" the gave the Victorian Government power to make laws for peace order and good government for the Indigenous people. and in reply
On 26 August 1996 from the Scrutiny of Acts and Regulations Committee, to Les McDonald Chief Justice, Aboriginal Embassy Victoria, " I am unaware of any Act which gives the Victorian Government the Power to make laws for peace, order and good government for indigenous people. Signed Helen M. Mason Executive Officer."
10th November 2009 Ballarat County Court (Conference) Her Honour remarked "I've been told, several times, as far as the State of Victoria is concerned, the Act it enacts, it doesn't have to specify that it applies to Aboriginal people, because it applies to all people in the State" and further stated :-"There is no such documents. My understanding is, there is no such documents, Mr McDonald, The trial won't be held up waiting for a document that doesn't exist. That's my understanding , there will be no such document".
Further on, The Office of Public Prosecutions, Mr.Cordy, raised "Given that he's self-represented. The Matters that he's requested that the Victoria Government or the Attorney General ...Has the Victorian Parliament, proper legislated power to make laws for the Aboriginal race of Victoria? considering that the Victorian Constitution Act 1975 does not mention the Aboriginal race of Victoria and, Two. If the court's Jurisdiction is questioned in the Magistrates" court, should the matter then be transferred to the Supreme Court of Victoria to address the Jurisdiction issue,?
'Now I can tell Your Honour that no material of the nature, sought by Mr. McDonald, is going to be provided to him and really, his recourse is to legal advice or run this argument on his own if he sees that is the appropriate way to go, but at the end of the day, He's not going to get the sort of advice that he wants and I think he encapsulated it when he said to Your Honour, he wants a piece of paper that says that the Laws of Victoria apply to Aboriginal people".
"The position of the office of Public Prosecutions, is that the laws of Victoria apply to all people in Victoria, as your Honour has pointed out to him. That's the prima facie position and if he wants to challenge that, that's his right. But it would be better for him and, indeed, anyone else if he sought proper legal advice in relation to the matter, because if he's right, and he might be, I don't know, but if he's right, it's a matter that needs to litigated very carefully, rather than just doing it in an ad hoc fashion.."
Now as to help clarify the position of the Aboriginal people and to assist the Court I offer the following as byway of some relevant background:-
On the 12th October 1786 King George of England declared war on all lands held by the Dutch including New Holland which Australia was known as at that time. They chose to treat New Holland as terra nullius, meaning an uninhabited land open for settlement. Since the Privy Council had held that uninhabited lands settled by English subjects would be governed by the laws of England, there was no place for Aboriginal native title to land, nor for the recognition of Aboriginal custom or law.
1875 The Pacific Islanders Protection Act 1875 came in to beings, s. 6. Power for Her Majesty to exercise jurisdiction over British subjects in islands of the pacific ocean. to erect a court of justice for British subjects in the islands of the pacific. to make ordinances.
"It shall be lawful for Her Majesty to exercise power and jurisdiction over her subjects within any islands and places in the Pacific Ocean not being within Her Majesty's dominions, nor within the jurisdiction of any civilized power, ...to make regulations for the Government of her subjects in such islands and places, and to impose penalties, forfeitures, or imprisonment's for the breach of such regulations"
"It shall be lawful for Her Majesty, by order in council to create a court of justice and civil, criminal and Admiralty jurisdiction over Her Majesty's subjects within islands and places to which the authority of the said High Commissioner shall extend, and with power to take cognizance of all crimes and offences committed by Her Majesty's subjects within any of the said islands and places, or upon the sea, or in any haven, river, creek, or place within jurisdiction of the Admiralty. and Her Majesty..."
Considering that the above Act, which is still valid and adhered to by the Courts of Victoria only relates to Her Majesty Courts jurisdiction over her Majesty's subjects, and does not include the natives, Aboriginal people of this land. being a civilisation that had it own rule of Lore to guide, direct, protect and control their society at that time.
The law of Australia consists of the Australian common law (which is based on the English common law), federal laws enacted by the Parliament of Australia, and laws enacted by the Parliaments of the Australian states and territories. The most important law of Australia is the Constitution of Australia, which describes Australia's system of constitutional monarchy, and forms the basis for the government of Australia.
All of the States and territories of Australia that are self-governing are separate jurisdictions, and have their own system of courts and parliaments. The systems of laws in each State are influential on each other, but not binding. Laws passed by the Parliament of Australia apply to the whole of Australia.
The reception of English law was clarified by the Australian Courts Act 1828, which provided that all laws and statutes in force in England at the date of the enactment of the legislation should be applied in the courts of New South Wales and Van Diemen's Land (Tasmania) so far as they were applicable. Since Queensland and Victoria were originally part of New South Wales, the same date applies in those States for the reception of English law. South Australia adopted a different date for reception, as did Western Australia.
