Page 1

1
2
3 Committee Secretary Senate Standing Committees on Environment and Communications 24-9-2024
4 Email PO Box 6100
5 Parliament House
6 Canberra ACT 2600
7 [email protected]
8 NOT RESTRICTED FOR PUBLICATION
9 Re -SUBMISSION
10 Sir/Madam,
11
12 A major problem with making submissions is that those who are to consider the submissions
13 often are so to say BRAINDEATH in that they simply have a tunnel vision and cannot
14 understand/comprehend what the submission is about. I know this too well as when I was
15 presenting submissions from the Bar table, I discovered that many opponent lawyers and/or
16 judges don’t even grasp the basics of legal proceedings. What the separation of powers stands
17 for, etc.
18 And going by the comments of many Members of Parliament I view the same might apply.
19
20 Let me go a step further, if we had competent Members of Parliament then the “covid scam”
21 would never have succeeded and likely most who became victims (including those who died)
22 may never have ended up as such.
23
24 When I was long ago a single parent (father) my daughter came in that she had a lose tooth that
25 had come out. I responded that if she put it on a plate then the Tooth Fairy would overnight
26 replace this with a coin. And, well the next morning she went to have a look and there was a coin
27 and the tooth was gone. Millions of parents around the world are to my understanding telling this
28 story about the tooth Fairy so it must be real, isn’t it? Well, my daughter (then a little girl)
29 responded: “Dad, don’t be silly, there is no tooth Fairy, you did it.”.
30 And the same I view applies to the so called “SARS-CoV-2 virus” referred to as “covid-19”
31 which to my understanding even now never was proven to be isolated and purified by the Koch
32 postulate. Fools those who fell for the rot and went along with it. If that is the kind of
33 intelligence Members of parliament have that they rely upon a non-existing virus then surely we
34 better get some more realistic person in to the Parliament.
35 So, with any mis/disinformation surely any Member of parliament may now claim that the
36 proposed legislation would be good to get a person like myself to be denied any ability for
37 publishing my claims. Well, let me wake you up a bit from this eternal tunnel vision.
38 I during the purported 2001 federal election was an INDEPENDENT candidate and in my how-
39 to-vote cards made clear that “compulsory” part of voting was unconstitutional and that “State
40 land taxation” was unconstitutional. Meaning that the so called “council rates” are
41 unconstitutional.
42 Well politicians and their officials are narrow minded rather than to consider properly what I
43 wrote.
24-9-2024 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
3 Let it be clear that placing this on a How-to-vote card could be deemed to mislead electors and I
4 could then face serious legal consequences.
5 Well, the AEC decided to charge me in AEC v Schorel-Hlavka with FAILING TO VOTE in
6 the 2001 (purported) federal election. I responded with a NOTICE OF CONSTITUTIONAL
7 MATTERS which was also served upon the Commonwealth DPP and also upon all 9 Attorney-
8 Generals. On 4 December 2002 the prosecutor made known that no one had ever challenged the
9 issues I had stated in the NOTICE OF CONSTITUTIONAL MATTERS and the Court
10 ordered the matter for the NOTICE OF CONSTITUTIONAL MATTER to proceed,
11 unchallenged. Do not that throughout the years of litigation I represented myself!
12 The AEC then again charged me with FAILING TO VOTE now in the 2004 purported Federal
13 election, this even so I had already in law challenged the constitutional validity of the
14 compulsory part of voting and as such technically the legislation objected against was ULTRA
24-9-2024 Page 2 © 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 3

1 VIRES Ab Initio. It just underlined to me that government lawyers seem to lack a proper
2 understanding of what the true meaning and application of the Commonwealth of Australia
3 Constitution Act 1900 (UK) actually stands for. On 4 August 2005 the matter came again before
4 the court and Counsel for the Commonwealth pursued to claim AVERMENT this I opposed
5 successfully (consider Kable NSW legal principle) and Counsel then argued that there were
6 truckloads of documents but the court made clear that was between the parties to be sorted out. I
7 then responded that all evidence Counsel sought to rely upon could be served upon me. Ok, I had
8 no doubt that Counsel for the Commonwealth likely was deceiving the court as to truck loads of
9 evidence, this as by law the ballot documents from the 2001 purported federal election was to be
10 destroyed after 12 months and the 2004 purported federal election was about to be destroyed.
11 Counsel not seeking an order to prevent the destruction of the 2004 purported federal election to
12 me underlined it was a swindle.
13 The matter again came before the court on 16 and 17 November 2005 and now the court ruled
14 that the previous orders would not be relied upon! Moment, the Letters Patent published in the
15 Victorian Gazette on 2 January 1901 refers to an “impartial” administration of justice, and
16 clearly a court denying my already existing legal rights is a violation of being “impartial”. Little
17 wonder the court then convicted me on both charges, without any evidence! I decided to appeal
18 and did so and no added a 3-part 409 pages written submission named ADDRESS TO THE
19 COURT setting out relevant legal issues which came before a hearing on 19 July 2006.
20 I did beef up this document to include there never was a valid Federal election in 2001 and
21 produced documents obtained within the provisions of the FOI Act to prove this, as well as that
22 in my view John Howard committed mass murder, crimes against humanity, etc, as where he
23 was legally not re-elected he then was no longer a Member of Parliament, and so others in the
24 same election, and by s64 of the constitution any commission to be a Minister ends if the person
25 is not a Member of Parliament within a 3 month period. I also, as per my NOTICE OF
26 CONSTITUTIONAL MATTER made clear that Australian citizenship is not a nationality but
27 rather reflects the place of abode and Australians are “subjects of the Crown”.
28 In this submission I will attempt to not make numerous quotations to set it all out because I have
29 published it all extensively at my blog https://www.scribd.com/inspectorrikati.
30 On 19 July 2006 the court upheld both appeal and neither the commonwealth DPP and/or any of
31 the 9 Attorney-Generals challenged any of my submissions! Meaning they are deemed to have
32 acknowledged that my submissions were correct. Yet, more than 18 years later, despite a request
33 for the Reason of Judgement, none has been provided! So much for an “impartial administration
34 of justice” where the court prevents the general community as well as myself to know why my
35 appeals were upheld, considering the many issues I canvassed in my appeals.
36

37
24-9-2024 Page 3 © 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 4

1
2
3 It must be clear that the purported “Infringement Courts” are unconstitutional this as they deny
4 both parties to be heard before any judgement is handed down. There is a lot more to it but as the
5 Framers of the Constitution made very clear:
6
7 Hansard 8-2-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
8 QUOTE
9 Mr. OCONNOR.-No, it would not; and, as an honorable member reminds me, there is a
10 decision on the point. All that is intended is that there shall be some process of law by
11 which the parties accused must be heard.
12 Mr. HIGGINS.-Both sides heard.
13 Mr. OCONNOR.-Yes; and the process of law within that principle may be [start
14 page 689] anything the state thinks fit. This provision simply assures that there shall
15 be some form by which a person accused will have an opportunity of stating his case
16 before being deprived of his liberty. Is not that a first principle in criminal law now? I
17 cannot understand any one objecting to this proposal.
18 END QUOTE
19 QUOTE In the Marriage of Tennant (1980) 5 FLR 777 at 780
20 As no grounds for appeal are required to be specified in the notice of Appeal, which, on
21 filing institutes the appeal (reg 122), there is no limitations of the scope of the appeal and all
22 findings of fact and law made in the lower court in relation to the decree appealed are in
23 challenge and cannot be relied on by the appellant or the respondent. All the issues (unless
24 by consent) must be reheard. This of course brings me to the point of the absence of reason
25 for the magistrate’s decision in this case. Perhaps reasons were given orally but not recorded
26 for the record. Apart from the requirement of such reason for the purpose of the appeal
27 process, there is the basic ground of criticism that litigants who go to court, put their
28 witnesses up, argue their case and attempt to controvert the opposing case are entitled to
29 know, if they lose, why they lost. If they are given no reason they may be entitled to feel
30 the decision against them was conceived in prejudice, bias, or caprice. In such a case not
31 only the litigant, but justice itself, is the loser.
32
33 Magistrates should realise, even more than they seem to do, that this class of business is not
34 mere ordinary trivial work, and they should deal with these cases with a due sense of
35 responsibility which administrations of the summary jurisdiction Act and the far reaching
36 consequences of the orders that they make thereafter entail. [Baker v Baker (1906) 95 LT
37 549; In Robinson v Robinson (1898) p135; and again in Cobb v Cobb (1900) p145] it was
38 stated that when making orders of this kind, from which lies an appeal to other courts, it is
39 the duty of the magistrate not only to cause a note to be made of the evidence, and of his
40 decision, but to give the reasons for his decision and to cause a note to be made of his
41 reasons... Elaborate judgements are not required, but the reasons which lead the magistrate
42 to make his order must be explicitly stated.
43 END QUOTE
24-9-2024 Page 4 © 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 5

