20240918-Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. To Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus-Reject Extradition Regarding "Top Gun" Dan Duggan
20240918-Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. To Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus-Reject Extradition Regarding "Top Gun" Dan Duggan
1
2
3 Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus 18-9-2024
4 Email [email protected],
5
6 NOT RESTRICTED FOR PUBLICATION
7 Re -reject extradition regarding “Top Gun” Dan Duggan
8 Sir,
9 I refer to my past writings and now add this document on to it.
10 I request you provide a copy of this correspondence also to Mr Dan Duggan and/or his
11 legal representatives without undue delay.
12
13 In my view the legal principle embedded in the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act
14 1900 (UK) has embedded in the constitution that Ministers (including the Attorney-General) are
15 to be “constitutional advisers”.
16
17 Meaning that you as the first law officer at the very least should need to have a basic
18 understanding as to the true meaning and application of the legal principles embedded in the
19 constitution!
20
21 Hansard2-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates;
22 QUOTE Dr. QUICK.-
23 The Constitution empowers the Federal Parliament to deal with certain external affairs, among which
24 would probably be the right to negotiate for commercial treaties with foreign countries, in the same way as
25 Canada has negotiated for such treaties. These treaties could only confer rights and privileges upon the
26 citizens of the Commonwealth, because the Federal Government, in the exercise of its power, [start
27 page 1753] could only act for and on behalf of its citizens.
28 END QUOTE
29 .
30 Hansard 6-3-1891 Constitution Convention Debates
31 QUOTE Mr. THYNNE:
32 I shall quote from Mr. Dicey's recent work, which is very clear in its language. He says:
33 One of the characteristics of a federation is that the law of the constitution must be either
34 legally immutable or else capable of being changed only by some authority above and
35 beyond the ordinary legislative bodies, whether federal or state legislatures, existing under
36 the constitution.
37 END QUOTE
38
39 It must therefore be very clear that any extradition of Mr Dan Duggan (who I understand
40 naturalized in 2012 to be an Australian) would be a violation of his constitutional rights, as no
41 government can engaged in conduct that defies constitutional guarantees and rights. It is not
42 relevant that the Commonwealth may have any purported treaty with the USA as in the
43 end any treaty cannot be used to override or purportedly sideline constitutional rights.
44
45 The following legal principle also is applicable in the Commonwealth of Australia:
18-9-2024 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
[email protected] See also www.scribd.com/inspectorrikati
Page 2
1
2 Scheuer v Thodes, 416 US 232 94S Ct 1683, 1687 (1974) states:
3 “when a state officer (which includes Judges) acts under a state law in a manner violative
4 of the US Constitution, he comes into conflict with the superior authority of that
5 Constitution, and he is in that case stripped of his official or representative character and is
6 subjected in his person to the consequences of his individual conduct.
7 The State has no power to impart to him any immunity from responsibility to the supreme
8 authority of the United States”.
9
10 In my view anyone Minister involved in an unconstitutional extradition would be a TRAITOR
11 and accordingly by S44 & 45 of the constitution instantly vacated his/her seat in the Parliament.
12
13 Hansard 8-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National Australasian
14 Convention)
15 QUOTE
16 Mr. ISAACS.-We want a people's Constitution, not a lawyers' Constitution.
17 END QUOTE
18
19 HANSARD18-2-1898 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National
20 Australasian Convention)
21 QUOTE Mr. ISAACS.-
22 The right of a citizen of this great country, protected by the implied guarantees of its
23 Constitution,
24 END QUOTE
25
26 HANSARD 17-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
27 QUOTE
28 Mr. BARTON.- Of course it will be argued that this Constitution will have been made by
29 the Parliament of the United Kingdom. That will be true in one sense, but not true in
30 effect, because the provisions of this Constitution, the principles which it embodies,
31 and the details of enactment by which those principles are enforced, will all have been
32 the work of Australians.
33 END QUOTE
34
35 The following will also make clear that the Framers of the Constitution intended to have CIVIL
36 RIGHTS and LIBERTIES principles embedded in the Constitution;
37 HANSARD 17-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National
38 Australasian Convention)
39 QUOTE Mr. CLARK.-
40 the protection of certain fundamental rights and liberties which every individual
41 citizen is entitled to claim that the federal government shall take under its protection
42 and secure to him.
43 END QUOTE
44
45 Hansard 1-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
46 QUOTE
47 Mr. HIGGINS.-Suppose the sentry is asleep, or is in the swim with the other power?
48
49 Mr. GORDON.-There will be more than one sentry. In the case of a federal law,
50 every member of a state Parliament will be a sentry, and, every constituent of a state
51 Parliament will be a sentry.
52 As regards a law passed by a state, every man in the Federal Parliament will be a
53 sentry, and the whole constituency behind the Federal Parliament will be a sentry.
54 END QUOTE
55
1 Hansard 25-3-1897 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National
2 Australasian Convention)
3 QUOTE Mr. WISE:
4 They forget that this commonwealth can only deal with those matters that are expressly
5 remitted to its jurisdiction; and excluded from its jurisdiction are all matters that affect civil
6 rights, all matters that affect property, all matters, in a word, affecting the two great objects
7 which stir the passions and affect the interests of mankind.
8 END QUOTE
9
10 In my view any detention of Mr Dan Duggan that is not based upon constitutionally valid laws
11 would be a violation of his constitutional guaranteed rights and would therefore make any
12 Minister involved and any official to be “PERSONALLY” legally accountable without the tax
13 payers having to fork out the compensation. It is about time politicians who place themselves
14 above the true meaning and application of the legal principles embedded in the constitution are
15 held “PERSONALLY” legally accountable so they may be a warning for others that if you
16 overstep your authority then you have to face the financial consequences that may flow from
17 this.
18
19 In my view unless Mr Dan Duggan violated Australian law his detention itself would be
20 unconstitutional and in any event, treaties do not override constitutional limitations neither that
21 of the constitutional rights of a person. Hence, he should be immediately released where there
22 are no valid Australian charges against him.
23
24 Let the rule of law prevail!
25
26 We need to return to the organics and legal principles embed in of our federal constitution!
27
28 This correspondence is not intended and neither must be perceived to state all issues/details.
29 Awaiting your response, G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. (Gerrit)