The Victoria Constitution Act 1885 and 1975 and direct to
3. Laws of England to be applied in the administration of Justice. (1) Subject to the Imperial Acts application Act 1922. all laws and statutes in force within the realm of England on the 25th day of July, 1828 (not being inconsistent with any law now in force) shall be applied in the administration of justice in the courts of Victoria, so far as they can be applied within Victoria. then to
Part 11- The Parliament.- Division 1. Constitution and Powers
16. Legislative power of Parliament, The Parliament shall have power to make laws in and for Victoria in all cases whatsoever"
As it now appears, the Courts and the Office of Public Prosecution has relied on the Victoria Constitution Act 1975. to prop up the claim That the Victorian Parliament has power to make Law for the Aboriginal people of Victoria and the Courts have jurisdiction over the Aboriginal people of Victoria
It has been cited over the years, (1) that the Victorian Constitution Act.. came into being without Her Majesty Queen Victoria, assent to establish a Constitution in and for Colony Victoria. and (2) It also has been raised that the Constitution Act does not require any public referendum to alter or amend the Constitution Act, as required by and under, Australian Constitution 1901. Which leaves open to question, if the Constitution Act. is in fact a lawful, valid Act it's self.
I pray that this Honourable Court if it see fit to do so, as to clarify the above points (1), and (2) being in best interest of Justice, the Courts and the people of Victoria.
I reiterate, that the Victoria Parliament has no proper legislated power to make Laws for peace order and good Government for the Aboriginal people of Victoria.
and that the Courts of Victoria has no jurisdiction over the Aboriginal people of Victoria as they Courts are established for Her Majesty subjects. (as aforesaid)
Complied by Les McDonald Chief Lore Officer, Aboriginal Embassy Victoria;being on behalf of the accused. in the matter County Court Ballarat, No. CR-08-01796
Dated this day, Wednesday 30th December 2009
Thursday, December 17, 2009
to the court "U" be the Judge
Registrar County Court
100 Grenville Street South
P.O. Box 604
Ballarat 3353 16th December 2009
Dear Ms Loren Matheson
Re: Case No. X00340105 and file No. CR-08-01796
I acknowledge your letter of the 15th December 2009, which included Circuit List commencing January 18th 2010, which I thank you for, as you may not be aware, I am not a Legal practitioner.
As by way of apparition I have enclosed herewith a signed copy of my statement as to assist the Court, and handed to the Officer of Public Prosecution. Please note I have not included exhibits mention. copies of such are in trust of OPP, Mr Weigal.
I ask is it possible to let me know about 2-3 days prior before the matter is before the Court, this will give me time to call witnesses, that reside at great distance from Ballarat.
I also take this opportunity to bring to your attention, disappointed that the issues put before the Court. still have not been addressed in a proper manner as expected by the people of Victoria, a truthful and responsible response to clearly clarify the law.
As this matter started on the 8th April 2008 mention at the Maryborough Magistrates Court, I filed my defence with the court on the 3rd April 2008, which raised the question of the Courts over the Aboriginal People of Victoria.. and to leave open to question If the Courts Jurisdiction is challenged, should the matter be addressed be a higher Court, if so what Court?
It is very disturbing that as yet the Office of Public Prosecution has not or can not forward any documented evidence that supports the Victorian Parliament the power to make laws for peace, order and good Government for the Aboriginal people of Victoria, being one of the main bases of my defence.
I thank you
Yours faithfully
Les McDonald
100 Grenville Street South
P.O. Box 604
Ballarat 3353 16th December 2009
Dear Ms Loren Matheson
Re: Case No. X00340105 and file No. CR-08-01796
I acknowledge your letter of the 15th December 2009, which included Circuit List commencing January 18th 2010, which I thank you for, as you may not be aware, I am not a Legal practitioner.
As by way of apparition I have enclosed herewith a signed copy of my statement as to assist the Court, and handed to the Officer of Public Prosecution. Please note I have not included exhibits mention. copies of such are in trust of OPP, Mr Weigal.
I ask is it possible to let me know about 2-3 days prior before the matter is before the Court, this will give me time to call witnesses, that reside at great distance from Ballarat.
I also take this opportunity to bring to your attention, disappointed that the issues put before the Court. still have not been addressed in a proper manner as expected by the people of Victoria, a truthful and responsible response to clearly clarify the law.
As this matter started on the 8th April 2008 mention at the Maryborough Magistrates Court, I filed my defence with the court on the 3rd April 2008, which raised the question of the Courts over the Aboriginal People of Victoria.. and to leave open to question If the Courts Jurisdiction is challenged, should the matter be addressed be a higher Court, if so what Court?
