Page 1

1
2
3 Attorney-General Michelle Rowland 26-8-2025
4 Email [email protected],
5
6 Cc: Service Australian CUSTOMER.COMMENTS <[email protected]>
7 Centrelink Ref 301 602 799V Reply Paid 7800, CANBERRA BC ACT 2610
8
Minister for Health and Ageing The Hon Mark Butler MP
Minister for Disability and the National Disability Insurance Scheme The Hon Mark Butler MP
(Deputy Leader of the House)
Minister for the National Disability Insurance Scheme Senator the Hon Jenny McAllister
Minister for Aged Care and Seniors The Hon Sam Rae MP
9 NOT RESTRICTED FOR PUBLICATION
10 Re 20250826-Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to Attorney-General Michelle Rowland
11 -COMPLAINT -details information-Supplement 1
12 Michelle,
13 It appears to me very clear that the Commonwealth of Australia via Service
14 Australia/Centrelink HAS DECLARED WAR against me by its conduct and so a WAR there
15 shall be.
16
17 When is there a declared WAR?
18
19 END QUOTE 20230726-Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to Department of Infrastructure-SUBMISSION Re
20 MISINFORMATION BILL, etc
21 QUOTE (PROVIDED BYY A READER)
22 The first principal doctrine in the Communist Party Case maxim was described by Justice
23 Fullagar as “an elementary rule of constitutional law which has been expressed
24 metaphorically” by saying that “a stream cannot rise higher than its source”, citing
25 Shrimpton v The Commonwealth where it was stated by Dixon J that “an exercise of a
26 power, whether legislative or administrative, cannot rise higher than its source” or
27 “the Parliament cannot recite itself into power.” [Cf. Australian Communist Party v
28 Commonwealth [1951] HCA 5; 83 CLR 1 at p. 258; Shrimpton v The Commonwealth
29 [1945] HCA 4; 69 CLR 613 at p. 630.]
30
31 In British Medical Association v The Commonwealth [1949] HCA 44; 79 CLR 201 at
32 [p293] Webb J observed: “To
require a person to do something
33 which he may lawfully decline to do but only at the
34 sacrifice of the whole or a substantial part of the means
35 of his livelihood would, I think, be to subject him to
36 practical compulsion amounting to conscription
37 [unlawful impressment and press-ganging by force]… If
38 Parliament cannot lawfully do this directly by legal
26-8-2025 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 means it cannot lawfully do it indirectly by creating a

2 situation, as distinct from merely taking advantage of
3 one, in which the individual is left no real choice [of
4 abstention] but compliance.” Cf. The Commonwealth of Australia
5 Constitution Act, 1900 [63 & 64 Vict.] (Imp.), Sect. 51 – (xxiiiA.) The provision of
6 maternity allowances, widows’ pensions, child endowment, unemployment,
7 pharmaceutical, sickness and hospital benefits, medical and dental services (but not so as
8 to authorize any form of civil conscription), benefits to students and family allowances.
9 END QUOTE (PROVIDED BYY A READER)
10 END QUOTE 20230726-Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to Department of Infrastructure-SUBMISSION Re
11 MISINFORMATION BILL, etc
12
13 Hansard 2-2-1898 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National Australasian
14 Convention)
15 QUOTE Mr. DEAKIN (Victoria).-
16 The record of these debates may fairly be expected to be widely read, and the
17 observations to which I allude might otherwise lead to a certain amount of
18 misconception.
19 END QUOTE
20
21 Hansard 9-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National Australasian
22 Convention)
23 QUOTE
24 Mr. DEAKIN (Victoria).-The position of my honorable and learned friend (Mr. [start
25 page 2092] Higgins) may be perfectly correct. It may be that without any special provision
26 the practice of the High Court, when declaring an Act ultra vires, would be that such a
27 declaration applied only to the part which trespassed beyond the limits of the
28 Constitution. If that were so, it would be a general principle applicable to the
29 interpretation of the whole of the Constitution.
30 END QUOTE
31 .
32 Hansard 8-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
33 QUOTE
34 Mr. GLYNN.-I think they would, because it is fixed in the Constitution. There is no
35 special court, but the general courts would undoubtedly protect the states. What Mr. Isaacs
36 seeks to do is to prevent the question of ultra vires arising after a law has been passed.
37 [start page 2004]
38 Mr. ISAACS.-No. If it is ultra vires of the Constitution it would, of course, be
39 invalid.
40 END QUOTE
41
42 Meaning, that when Service Australia/Centrelink in April 2025 and still continue to do so and
43 refuses to follow legal processes to conduct a REVIEW, etc, when invalidated my Pension
44 concession card and the next day suspended my Age Pension payments and so prevented from
45 that day to use it to purchase food, pay for medical care expenses, pay for medication, fuel, and
46 other household bills, it actually not just violated my constitutional rights (A DECLARATION
47 OF WAR) and pursued a form of TERRORISM, which obviously for me to use the best
48 weapon in my arsenal being the true meaning and application of the legal principles embedded in
49 the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900 (UK!
50