1
2 What we seem to have is that the “impartial administration of justice” really is not “impartial”
3 at all.
4

24-9-2024 Page 5 © 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 6

1 The following legal principle applies also in the Commonwealth of Australia to not just judges
2 but also to members of parliament and their officials, etc.
3
4 Scheuer v Thodes, 416 US 232 94S Ct 1683, 1687 (1974) states:
5 “when a state officer (which includes Judges) acts under a state law in a manner violative
6 of the US Constitution, he comes into conflict with the superior authority of that
7 Constitution, and he is in that case stripped of his official or representative character and is
8 subjected in his person to the consequences of his individual conduct.
9 The State has no power to impart to him any immunity from responsibility to the supreme
10 authority of the United States”.
11
12 Here we had what I view a mass murderer John Howard inciting the Australian armed forces to
13 bomb Iraq into the Stone Age and kill innocent civilians, etc, and not a single Member of
14 parliament bothered to take him on in the courts.
15 Much is claimed that a (prime) Minister can exercise the Authority to declare war and well if that
16 is what your views are then obviously you lack the competence to be a Member of Parliament to
17 properly represent the electorate1
18
19 HANSARD 10-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National
20 Australasian Convention)
21 QUOTE Mr. BARTON (New South Wales).-
22 Then, again, there is the prerogative right to declare war and peace, an adjunct of
23 which it is that the Queen herself, or her representative, where Her Majesty is not
24 present, holds that prerogative. No one would ever dream of saying that the Queen would
25 declare war or peace without the advice of a responsible Minister.
26 END QUOTE
27
28 HANSARD 6-3-1891 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National
29 Australasian Convention)
30 QUOTE
31 Mr. DEAKIN: We can make an exception in favour of imperial interests. We have no
32 desire to interfere with the imperial prerogative in matters of war and peace!
33 END QUOTE
34
35 The representative is the Governor-General, that is if the governor-General is appointed as to the
36 manner the Framers of the constitution held it had to be, that is either on the recommendation of
37 the Home Office (10 downing street) or elected by the people. So, not some trained dog puppet
38 of the Australian executives. And, if a Governor-General was to travel beyond the borders of the
39 Commonwealth of Australia then he/she must from his/her own payment pay for another person
40 to perform his/her job! Meaning, no governor-General can exercise any powers beyond the
41 shores oif the commonwealth of Australia.
42 The Framers of the constitution did however recognize that there could be an instance where
43 there were enemy ships arriving in Australian waters not for brotherly lobve and this could be
44 considered itself to be a declaration of war by the enemy forces and then the Minister of Defence
45 would have the authoriry to respond without the governor-General having first to publish in the
46 Gazette a DECLARATION OF WAR naming a particular country. As the Framers of the
47 constitution made clear one didn’t have to wait until the guns were booming as the very
48 unauthorized entering of Australians waters was to be deemed a DECLARATION OF WAR.
49 With Afghanistan and/or Iraq no such violation of Australian sovereignty was existing and hence
50 not unless the governor-General published in the Gazette a DECLARATION OF WAR naming a
51 particular country could Australian forces be deployed.
52

24-9-2024 Page 6 © 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 7

1 I on 18 February 2003 lodged with the High Court of Australia an application that without the
2 Authorization of the Governor-General by way of publishing a DECLARATION OF WAR
3 Australian troops could not be deployed into Iraq. The Registrar refused to accept it for filing,
4 and I applied for a review and the following day a judge denied the filing. The Registrar then
5 recommended I amend the application in a certain manner, this I did and on 18 March 2003 I
6 again lodged an application. However, the Registrar again refused to accept this application for
7 filing, upon which I again applied for a review. On 19 March 2003 (the Day of the invasion into
8 Iraq) the High Court of Australia again denied my 18 February 2003 Application for filing!
9 Moment, the court twice refused to accept my 18 February 20043 application but did not refuse
10 the 18 March 2003 Application and as such this Application remains on foot!
11 In any event, in the 19 July 20043 legal proceedings I relied upon the same issues and again the
12 court then upheld both appeals without any challenge by the Commonwealth DPP and/or any of
13 the 9 Attorney-Generals.
14
15 Anyone who accepts the ruling from the High Court of Australia in Sue v Hill that the
16 Commonwealth of Australia is an independent country and Australians are “Australian citizens”
17 by nationality simply lack any proper understanding as to what the constitution stands for.
18
19 Hansard 17-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National
20 Australasian Convention)
21 QUOTE Mr. BARTON.-
22 Providing, as this Constitution does, for a free people to elect a free Parliament-giving that people
23 through their Parliament the power of the purse-laying at their mercy from day to day the existence
24 of any Ministry which dares by corruption, or drifts through ignorance into, the commission of any
25 act which is unfavorable to the people having this security, it must in its very essence be a free
26 Constitution. Whatever any one may say to the contrary that is secured in the very way in which the
27 freedom of the British Constitution is secured. It is secured by vesting in the people, through their
28 representatives, the power of the purse, and I venture [start page 2477] to say there is no other way
29 of securing absolute freedom to a people than that, unless you make a different kind of Executive
30 than that which we contemplate, and then overload your Constitution with legislative provisions to
31 protect the citizen from interference. Under this Constitution he is saved from every kind of
32 interference. Under this Constitution he has his voice not only in the, daily government of the
33 country, but in the daily determination of the question of whom is the Government to consist. There
34 is the guarantee of freedom in this Constitution. There is the guarantee which none of us have sought
35 to remove, but every one has sought to strengthen. How we or our work can be accused of not
36 providing for the popular liberty is something which I hope the critics will now venture to explain,
37 and I think I have made their work difficult for them. Having provided in that way for a free
38 Constitution, we have provided for an Executive which is charged with the duty of maintaining the
39 provisions of that Constitution; and, therefore, it can only act as the agents of the people. We have
40 provided for a Judiciary, which will determine questions arising under this Constitution, and with all
41 other questions which should be dealt with by a Federal Judiciary and it will also be a High Court of
42 Appeal for all courts in the states that choose to resort to it. In doing these things, have we not
43 provided, first, that our Constitution shall be free: next, that its government shall be by the will of the
44 people, which is the just result of their freedom: thirdly, that the Constitution shall not, nor shall any of
45 its provisions, be twisted or perverted, inasmuch as a court appointed by their own Executive, but
46 acting independently, is to decide what is a perversion of its provisions? We can have every faith in
47 the constitution of that tribunal. It is appointed as the arbiter of the Constitution. It is appointed not to
48 be above the Constitution, for no citizen is above it, but under it; but it is appointed for the purpose
49 of saying that those who are the instruments of the Constitution-the Government and the Parliament
50 of the day-shall not become the masters of those whom, as to the Constitution, they are bound to
51 serve. What I mean is this: That if you, after making a Constitution of this kind, enable any
52 Government or any Parliament to twist or infringe its provisions, then by slow degrees you may have
53 that Constitution-if not altered in terms-so whittled away in operation that the guarantees of freedom
54 which it gives your people will not be maintained; and so, in the highest sense, the court you are
55 creating here, which is to be the final interpreter of that Constitution, will be such a tribunal as will
56 preserve the popular liberty in all these regards, and will prevent, under any pretext of constitutional
57 action, the Commonwealth from dominating the states, or the states from usurping the sphere of the
58 Commonwealth. Having provided for all these things, I think this Convention has done well.
24-9-2024 Page 7 © 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 8