It is very disturbing that as yet the Office of Public Prosecution has not or can not forward any documented evidence that supports the Victorian Parliament the power to make laws for peace, order and good Government for the Aboriginal people of Victoria, being one of the main bases of my defence.
I thank you
Yours faithfully
Les McDonald
from the Court "U" be the judge
Dear Practitioner
RE Crime Circuit commencing January 18th,2010 (
Not compleated)
signed
Loren Mathson
Registrar County Courtre
RE Crime Circuit commencing January 18th,2010 (
Not compleated)
signed
Loren Mathson
Registrar County Courtre
Friday, November 27, 2009
"U" be the judge " To the Court_OPP 26/11/08
The County Court Ballarat File No. CR-08-01796
In the matter of Leslie Ernest McDonald and
To the Officer of Public Prosecutions, Re:- Case conferences November 26th 2009
Re:- Request, (as to assist the Court)
The Defendant has filed and placed before the Honourable Court copies of the following correspondence:-
6th August 1996 Aboriginal Embassy Victoria to Scrutiny of Acts and Regulations Committee, "I write to request a copy of the "Current Act" the gave the Victorian Government power to make laws for peace order and good government for the Indigenous people. "
26 August 1996 from the Scrutiny of Acts and Regulations Committee, to Les McDonald Chief Justice, Aboriginal Embassy Victoria, " I am unaware of any Act which gives the Victorian Government the Power to make laws for peace, order and good government for indigenous people. Signed Helen M. Mason Executive Officer."
The Defendant maintains that the above (as evidence) verifies and leaves open to question if The Victorian Parliament has any lawful jurisdiction to make laws for the Indigenous People of Victoria.
The Defendant maintains, The Victorian Constitution Act 1975. Part 11 "The Parliament 16. Legislative power of Parliament "The Parliament shall have power to make laws in and for Victoria in all cases whatsoever." makes no mention of the Aboriginal people of Victoria, therefore has no proper standing or meaning to the Aboriginal People of Victoria.
Constitution Act 1975. 2. Existing laws. to:-
(2) All courts within Victoria and all offices judicial administrative or ministerial there in and all charters legal commissions powers and authorities except insofar as the same may be abolished altered or varied by or may be inconsistent with the provisions of this act or are abolished altered or varied by any Act or Acts shall continue to subsist in the same form and with the same effect as if this Act had not come into force.
The Defendant maintains the doubt surrounding the Constitution Act 1975, and leaves open to challenge the Courts of Victoria jurisdiction over the Natives -Aboriginal People.
3. Laws of England to be applied in the Administration of Justice.
(2) If any doubt arises as to the application of any such laws or statues in Victoria, it shall be lawful for the Parliament be Act to declare whether such laws or statutes shall be deemed to extend with in Victoria or to make and establish such limitations and modifications of such laws and statutes within Victoria as may be deemed expedient in that behalf.
Cont.2
The Defendant maintains, that Parliament has been made made aware of the doubt of such laws or statues in Victoria (1996) and as yet have not declared whether such laws shall be deemed to extend to the Aboriginal natives of Victoria
The Pacific Islanders Protection Act 1875
6. Power for Her Majesty to exercise jurisdiction over British subjects in islands of the pacific ocean. to erect a court of justice for British subjects in the islands of the pacific. to make ordinances.
"It shall be lawful for Her Majesty to exercise power and jurisdiction over her subjects within any islands and places in the Pacific Ocean not being within Her Majesty's dominions, nor within the jurisdiction of any civilized power, ...to make regulations for the Government of her subjects in such islands and places, and to impose penalties, forfeitures, or imprisonment's for the breach of such regulations"
"It shall be lawful for Her Majesty, by order in council to create a court of justice and civil, criminal and Admiralty jurisdiction over Her Majesty's subjects within islands and places to which the authority of the said High Commissioner shall extend, and with power to take cognizance of all crimes and offences committed by Her Majesty's subjects within any of the said islands and places, or upon the sea, or in any haven, river, creek, or place within jurisdiction of the Admiralty. and Her Majesty..."
The Defendant maintains that the above Act, which is still valid and adhered to by the Court of Victoria only relates to Her Majesty Courts jurisdiction over her Majesty's subjects .
The Defendant preys that the Office of Public Prosecutions address the questions of Law in a proper, reasonable, and truthful manner, as expected by Her Majesty's Courts and the citizen's of Victoria.
This ends the request by the Defendant which is intended to handed to the duty officer of the Office of Public Prosecution, on the aforesaid Ballarat County Court date.