26-8-2025 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 In my view this was a calculated conduct by the Commonwealth of Australia against my person
2 to try to silence me because of my ongoing exposure of the Commonwealth of Australia to
3 violate the true meanings and application of the legal principles embedded in the constitution.
4
5 Let us consider some issues.
6
7 • The Commonwealth dictates if a medical doctor can prescribe certain medication for a
8 patient, regardless if the patient is to pay personally for the medication. In my view this is
9 unconstitutional as the constitution limits Commonwealth legislative powers to:
10 QUOTE
11 (xxiiiA) the provision of maternity allowances, widows’ pensions,
12 child endowment, unemployment, pharmaceutical,
13 sickness and hospital benefits, medical and dental services
14 (but not so as to authorize any form of civil conscription),
15 benefits to students and family allowances;
16 END QUOTE
17
18 Meaning, the Commonwealth may refuse to pay for certain medication not on the PBS scheme
19 but it has no constitutional powers to interfere with a medical practitioner to prescribe
20 medication as the medical practitioner may deem appropriate for a patient. No doubt the
21 intention of the Commonwealth might be likely to seek to avoid misuse and overuse of certain
22 drugs but nevertheless the Framers of the Constitution made clear:
23
24 Hansard 1-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
25 QUOTE
26 Mr. GORDON.-Well, I think not. I am sure that if the honorable member applies his
27 mind to the subject he will see it is not abstruse. If a statute of either the Federal or the
28 states Parliament be taken into court the court is bound to give an interpretation
29 according to the strict hyper-refinements of the law. It may be a good law passed by
30 "the sovereign will of the people," although that latter phrase is a common one which I do
31 not care much about. The court may say-"It is a good law, but as it technically infringes
32 on the Constitution we will have to wipe it out." As I have said, the proposal I support
33 retains some remnant of parliamentary sovereignty, leaving it to the will of Parliament on
34 either side to attack each other's laws.
35 END QUOTE
36
37 Meaning that the Commonwealth unconstitutional system that a medical doctor must apply for
38 the Commonwealth to approve to be allowed to prescribe certain medication is beyond the
39 Commonwealth legislative powers.
40 If the commonwealth held it is important to have the legislative powers then why not have
41 pursued a REFERENDUM to seek an amendment of the constitution instead of the scam Voice
42 referendum that would have been violating existing constitutional provisions as was with the
43 1967 Subsection 51(xxvi) con-job referendum where instead Aboriginals remaining equal to
44 other native born Australians were no redelegated to be considered to be like “aliens” “inferior”
45 “coloured” “races” and by any legislation against them now lost their citizenship and the right
46 to vote and be a Member of parliament. See https://www.scribd.com/inspectorrikati for extensive
47 set out!
48
49 • Where is the constitutional legislative power of the Commonwealth to deal with “Sport”?
50
51 • Where is the constitutional legislative power of the Commonwealth to deal with “Arts”?
52
26-8-2025 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 For any fool to claim that the States can provide the Commonwealth of such legislative powers
2 just by so to say saying so then this person obviously doesn’t understand the way the constitution
3 applies.
4
5 • Let us take the issue of climate change. Where is the constitutional legislative power for
6 the Commonwealth for this?
7
8 Hansard 2-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National Australasian
9 Convention)
10 QUOTE
11 Mr. BARTON.-No; I do not think that there is anything in the Bill that takes it away.
12 Very well, then, if a state law, or the action of the state, or the action of a citizen of a state,
13 does not contravene Commonwealth legislation under that power of legislation, granted in
14 this Bill. the state law is still valid, and cannot be touched or interfered with, and that I
15 conceive is sufficient for the purpose of New South Wales under this Constitution. Now,
16 my honorable friend (Mr. Isaacs) yesterday, in that remarkably able and statesmanlike
17 speech which he made-one of the best speeches addressed to this Convention since it began
18 its sittings in Adelaide-mentioned state laws with regard to irrigation in the United States,
19 especially state laws passed with reference to the and country, and with reference to
20 California. Now, while my honorable friend mentioned those in support of his argument,
21 all those instances are evidences that, under the operation of the trade and commerce
22 clause in America, the right is retained to the states, under the United States Constitution,
23 to deal with these matters, and is recognised by the courts. And if there were any doubt
24 about that in our own' case, we have only to refer to clause 99 of this Bill, which tells us
25 that-
26
27 All powers which at the establishment of the Commonwealth are vested in the
28 Parliaments of the several colonies, and which are not by this Constitution exclusively
29 vested in the Parliament of the Commonwealth, or withdrawn from the Parliaments
30 of the several states, are reserved to, and shall remain vested in, the Parliaments of
31 the states respectively.
32 Mr. KINGSTON.-That is the reservation clause.
33 Mr. BARTON.-Yes, the reservation clause. Now, that clause has a twofold operation. It
34 means, first, that the power to deal with water conservation and irrigation, which, if you
35 rely on sub-section (1) alone, finds no mention in this Constitution, and, therefore, is
36 not a power given to the Commonwealth, but a power retained in the states
37 absolutely. And it means, in addition to that, that the states will retain their power of
38 dealing with the navigation of their rivers, except so far as those rivers fall under the
39 domination-if you like to use that large word-of the legislation of the Commonwealth,
40 when the Commonwealth chooses to legislate on the subject of navigation. So that the
41 position of the state is secure as regards the conservation and use of its waters, except to
42 the extent that there may be an actual navigation law passed by the Commonwealth, which
43 may have the effect of limiting the state use of the water of the rivers within that state.
44 END QUOTE
45
46 Meaning also:
47
48 • The Commonwealth has absolutely no legislative, executive and/or administrative
49 powers regarding conservation/environment other than regarding its own limited existing
50 powers relating to Section 51 and/or Section 52 powers. As such, the Commonwealth
51 cannot engage in Treaty powers for NET ZERO, etc, which would relate to State
52 legislative powers. Neither can it engage in any “treaty” with private entities like the
26-8-2025 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 WHO (World Health Organisation), the WEF (World Economic Forum) and/or the UN
2 (United Nations) relating to State legislative powers! Neither can it be party of the WHO
3 to allow this entity to dictate the Commonwealth of Australia to apply MANDATES, etc,
4 as it would allow a private organization (representing the interest of pharmaceutical
5 companies) to dictate the rule of law in the Commonwealth of Australia in violation of
6 the true meaning and application of the legal principles embedded in the Commonwealth
7 of Australia Constitution Act 1900 (UK).
8