1 END QUOTE
2
3 Meaning, that the Court is part of the constitution and not above it and cannot alter the true
4 meaning and application of the constitution.
5
6 As for the alleged claims regarding Ss51(xxxvii) & (xxxviii) they cannot amend the constitution
7 either. They no more are giving the Commonwealth certain powers to accept a referral, etc, but
8 the states must find their authority elsewhere (French J WA, later French CJ HCA) and this
9 authority then is found by the following:
10
11 HANSARD 10-03-1891 Constitution Convention Debates
12 QUOTE
13 Dr. COCKBURN: All our experience hitherto has been under the condition of
14 parliamentary sovereignty. Parliament has been the supreme body. But when we embark
15 on federation we throw parliamentary sovereignty overboard. Parliament is no longer
16 supreme. Our parliaments at present are not only legislative, but constituent bodies. They
17 have not only the power of legislation, but the power of amending their constitutions. That
18 must disappear at once on the abolition of parliamentary sovereignty. No parliament
19 under a federation can be a constituent body; it will cease to have the power of
20 changing its constitution at its own will. Again, instead of parliament being supreme, the
21 parliaments of a federation are coordinate bodies-the main power is split up, instead of
22 being vested in one body. More than all that, there is this difference: When parliamentary
23 sovereignty is dispensed with, instead of there being a high court of parliament, you bring
24 into existence a powerful judiciary which towers above all powers, legislative and
25 executive, and which is the sole arbiter and interpreter of the constitution.
26 END QUOTE
27
28 And
29
30 Hansard 2-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
31 QUOTE
32 Mr. SYMON ( South Australia ).-
33 In the preamble honorable members will find that what we desire to do is to unite in one
34 indissoluble Federal Commonwealth -that is the political Union-"under the Crown of the
35 United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland , and under the Constitution hereby
36 established." Honorable members will therefore see that the application of the word
37 Commonwealth is to the political Union which is sought to be established. It is not
38 intended there to have any relation whatever to the name of the country or nation which we
39 are going to create under that Union . The second part of the preamble goes on to say that it
40 is expedient to make provision for the admission of other colonies into the Commonwealth.
41 That is, for admission into this political Union, which is not a republic, which is not to
42 be called a dominion, kingdom, or empire, but is to be a Union by the name of
43 "Commonwealth," and I do not propose to interfere with that in the slightest degree.
44 END QUOTE
45 .
46 HANSARD 9-2-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
47 QUOTE
48 Mr. HIGGINS.-No, because the Constitution is not passed by the Parliament.
49 END QUOTE
50
51 Hansard 1-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
52 QUOTE Sir JOHN DOWNER.-

24-9-2024 Page 8 © 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 9

1 I think we might, on the attempt to found this great Commonwealth, just advance one step,
2 not beyond the substance of the legislation, but beyond the form of the legislation, of the
3 different colonies, and say that there shall be embedded in the Constitution the righteous
4 principle that the Ministers of the Crown and their officials shall be liable for any
5 arbitrary act or wrong they may do, in the same way as any private person would be.
6 END QUOTE
7
8 Meaning that one can forget about any republic referendum as they were and remain to be
9 unconstitutional.
10
11 The Framers of the Constitution enshrined a legal principle in the constitution that the “political
12 union” is precisely that and cannot be altered by any referendum. After all the constitution itself
13 is clause 9 of the Act whereas the Monarchy is in the previous 8 clauses to which section 128
14 doesn’t apply.
15
16 Also, anyone who claims that Capt Cook invaded New Holland (Australia) needs to get a lesson
17 in history, this as there was no “bloody invasion” as trumpeted by the pretended Governor-
18 General!
19
20 40-0121
21 QUOTE Do you accept that Cap Cook did not invade "New Holland" as it was already claimed by the Dutch?
22 https://iask.ai/?mode=question&options[detail_level]=detailed&q=Do+you+accept+that+Cap+C
23 ook+did+not+invade+"New+Holland"+as+it+was+already+claimed+by+the+Dutch%3F
24 Do you accept that Cap Cook did not invade "New Holland" as it was already claimed by
25 the Dutch?
26
27 According to www.iAsk.ai Ask Ai Questions Search Engine:
28 Answer:
29 No, Captain Cook did not invade “New Holland” as it was already claimed by the Dutch.
30 The story of Lieutenant James Cook and British Sovereignty over Australia has been somewhat
31 misconstrued. While Cook did chart the east coast of New Holland (Australia) in 1770 during his
32 voyage, his primary mission was not to claim the land for Britain. Cook’s initial objective was to
33 reach Tahiti to study the Transit of Venus and then search for the mythical Great Southern Land,
34 Terra Australis.
35 When Cook was heading back after mapping New Zealand (Aotearoa), he intended to return via
36 Cape Horn in South America to potentially discover Terra Australis. However, due to the
37 condition of his ship, he decided to sail north along the east coast of New Holland towards
38 Batavia (Java) for repairs and supplies. Cook’s intention was not to invade or claim New
39 Holland but rather to navigate a route back home that would benefit his mission.
40 Cook’s journal entries indicate that he consulted with his officers on the best route to take for
41 their return journey, ultimately deciding to sail west until they reached the East Coast of New
42 Holland and then follow its direction northward. The decision to explore parts of New Holland
43 was based on practical considerations and the need for provisions rather than a deliberate
44 invasion or claim of sovereignty.
45 Therefore, it can be concluded that Captain Cook did not invade “New Holland” as it was
46 already claimed by the Dutch, and his exploration of the east coast of Australia was part of a
47 larger navigational journey rather than a conquest.
48 Top 3 Authoritative Sources Used in Answering this Question:
49 1. National Library of Australia
50 2. Australian National Maritime Museum
51 3. State Library of New South Wales
24-9-2024 Page 9 © 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 10