Signed ----------------------------------
Leslie Ernest McDonald
Defendant
In the matter of Leslie Ernest McDonald and
To the Officer of Public Prosecutions, Re:- Case conferences November 26th 2009
Re:- Request, (as to assist the Court)
The Defendant has filed and placed before the Honourable Court copies of the following correspondence:-
6th August 1996 Aboriginal Embassy Victoria to Scrutiny of Acts and Regulations Committee, "I write to request a copy of the "Current Act" the gave the Victorian Government power to make laws for peace order and good government for the Indigenous people. "
26 August 1996 from the Scrutiny of Acts and Regulations Committee, to Les McDonald Chief Justice, Aboriginal Embassy Victoria, " I am unaware of any Act which gives the Victorian Government the Power to make laws for peace, order and good government for indigenous people. Signed Helen M. Mason Executive Officer."
The Defendant maintains that the above (as evidence) verifies and leaves open to question if The Victorian Parliament has any lawful jurisdiction to make laws for the Indigenous People of Victoria.
The Defendant maintains, The Victorian Constitution Act 1975. Part 11 "The Parliament 16. Legislative power of Parliament "The Parliament shall have power to make laws in and for Victoria in all cases whatsoever." makes no mention of the Aboriginal people of Victoria, therefore has no proper standing or meaning to the Aboriginal People of Victoria.
Constitution Act 1975. 2. Existing laws. to:-
(2) All courts within Victoria and all offices judicial administrative or ministerial there in and all charters legal commissions powers and authorities except insofar as the same may be abolished altered or varied by or may be inconsistent with the provisions of this act or are abolished altered or varied by any Act or Acts shall continue to subsist in the same form and with the same effect as if this Act had not come into force.
The Defendant maintains the doubt surrounding the Constitution Act 1975, and leaves open to challenge the Courts of Victoria jurisdiction over the Natives -Aboriginal People.
3. Laws of England to be applied in the Administration of Justice.
(2) If any doubt arises as to the application of any such laws or statues in Victoria, it shall be lawful for the Parliament be Act to declare whether such laws or statutes shall be deemed to extend with in Victoria or to make and establish such limitations and modifications of such laws and statutes within Victoria as may be deemed expedient in that behalf.
Cont.2
The Defendant maintains, that Parliament has been made made aware of the doubt of such laws or statues in Victoria (1996) and as yet have not declared whether such laws shall be deemed to extend to the Aboriginal natives of Victoria
The Pacific Islanders Protection Act 1875
6. Power for Her Majesty to exercise jurisdiction over British subjects in islands of the pacific ocean. to erect a court of justice for British subjects in the islands of the pacific. to make ordinances.
"It shall be lawful for Her Majesty to exercise power and jurisdiction over her subjects within any islands and places in the Pacific Ocean not being within Her Majesty's dominions, nor within the jurisdiction of any civilized power, ...to make regulations for the Government of her subjects in such islands and places, and to impose penalties, forfeitures, or imprisonment's for the breach of such regulations"
"It shall be lawful for Her Majesty, by order in council to create a court of justice and civil, criminal and Admiralty jurisdiction over Her Majesty's subjects within islands and places to which the authority of the said High Commissioner shall extend, and with power to take cognizance of all crimes and offences committed by Her Majesty's subjects within any of the said islands and places, or upon the sea, or in any haven, river, creek, or place within jurisdiction of the Admiralty. and Her Majesty..."
The Defendant maintains that the above Act, which is still valid and adhered to by the Court of Victoria only relates to Her Majesty Courts jurisdiction over her Majesty's subjects .
The Defendant preys that the Office of Public Prosecutions address the questions of Law in a proper, reasonable, and truthful manner, as expected by Her Majesty's Courts and the citizen's of Victoria.
This ends the request by the Defendant which is intended to handed to the duty officer of the Office of Public Prosecution, on the aforesaid Ballarat County Court date.
Signed ----------------------------------
Leslie Ernest McDonald
Defendant
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
'U" be the Judge; Court notice 11/11/09
From the County Court 11th November 2009
Addressed
RE: Crime Circuit commencing November 23rd 2009
Please find attached the above document
Please be advised that this circuit will be commencing at 11am on 23rd November 2009. Matters will be dealt with in the order they appear in th list. there will be no callover.
If you have any queries, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Regards
signed
Loren Matheson
Registrar County Court.
Addressed
RE: Crime Circuit commencing November 23rd 2009
Please find attached the above document
Please be advised that this circuit will be commencing at 11am on 23rd November 2009. Matters will be dealt with in the order they appear in th list. there will be no callover.
If you have any queries, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Regards
signed
Loren Matheson
Registrar County Court.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)