9
10

26-8-2025 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
2
3 A person who in my view is incompetent as to constitutional issues and also incompetent
4 regarding a portfolio allegedly not even knowing the difference between AC and DC.
5
6 • As to the Child Support Agency, I will repeat:
7
8 END QUOTE 20230726-Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to Department of Infrastructure-SUBMISSION Re
9 MISINFORMATION BILL, etc
10 QUOTE (PROVIDED BYY A READER)
11 The first principal doctrine in the Communist Party Case maxim was described by Justice
12 Fullagar as “an elementary rule of constitutional law which has been expressed
13 metaphorically” by saying that “a stream cannot rise higher than its source”, citing
14 Shrimpton v The Commonwealth where it was stated by Dixon J that “an exercise of a
15 power, whether legislative or administrative, cannot rise higher than its source” or
16 “the Parliament cannot recite itself into power.” [Cf. Australian Communist Party v
17 Commonwealth [1951] HCA 5; 83 CLR 1 at p. 258; Shrimpton v The Commonwealth
18 [1945] HCA 4; 69 CLR 613 at p. 630.]
19
20 In British Medical Association v The Commonwealth [1949] HCA 44; 79 CLR 201 at
21 [p293] Webb J observed: “To
require a person to do something
22 which he may lawfully decline to do but only at the
23 sacrifice of the whole or a substantial part of the means
26-8-2025 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 of his livelihood would, I think, be to subject him to