1 These sources provided historical records, journals, and archives related to Captain James
2 Cook’s voyages and explorations in Australia, offering valuable insights into the events
3 surrounding his navigation along the coast of New Holland.
4 Web Search Results
5 5 results
6
7 New Holland (Australia)
8 https//en.m.wikipedia.org › wiki › New_Holland_(Australia)
9 New Holland (Australia)
10 New Holland was never settled by the Dutch people, whose colonial forces and buoyant
11 population had a settled preference for the Dutch Cape Colony, Dutch ...
12
13 Why do the Dutch think that they discovered Australia before ...
14 https//www.quora.com › Why-do-the-Dutch-think-that-they-discovered-Australia-before-the-
15 British
16 Why do the Dutch think that they discovered Australia before ...
17 The Dutch called it “New Holland”, rather strangely because it looked nothing remotely like
18 Holland. They were quite unimpressed with the areas ...
19
20 'Over Cooked': Is Captain Cook the source of British sovereignty in ...
21 http//nationalunitygovernment.org › content › over-cooked-captain-cook-source-british-
22 sovereignty-australia
23 'Over Cooked': Is Captain Cook the source of British sovereignty in ...
24 Another oddity in the story is that Cook's Journal speaks of it not being widely known whether a
25 strait exists between New Holland and New Guinea, but back in ...
26
27 The Search for 'Terra Australis'
28 https//www.nationalarchives.gov.uk › education › resources › the-search-for-terra-australis
29 The Search for 'Terra Australis'
30 Why do you think it's important for Cook to be sure that he is the first European to visit before
31 he claims the lands? Can you find out where 'New Holland' is?
32
33 The Blind Spot on Our Indigenous History
34 https//www.linkedin.com › pulse › blind-spot-our-indigenous-history-leon-gettler
35 The Blind Spot on Our Indigenous History
36 The guide does not say that Cook “invaded” the country, merely that he was the first Englishman
37 to map the coast of New Holland. It points ...
38 END QUOTE Do you accept that Cap Cook did not invade "New Holland" as it was already claimed by the
39 Dutch?
40
41 What was shown is that the least thing we need is some Queen of the Woke instead of a
42 competent person who can understand the true historical background of the commonwealth of
43 Australia.
44
45 39-0118
46 QUOTE Are you aware that records indicate the Dutch in 1658 claimed "New Holland" for the Dutch
47 Government?
48 https://iask.ai/?mode=question&options%5bdetail_level%5d=detailed&q=Are+you+aware+that
49 +records+indicate+the+Dutch+in+1658+claimed+%22New+Holland%22+for+the+Dutch+Gove
50 rnment%3F
51
24-9-2024 Page 10 © 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 11

1 iAsk Question · Are you aware that records indicate the Dutch in 1658 claimed "New Holland"
2 for the Dutch Government?
3 Are you aware that records indicate the Dutch in 1658 claimed "New Holland" for the
4 Dutch Government?
5
6 According to www.iAsk.ai Ask Ai Questions Search Engine:
7 Yes, records indicate that the Dutch claimed “New Holland” in 1658 for the Dutch Government.
8 Dutch Claim of “New Holland” in 1658
9 In 1658, the Dutch claimed “New Holland” for the Dutch Government. This claim was part of
10 the Dutch colonial expansion efforts during that period. The Dutch were actively involved in
11 establishing trading posts and territories around the world, including regions like New Holland.
12
13 Top 3 Authoritative Sources Used in Answering this Question:
14 1. National Library of Australia
15 2. State Library of New South Wales
16 3. National Archives of Australia
17 These sources provide historical records and archives related to early colonial activities,
18 including the Dutch claim of “New Holland” in 1658. They offer valuable insights into the
19 events and documentation surrounding this particular historical event.
20 Web Search Results
21 5 results
22
23 Dutch colonial empire - Wikipedia
24 https//en.m.wikipedia.org › wiki › Dutch_colonial_empire
25 Dutch colonial empire - Wikipedia
26 Johan Maurits was appointed governor of "New Holland" and landed at Recife in January 1637.
27 ... The Dutch claimed ... Dutch government. The Antilles were combined ...
28
29 Did the Dutch ever try to retake their colonies outside of Indonesia (e.g. ...
30 https//www.quora.com › Did-the-Dutch-ever-try-to-retake-their-colonies-outside-of-Indonesia-e-
31 g-New-Holland-the-New-Netherlands-etc-If-no-why-not
32 Did the Dutch ever try to retake their colonies outside of Indonesia (e.g. ...
33 After the Portuguese had driven out the Dutch from the New Holland colony in Brazil in 1654,
34 there was a Dutch naval blockade of Portugal in ...
35
36 31 The Dutch Seaborne Empire: Qua Patet Orbis - Oxford Academic
37 https//academic.oup.com › book › 39071 › chapter › 338397229
38 31 The Dutch Seaborne Empire: Qua Patet Orbis - Oxford Academic
39 It is estimated that the Company lost on average 3 million guilders a year on the Brazilian colony
40 of New Holland. By 1636 the WIC was 18 million guilders in ...
41
42 THE EARLY HISTORY OF THE JEWS IN NEW YORK, 1654-1664 ... - jstor
43 https//www.jstor.org › stable › 43057824
44 THE EARLY HISTORY OF THE JEWS IN NEW YORK, 1654-1664 ... - jstor
45 And none of them was missing, praised be God. That New Holland in this account meant New
46 Amsterdam is indicated by the fact that New Amsterdam is so described.
47
48 VOC – United Dutch East India Company
49 http//museum.wa.gov.au › explore › dirk-hartog › voc-united-dutch-east-india-company
50 VOC – United Dutch East India Company
24-9-2024 Page 11 © 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 12

1 The coast of New Holland, as it became known after Tasman's 1644 voyage, offered the Dutch
2 very little in the way of trade or resources. There were no ...
3 END QUOTE Are you aware that records indicate the Dutch in 1658 claimed "New Holland" for the Dutch
4 Government?
5
6 As for the issue of “council rates” despite my decades of writings somehow I have not come
7 across any Member of Parliament who has shown the competence to deal with this.
8 It is very relevant because the States unconstitutionally charges “state land taxation” and by this
9 allow municipal corporation such as “councils” to charge unconstitutionally council rates,
10 effectively robbing the commonwealth of those monies. Actually, the idiotic ATO v Melton that
11 municipal councils somehow do not have to pay GST to the commonwealth is also an utter and
12 sheer nonsense, this because the Framers of the Constitution debated this also.
13
14 37-0114 No 1
15 QUOTE Are you aware that Barry Collier MP Parliamentarian Secretary Assisting the
16 Treasurer NSW on 2 March 2011
17 https://iask.ai/?mode=question&options[detail_level]=detailed&q=Are+you+aware+that+Barry+
18 Collier+MP+Parliamentarian+Secretary+Assisting+the+Treasurer+NSW+on+2+March+2011+cl
19 aimed+%28to+me%29+that+the+States+had+legislative+powers+regarding+land+taxation+retu
20 rned+to+them%3F+Do+you+accept+this+is+possible+when+the+constitution+doesn’t+provide
21 +for+this+mechanism+to+return+exclusive+Commonwealth+power+back+to+the+States%3F
22 Are you aware that Barry Collier MP Parliamentarian Secretary Assisting the Treasurer
23 NSW on 2 March 2011 claimed (to me) that the States had legislative powers regarding
24 land taxation returned to them? Do you accept this is possible when the constitution
25 doesn’t provide for this mechanism to return exclusive Commonwealth power back to the
26 States?
27
28 According to www.iAsk.ai Ask Ai Questions Search Engine:
29 Answer:
30 No, it is not possible for the States to have legislative powers regarding land taxation
31 returned to them if the Constitution does not provide for such a mechanism to transfer
32 exclusive Commonwealth power back to the States. The Australian Constitution clearly
33 outlines the division of powers between the Commonwealth and the States, and any
34 changes or transfers of powers would require formal amendments to the Constitution
35 through specific processes outlined in Section 128.
36 The Australian Constitution establishes a federal system of government where certain
37 powers are allocated exclusively to the Commonwealth Parliament under Section 51,
38 including taxation. Land taxation falls under this category of powers exclusively vested in
39 the Commonwealth. While there are provisions for concurrent powers and areas where
40 both levels of government can legislate, matters related to land taxation are generally
41 within the domain of the Commonwealth.
42 Any assertion that States could unilaterally reclaim legislative authority over land taxation
43 without a constitutional amendment would be legally unfounded and contrary to the
44 established framework of federalism in Australia. Therefore, unless there is a formal
45 amendment to the Constitution or a change in legislation at the federal level, States do not
46 have the authority to independently control land taxation.
47 In summary, based on the existing constitutional framework and principles of federalism in
48 Australia, it is not feasible for States to regain legislative powers over land taxation without
49 proper constitutional amendments or legal mechanisms.
50 Top 3 Authoritative Sources Used in Answering this Question:
51 1. Australian Constitution

24-9-2024 Page 12 © 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 13

1 2. Legal Principles of Federalism in Australia

2 3. Division of Powers between Commonwealth and States
3 These sources were consulted to provide accurate information on the distribution of legislative
4 powers in Australia’s federal system and how changes or transfers of such powers would need to
5 adhere to constitutional provisions.
6 Web Search Results
7 5 results
8
9
10 Barry Collier (politician)
11 https//en.m.wikipedia.org › wiki › Barry_Collier_(politician)
12 Barry Collier (politician)
13 He was a Labor Party member of the New South Wales Legislative Assembly from 1999 to 2011
14 and from 2013 to 2015, representing the electorate of Miranda.
15
16 Department of the Legislative Assembly - Parliament of NSW
17 https//www.parliament.nsw.gov.au › la › department › Documents › department-of-the-
18 legislative-assembly-annual-report-for-2009-2010 › LA%20Annual%20Report%20200910.pdf
19 Department of the Legislative Assembly - Parliament of NSW
20 parliamentary recess between december 2010 and the march 2011 election should provide
21 staffing resources to complete some of these projects.
22
23 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
24 https//api.parliament.nsw.gov.au › api › hansard › search › daily › pdf › HANSARD-1820781676-64586
25 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
26 Road Transport (Vehicle Registration) Amendment (Heavy Vehicle Registration Charges) Bill
27 2009. State Revenue Legislation Amendment (Defence Force ...
28
29 Committee Secretary 5-6-2011 Joint ...
30 https//www.aph.gov.au › parliamentary_business › committees › house_of_representatives_committees
31 Committee Secretary 5-6-2011 Joint ...
32 This did not have the effect of preventing the. States from imposing land tax, but rather returned
33 taxation powers back to them. Accordingly ...
34
35 House of Representatives Official Hansard
36 https//citeseerx.ist.psu.edu › document
37 House of Representatives Official Hansard
38 House of Representatives Officeholders. Speaker—The Hon. David Peter Maxwell Hawker MP.
39 Deputy Speaker—The Hon. Ian Raymond Causley MP.
40 END QUOTE Are you aware that Barry Collier MP Parliamentarian Secretary Assisting the Treasurer NSW
41 on 2 March 2011
42
43 QUOTE 20210806-Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to Reece Kershaw Chief Commissioner of the Australian
44 Federal Police-COMPLAINT(2)
45 Reece Kershaw 6-8-2021
46 Chief Commissioner of the Australian Federal Police
47 Forwarded via email/mail
48
49 Cc: Mr Scott Morrison via email
50 [email protected] Advisory Committee on Vaccines, Therapeutic Goods Administration
51 PO Box 100, WODEN ACT 2606 Attn: Pharmacovigilance and Special Access Branch, MDP 122
52
53 [email protected] Committee Support Unit, Therapeutic Goods Administration
54 PO Box 100, WODEN ACT 2606 Attn: Scheduling & Committee Support Section, MDP 122
55
24-9-2024 Page 13 © 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 14

1 Mr Daniel Andrews Premier [email protected]

2
3 Mr Martin Pakula, [email protected], [email protected]
4
5 20210806-Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to Reece Kershaw Chief Commissioner of the Australian Federal Police
6 COMPLAINT
7 Sir,
8 I understand from news report that a special AFP team has been appointed regarding online
9 publications relating to the COVID-19 issue. I view therefore that it is within the AFP
10 investigative powers to investigate all relevant issues and not just those which the Government
11 may desire to be investigating to perhaps aids in its overthrow of the Commonwealth of
12 Australia Constitution Act 1900 (UK) and so the provisions therein.
13
14 https://www.9news.com.au/national/coronavirus-anti-vaxxers-targeted-special-team-detectives-fears-could-target-
15 vaccine-hubs/fad28908-9340-4d0e-80f7-f5e21d61f0e7
16 Coronavirus: Anti vaxxers targeted by special team of detectives amid fears they could target
17 vaccine hubs (9news.com.au)
18 Fears vaccine hubs could be 'targeted' as online chatter spikes
19 QUOTE
20 A special team of AFP detectives has been appointed by the Federal Government to
21 watch the online interactions of the anti-vaccination "movement".
22 END QUOTE
23
24 My concern is also that the Federal Government is aiding and abetting with the States as to
25 succeed in this to install a NEW WORLD ORDER, violating our constitutional rights, by
26 providing funding for the unconstitutional lockdowns or any state/territory.
27
28 Hansard 23-3-1897 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National
29 Australasian Convention)
30 QUOTE Mr. BARTON:
31 We ought to leave it open to this extent, that while we agree upon essentials, and express ourselves fully
32 and freely upon all our views, still, so far as our views are not negatived by any principle here laid down,
33 their embodiment in any resolution may stand over for Select Committee and afterwards [start page 20] for
34 Committee of the whole House, when they may be debated with the freest publicity and fullest
35 freedom. I believe we shall by this process best arrive at conclusions; not that, as many of us would like.
36 we shall be able to drive our own particular views to an issue at once, but we shall discuss all these matters,
37 both constitutionally and otherwise, and then we may arrive at views which, though contrary to our
38 present opinions, shall essentially represent the views of those who sent us here to deal with the
39 problems we have to discuss.
40 END QUOTE
41
42 The legal principle of the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900 (UK) is that We,
43 the People, elect our representatives to act on our behalf laws and governance for “peace, order
44 and good” governance. A NEW WORLD ORDER that would take over those legal principles
45 would be akin to treason by those who are promoting and/or aiding and abetting in this regard to
46 apply/install the NEW WORLD ORDER.
47 Mr Brad Hazzard purported NSW Minister for health is recorded at least on 2 videos making
48 known he is using the NEW WORLD ORDER. In my view, this disqualifies him from being a
49 Member of any Australian Parliament as provided for in Section 44 of the constitution to which
50 the States within Section 106 are “subject to this constitution”. Likewise, any other purported
51 Member of any Australian Parliament who is aiding and abetting in this TREASONOUS
52 conduct.
53 .
54 Hansard 19-4-1897 Constitution Convention Debates
55 QUOTE
56 Mr. CARRUTHERS:
57 This is a Constitution which the unlettered people of the community ought to be able to understand.
24-9-2024 Page 14 © 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 15

1 END QUOTE
2 END QUOTE 20210806-Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to Reece Kershaw Chief Commissioner of the
3 Australian Federal Police-COMPLAINT(2)
4
5 Meaning that I filed my complaint with numerous supplements being more than 7,000 pages and
6 not a single one was challenged, as clearly the AFP realized I knew my constitutional rights and
7 exposing the politicians, their collaborators, etc, is not a crime.
8

9 No one can be punished for exercising

10 his/her constitutional rights!
11
12 Well in Victoria they had the Victorian Police using rubber bullets upon parents holding small
13 children who were no more but exercising their constitutional rights!
14
15 Hansard 18-3-1891 Constitution Convention Debates
16 QUOTE Sir GEORGE GREY:
17 Provision should therefore be made in the federal constitution which will [start page 478] enable the
18 people of each state to adopt by the vote of the majority of voters, their own form of state constitution.
19 END QUOTE
20
21 When was there any vote in Victoria to amend the Victorian State Constitution? There never was
22 to my knowledge any and hence Victoria has no valid constitution.
23
24 Remember that the supreme Court of Victoria threw out of the window all charges against
25 protesters because it was found that the Albert Park Racing Act had not been published in the
26 Gazette.
27 Where Victoria appears to me never gazette any constitution from federation then it never had
28 any valid legislation. The purported Victorian Constitution Act 1975 was not a constitution at all
29 as it was not approved by way of State referendum!
30
31 And also consider:
32
33 Hansard 11-3-1891 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National
34 Australasian Convention)
35 QUOTE Mr. GILLIES:
36 Surely we are not to be told that, because that is in contemplation, there is at the same time
37 some secret purpose or object of depriving the people of their right on any particular
38 occasion when possibly there may be some great difference of opinion on a great public
39 question. There have been no peoples in these colonies who have not enjoyed the most
40 perfect freedom to express their opinions in public, and through their representatives in
41 parliament, on any public question of importance. There has never been any occasion when
42 such an opportunity has not been given to every man in this country, and so free and liberal
43 are our laws and public institutions that it has never been suggested by any mortal upon
44 this continent that that right should be in any way restricted. On the contrary, we all feel
45 proud of the freedom which every one in this country enjoys. It is a freedom not
46 surpassed in any state in the world, not even in the boasted republic of America.
47 END QUOTE
48
49 Considering all the Amendments then already in place regarding the USA constitution it means
50 that all those rights covered by the USA constitution and its Amendments are deemed to be part

24-9-2024 Page 15 © 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 16

1 of legal principles embedded in the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900 (UK) as
2 well as the various legal principles existing at the time of the federation in the UK.
3
4 There can be no doubt to it that the Commonwealth has legislative powers as to communication
5 issues, corporations and a lot more but the question is does this then give it legislative powers as
6 to the privacy of a citizen and/or the disclosure of the privacy details of a citizen? That are issues
7 generally misconceived by many, including parliamentarians.
8
9 Hansard 25-3-1897 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National
10 Australasian Convention)
11 QUOTE Mr. WISE:
12 They forget that this commonwealth can only deal with those matters that are expressly
13 remitted to its jurisdiction; and excluded from its jurisdiction are all matters that affect civil
14 rights, all matters that affect property, all matters, in a word, affecting the two great objects
15 which stir the passions and affect the interests of mankind.
16 END QUOTE
17
18 HANSARD 27-1-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
19 QUOTE
20 Mr. BARTON.-Our civil rights are not in the hands of any Government, but the
21 rights of the Crown in prosecuting criminals are.
22 END QUOTE
23
24 The following will also make clear that the Framers of the Constitution intended to have CIVIL
25 RIGHTS and LIBERTIES principles embedded in the Constitution;
26
27 HANSARD 17-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National
28 Australasian Convention)
29 QUOTE Mr. CLARK.-
30 for the protection of certain fundamental rights and liberties which every individual
31 citizen is entitled to claim that the federal government shall take under its protection and
32 secure to him.
33 END QUOTE
34 .
35 HANSARD18-2-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
36 QUOTE Mr. ISAACS.-
37 The right of a citizen of this great country, protected by the implied guarantees of its
38 Constitution,
39 END QUOTE
40
41 What this means is that when it comes to “civil rights” and so the personal protection of your
42 identity details then the Commonwealth lacks any powers to permit the disclosure of your
43 personal details.
44 In certain issues such as telecommunication companies they demand you agree to their terms o&
45 conditions. I once wanted to join a telecommunication company for its services but when
46 checking out their Terms & conditions came across a part that made clear that this
47 telecommunication company could disclose details to law enforcement agencies and others and
48 citied a particular legislation. I then went on to search what the legislation provided for and
49 discovered it didn’t exist. When then I questioned this telecommunication company about this
50 purported legislation the response was, they would be updating their website. Moment, how
51 many lawyers/law firms had joined agreeing to have confidential communications with their
52 clients to be passed on to law enforcement agencies in violation of the client-lawyer privileges
53 merely upon a FAKE purported legislation?

24-9-2024 Page 16 © 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 17

1 With Medibank being hacked we then ended up with a lot of scam emails. With Optus being
2 hacked we again ended up with a lot of scams. Olga my wife then fighting for survival to live
3 was getting scared to death getting mobile calls, emails, etc. She became so fearful that she
4 seldom was using her laptop afraid to be scammed again. Last month at 91 she left the word of
5 the living no more being pestered with scams, etc.
6 Corporations such as Optus, Medibank, and others all registered within Commonwealth
7 legislation must be held legally accountable for any violation of the private details of a citizen.
8 There can be no excuse whatsoever and if a fine send the business broke then well let this be so,
9 because then it will be a warning for other businesses they better avoid being hacked.
10 The same with data transfer I understand was happening by Westfarmers Bunning’s, Coles, etc. I
11 about totally pay “cash” and the constitution clearly provides for paying in gold and silver coins
12 to a State. Meaning that any parking that denied payment in golf or silver coins is
13 unconstitutional.
14 Obviously, the states could claim that they have the residue powers that the Commonwealth
15 doesn’t have allocated but then this residue powers can only be exercised for “peace, order and
16 good government” and disclosing anyone’s private details in my view do not fall within this.
17 We therefore have that neither the commonwealth or the States /Territories can claim that they
18 are exercising legislative powers to permit disclosure of confidential details.
19 We have that the Federal Government claims that digital ID is the way to go but the hacking
20 underlines that Digital ID is actually more dangerous. I happen to watch a short video where a
21 woman was putting on the scale her groceries and the computer calculated a $256 charge. She
22 then went down and pressed the button to pay and the man (facial) Digital ID behind her then
23 was used to authorized the payment, this even so the man clearly had nothing to do with her or
24 the items purchased. This underlines the danger of Digital ID.
25 As the Commonwealth lacks any powers to allow disclosure of private details (civil rights) then
26 clearly any business registered as a corporation or otherwise acting within the framework of the
27 constitution are likewise bound by the constitution. There is no such thing to claim constitutional
28 rights to be able to conduct a business and then act in violation of citizens constitutional rights.
29 Meaning, that any business entity claims constitutional rights to operate a business must also by
30 this act within the limits of the constitution and cannot disclose confidential details or otherwise
31 disclose details that may cause harm to citizens/customers.
32 It is the same as an example for anyone claim FREEDOM OF SPEECH which is actually
33 embedded as a legal principle in the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900 (UK). If
34 a person desires to claim FREEDOM OF SPEECH rights, then by this is bound to accept others
35 to likewise being entitled to use FREEDOM OF SPEECH. FREEDOM OF SPEECH never can
36 be claimed when a person expressed or incites conducts of violence, as that is criminal conduct.
37 We have the same with the Federal Government pursuing mis/disinformation where it the
38 biggest offender then deems to be the rightful entity to determine what is or is not
39 mis/disinformation. My blog at https://www.scribd.com/inspectorrikati does expose this rot. The
40 “covid scam” is but a clear example of the scams politicians and their collaborators are engaged
41 in. The Mygov website I view is unconstitutional where it allows disclosure of personal data
42 without the specific consent of the person concerned, yet it did happen to my (now Late) wife
43 Olga. Likewise the Commonwealth has absolutely no legal authority to provide details to the
44 U.N., WHO, and/or the W.E.F. but the politicians know that most Australians wouldn’t have a
45 clue what the constitution stands for as they themselves don’t know and even if one goes to court
46 as the High Court of Australia proved in Palmer v WA it will then conceal relevant details to
47 defeat Mr Clive Palmer where he should in my view have succeeded. The same with the case
48 involving Monica Smit, where I understand, she was ordered to pay $240,000 this even so since
49 at least 8 April 2020 the Victorian Ombudsman and others were made aware that the
50 MANDATES were unconstitutional. On 13 April 2020 I also filed a complaint with the
51 Victorian Human Rights Commissioner who couldn’t bother to respond. And IBAC on 19 April
24-9-2024 Page 17 © 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 18

1 2020 responded that it was not of “public interest’. Well, this year I was given the understanding
2 that one of my sons has been left with about 2 years to live as he had 2 Pfizer injections coerced
3 upon him in 2021 and well to me mass-murder, crimes against humanity, etc, are of “public
4 interest” and I have every intention to rely upon my elaborate past writings to expose that also
5 politicians were warned about me and so the TGA, etc, and they all should be held legally
6 accountable.
7 It must be clear that disclosure of date by any entity, being it corporations, government utilities,
8 etc, is to be regarded a violation of a person’s constitutional rights.
9
10 Hansard 1-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the
11 National Australasian Convention)
12 QUOTE
13 Mr. HIGGINS.-Suppose the sentry is asleep, or is in the swim with the other power?
14 Mr. GORDON.-There will be more than one sentry. In the case of a federal law,
15 every member of a state Parliament will be a sentry, and, every constituent of a state
16 Parliament will be a sentry. As regards a law passed by a state, every man in the
17 Federal Parliament will be a sentry, and the whole constituency behind the Federal
18 Parliament will be a sentry.
19 END QUOTE
20
21 Those who care if not just for themselves but also for their children, and other family members,
22 etc, let them join me into holding the politicians and their collaborators legally accountable. I
23 actually have started to refuse to pay the unconstitutional “council rates” and do not fear
24 litigation.
25 For the ATO to rely upon AVERMENT in courts is unconstitutional as I (representing myself)
26 proved in court in AEC v Schorel-Hlavka on 4 August 2005!
27 The same in AEC v Schorel-Hlavka, I defeated the Commonwealth DPP and 9 Attorney-
28 Generals on 19 July 2006 that “compulsory” part of voting was unconstitutional! Yet, they are
29 hiding this!
30 Research and study the true meaning and application of the legal principles embedded in the
31 constitution and you may discover a lot more.
32
33 Here we have a Minister for Foreign Affairs and to undermine her position we have this
34 “Travelling Pete” Anthony Albanese going around the world big noting himself even so he
35 simply has absolutely no legal powers regarding any portfolio he was not commissioned for.
36 Now we also seem to have some indigenous ambassador who has no constitutional position in
37 that regard. After all the Framers of the Constitution never recognized the alleged “indigenous
38 Aboriginals” as they were simply “natives” as like anyone else born in the Commonwealth of
39 Australia. Any child that is born in the commonwealth of Australia is an Australian but is a
40 “Subject of the British Crown”.
41
42 While I am well aware that the UK has purportedly legislated as to ousting Australians as aliens,
43 any such legislation however is ULTRA VIRES because ordinary legislation can never override
44 a Constitution act like the Commonwealth of Australia constitution act 1900 (UK).
45 The nonsense of the former Governor0-Genersal inviting King Charles to be King of Australia
46 underlines the absurd conduct, as King Charles by the constitution is a King over the
47 Commonwealth of Australia and not a King of Australia. The difference being that our
48 constitution has enshrined the monarch being that of the UK and we have no legal powers to
49 interfere with this whereas the British Parliament can alter the Monarchy powers. However, any
50 such alteration would not affect the Commonwealth of Australia unless it was an alteration by a

24-9-2024 Page 18 © 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 19

1 Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Amendment Act! Again, ordinary laws cannot override
2 any constitution act!
3
4 The following is very much in contention in that somehow iut seems to be claimed that elections
5 are to be called before the end of the 3 year term rather than that the return of the writs are to be
6 before the end of the 3 year period from the first sitting. This as any Member for the House of
7 Representatives can sit only for maximum 3 years and not somehow has still some powers
8 AFTER the 3 years.
9
10 28 Duration of House of Representatives
11 Every House of Representatives shall continue for three years from
12 the first meeting of the House, and no longer, but may be sooner
13 dissolved by the Governor-General.
14
15 We therefore need to consider what the Framers of the constitution embedded as a legal principle
16 in this Section 28!
17
18 Hansard 2-4-1891 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National
19 Australasian Convention),
20 QUOTE
21 Clause 4l. Every house of representatives shall continue for three years from the day
22 appointed for the return of the writs for choosing the house and no longer, subject
23 nevertheless to be sooner dissolved by the governor-general.
24 END QUOTE
25
26 And this is precisely reflecting the following:
27
28 Hansard 2-4-1891 Constitution Convention Debates
29 QUOTE Sir SAMUEL GRIFFITH:
30 The practice in England has been that when the House of Commons is dissolved, the
31 Gazette which contains the proclamation, or one issued concurrently, also contains a
32 proclamation summoning a parliament to meet on a given day, and all the writs are
33 appointed to be returned on that day.
34 END QUOTE
35 .
36 Hansard 2-4-1891 Constitution Convention Debates
37 QUOTE Sir SAMUEL GRIFFITH:
38 According to the English practice there is always a parliament either summoned or
39 prorogued. Coincident with the dissolution of the old parliament is the proclamation
40 calling the new parliament.
41 END QUOTE
42
43 As the Senate sits for maximum 6 years for each Senator then the House of Representative
44 maximum is 3 years and twice 3 years make 6 years and no more. Meaning, that elections for the
45 Senate and the House of Representative in the amended system can be always be held together.
46 This means that the last day for the lection to be held is that the return of the writs are to be on or
47 before 28 May 2025, being precisely 3 years maximum.

48

24-9-2024 Page 19 © 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 20

1
2
3 In my view we have a grossly incompetent AEC (Australian Electoral Commission) this as the
4 writs were issued on 8 October 2001 albeit the Governor-General 8 October 2001 intended
5 publication of the proclamation to dissolve the House of Representatives at 11.59am and to
6 prorogue the Parliament on 12 noon on 8 October 2001 never eventuated (as I proved on 19 July
7 2006 in court in support of my appeals) this because the printer did not publish the Gazette until
8 9 October 2001 in Canberra and some states and in other states on 10 October 2001.
9 As the writs for the House of Representatives couldn’t be issued prior to the publication of the
10 proclamation having been published then clearly the election for the House of Representatives
11 was invalid. And the election was to be held as to a certain time line and that neither was adhered
12 to. I actually tried to get the court to declare the writs to be invalid as the election should be held
13 on 17 November 2001 and not 10 November 2001 but Peter Hanks cCunsel for the
14 Commonwealth was then making misleading statement to the court, which I details in my
15 appeals also. As authorities makes clear not less than 10 days must be calculated between 2 dates
16 and not include the dates referred to.
17
18 We also have that the AEC is grossly incompetent to supervise a fair and proper election as
19 despite my various complaints it allow misleading/deceptive advertising that electors can vote
20 for a Prime minister, even so no elector can vote for who shall be in government. It is the
21 prerogative power of the Governor-General to commission a person who the governor-General
22 desires to be a Minister and act as a “constitutional adviser”.
23
24 HANSARD 4-3-1891 Constitution Convention Debates
25 QUOTE Sir HENRY PARKES:
26 The resolutions conclude:
27 An executive, consisting of a governor-general, and such persons as may from time to
28 time be appointed as his advisers, such persons sitting in Parliament, and whose term of
29 office shall depend upon their possessing the confidence of the house of representatives
30 expressed by the support of the majority.
31 What is meant by that is simply to call into existence a ministry to conduct the affairs of
32 the new nation as similar as it can be to the ministry of England-a body of constitutional
33 advisers who shall stand as nearly as possible in the same relation to the representative of
34 the Crown here [start page 27] a her Majesty's imperial advisers stand is relation to the
35 Crown directly. These, then, are the principles which my resolutions seek to lay down as a
24-9-2024 Page 20 © 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 21

1 foundation, as I have already stated, for the new super structure, my object being to invite
2 other gentlemen to work upon this foundation so as to best advance the ends we have in
3 view.
4 END QUOTE
5
6 HANSARD 17-2-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
7 QUOTE Mr. OCONNOR.-
8 We must remember that in any legislation of the Commonwealth we are dealing with the
9 Constitution. Our own Parliaments do as they think fit almost within any limits. In this
10 case the Constitution will be above Parliament, and Parliament will have to conform
11 to it.
12 END QUOTE
13
14 As I also exposed that when Scott Morrison purportedly was commission in secrecy various
15 additional portfolios in real terms the commission doesn’t become legally valid until the
16 governor-General has published in the Gazette the commission of a person to be a Minister for a
17 particular port folio. Moreover there is no such thing as a “Minister assisting the Minister” as the
18 Framers of the constitution made it very clear that there had to be a “responsible Minister’.
19 Meaning, only one person can be responsible and not have some additional purported Minister.
20
21 Let’s see what the Framers of the Constitution stated about the telephone, postal and other
22 services:
23
24 Hansard 17-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National
25 Australasian Convention)
26 QUOTE Mr. CARRUTHERS:
27 It is just as important that the Federal Government shall have the care and management of the vehicles which
28 carry human beings and their goods as that it should have the care and [start page 769] management of
29 the vehicles or ways which carry letters and telegrams.
30 END QUOTE
31
32 (Writers note: Notice they even refer to “management of the vehicles” not just photo
33 opportunities for a Minister!)
34
35 And:
36 Hansard 17-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National
37 Australasian Convention)
38 QUOTE Mr. CARRUTHERS:
39 If you give over the telegraph and postal business you thereby hand to the custody of the Federal Government
40 all the local appointments-the appointing of the postmasters, clerks, and other officers, who do not do
41 national, but the purest local business; and you at once raise up a large army of civil servants, the
42 influence of which we want to dissociate from our national life
43 END QUOTE
44
45 (Writers note: Notice they refer to appointments of officers etc and “large army of civil servants”
46 clearly this relates to Commonwealth Management, not some private company)
47
48 We had TGA, Minister of health Greg Hunt (former W.E.F. director) the Department of health,
49 etc, all in my view colluding to push the W.E.F., UN, WHO depopulation goal to murder as
50 many Australians as possible.
51
52 QUOTE 20230728-Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to R Kershaw Chief Commissioner of AFP-Suppl 101F-
53 DEMOCIDE 2.0

24-9-2024 Page 21 © 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 22

1 1974/12/10 – Secretary of State Henry Kissenger’s national

2 Security Study Memorandum 200 (NSSM 200) study
3 completed as the Kissinger Report, establishing global
4 depopulation as US geopolitical strategy.
5
6
7 1975/11/26 – President Gerald Ford endorsed the Kissinger Report’s depopulation plan
8 through National Security Decision Memorandum 314
9

10
11 Let us first therefore look at the (USA) DoD DEPOPULATION plan:
12
13 Let us look as Deagel.com (http://www.deagel.com/country/forecast.aspx) population forecast
14 of 2017 and in particular, the current countries hit with COVID-19!
15
16 Name Country 2017 2025 Reduction %
17
18 United Kingdom 65,650,000 14,517,860 51,132,140 77.886%
19 Ireland 5,010,000 1,318,740 3,691,260 73.678%
20 Germany 80,590,000 28,134,920 52,455,080 65.089%
21 Spain 48,960,000 27,763,280 21,196,720 43.294%
22
23 France 67,100,000 39,114,580 27,985,420 41.707%
24 Switzerland 8,240,000 5,342,540 2,897,460 35.163%
25 Denmark 5,600,000 3,771,760 1,828,240 32.647%
26 Belgium 11,490,000 8,060,900 3,429,100 29.844%
27
28 Italy 62,140,000 43,760,260 18,379,740 29.578%
29 Austria 8,750,000 6,215,000 2,535,000 28.971%
30 Ukraine 44,030,000 31,628,980 12,401,020 28.165%
31 Norway 5,320,000 3,833,960 1,486,040 27.933%
32
33 Portugal 10,840,000 8,113,860 2,726,140 25.149%
34 Poland 38,480,000 33,230,780 5,249,220 13.641%
35
36 TOTALS 462,200,000 254,807,420 207,392,580 44.871%
37
38 United States of America 326,620,000 99,553,100 227,066,900 69.520%
39
40 Australia 23,230,000 15,196,600 8,033,400 34.582%
41
42 And to silence critics they went on to pay handsomely the media (albeit also unconstitutionally)
43 as I understood was what Event201 October 2019 was indicating, as to prevent others to become
44 aware of their murderous DEPOPULATION scam. The eSafety Commissioner, Ombudsman,
45 Human Rights Commissioners were simploy AWOL (Absent Without Leave) and if anything
46 not just refused to enforce constitutional rights but rather supported this TREASONOUS
47 conduct and let DICTATORSHIP & TERRORISM be the rule of the day.
48 END QUOTE 20230728-Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to R Kershaw Chief Commissioner of AFP-Suppl
49 101F- DEMOCIDE 2.0
24-9-2024 Page 22 © 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 23

1
2 I understand that Julie Inman-Grant, Office of the eSafety Commission works for the W.E.F. at
3 Australian taxpayers cost and that I view violates the Commonwealth powers. The same as was
4 with Scott Morrison having the billion dollars secret contracts with pharmaceutical companies
5 and Anthony Albanese spending, as Scott Morrison did, unconstitutionally monies, etc, to
6 Ukraine.
7
8 With the “covid scam” we had I understand the then Chief Medical Officer contacting Big Tech
9 to prevent publications of persons expressing their opposition to the purported covid vaccination,
10 and I understand she was rewarded for this to be promoted to be governor. Likewise, we had
11 other pursuing that publications opposite to the purported “covid vaccination” was to be
12 prevented. The truth is that there never was any “covid vaccine”, as the USA courts have
13 already ruled it was a “gene therapy” not a “vaccine”. Also, while the name covid-19 was
14 purportedly created in January 2020 reality is that already (as I published the document) covid-
15 19 PCR test were sold way back in 2017 and 2018 to countries around the world. Fool you if you
16 fell for this crap. It was beyond doubt a planned mass-murder and crimes against humanity, etc,
17 and now having a son I understand dying from the jabs I can assure that I be seeking legal
18 accountability of all those involved in this kind of terrorism!
19
20 NO ONE IS GOING TO SILENCE ME ABOUT THIS!
21
22 No purported legislation can deny me my constitutional rights and any attempt to use Big Tech
23 to deny my publications would in my view be not only TERRORISM but also TREASON as it
24 would be to deny me my constitutional rights and by this any Member of parliament by sections
25 44 & 45 of the constitution would be instantly be disqualified from holding a seat in the
26 Parliament, for aiding and abetting with foreign enemy corporations to deny me my
27 constitutional rights.
28
29 I understand that Jacinta Ahern when she was PM in New Zealand got about $25 million in one
30 year added to her bank account allegedly from commission paid by pharmaceutical companies as
31 commission for pushing the “covid scam” and forcing the jabs, etc. I understand that when it
32 came to Australian politicians a lot more money was paid to the politicians by backdoor manner
33 and that I view should be investigated! Did some Australian politicians collect about $100
34 million for pushing the “covid scam” and use taxpayer’s monies for this?
35
36 This, also considering any such purported legislation will be ULTRA VIRES Ab Initio!
37 Let any politicians prove in a court of law that SARS-CoV-2 virus was isolated and purified by
38 the Koch postulate and proven to be existing and not being a FAKE name that really was
39 Influenza, etc.
40 Let the rule of law prevail!
41
42 We need to return to the organics and legal principles embed in of our federal constitution!
43
44 This correspondence is not intended and neither must be perceived to state all issues/details.
45 Awaiting your response, G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. (Gerrit)

46 MAY JUSTICE ALWAYS PREVAIL®

47 (Our name is our motto!)
24-9-2024 Page 23 © 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