2 practical compulsion amounting to conscription
3 [unlawful impressment and press-ganging by force]… If
4 Parliament cannot lawfully do this directly by legal
5 means it cannot lawfully do it indirectly by creating a
6 situation, as distinct from merely taking advantage of
7 one, in which the individual is left no real choice [of
8 abstention] but compliance.” Cf. The Commonwealth of Australia
9 Constitution Act, 1900 [63 & 64 Vict.] (Imp.), Sect. 51 – (xxiiiA.) The provision of
10 maternity allowances, widows’ pensions, child endowment, unemployment,
11 pharmaceutical, sickness and hospital benefits, medical and dental services (but not so as
12 to authorize any form of civil conscription), benefits to students and family allowances.
13 END QUOTE (PROVIDED BYY A READER)
14 END QUOTE 20230726-Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to Department of Infrastructure-SUBMISSION Re
15 MISINFORMATION BILL, etc
16
17 HANSARD 22-9-1897 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National
18 Australasian Convention)
19 QUOTE
20 The Hon. E. BARTON: If the subclause can be amended in the direction which the hon.
21 and learned member suggests, my objection will have disappeared, and there will be a
22 reasonable consistency in the law. I think the difficulty might be overcome by inserting
23 before the words "parental rights" the word "also," and at the end of the sub-clause the
24 words "in relation thereto."
25 Mr. SYMON (South Australia)[3.51]: Is it worth while to deal with the matter in that
26 way? If you give the federal parliament power in relation to marriage generally and divorce
27 generally, then anything that concerns parental rights and the custody and guardianship of
28 infants is connected with either one or the other. It seems to me that if you intrust the
29 federal authority with the power of dealing with marriage and divorce, which involves
30 everything relating to the highest earthly ties-that of marriage-it ought, consequent on that,
31 also to regulate the custody of infants. It does not involve what the hon. member, Mr.
32 Carruthers, seems to think is in the minds of many who see some objection to this-
33 that it might empower the federal authority to interfere with domestic relations in
34 some mysterious manner so as to reduce children to a position of slavery. This is a
35 control that seems to me to be consequent upon marriage, and which might come into
36 operation, perhaps, in relation to all matters of divorce; but it is not confined to matters of
37 divorce, and might depend simply on marriage when the question of divorce does not arise.
38 It will, perhaps, be better to leave the sub-clause as it is and consider the matter further
39 later on.
40 END QUOTE
41
42 Well, the Child Support Agency seems to be making children to be the slaves of the
43 Commonwealth, this by claiming they can be used for extracting Child Support payments and in
44 the Liam McGill case when 2 out of 3 children were exposed not his biological children the
45 former wife didn’t by the High Court of Australia have to refund fraudulent obtained monies!
46

26-8-2025 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 • It is utter and sheer nonsense that somehow the Commonwealth can take over an alleged
2 Debt regarding Child Support on behalf of a person and then access taxation records
3 which the person itself has no powers to do so.
4 While the provisions of Section 96 of the constitution was inserted at the Premiers
5 conference prior to the Constitution being enacted, it doesn’t allow for the Commonwealth
6 to take over alleged private personal debts claim.
7 As I was once a single parent and the mother had Child Support orders for $5 a week
8 against her, which she refused to pay all along, then the Child Support Agency, once the
9 child was on age requested me to cancel all and any Child Support Debt. As such, it held
10 the Debt was not at all a Commonwealth Child Support Debt at all if it was I would have
11 had no powers to cancel the Debt!
12 In Abbott v Abbott (1994) after many court hearings Mr Abbott contacted me and we
13 decided to expose the rot, the High Court of Australia ruled that Mr Abbott did own a debt
14 to the Child Support Agency. After that, Mr Abbott filed his tax return and then the Child
15 support Agency conceded that Mr Abbott actually never had any Child Support Debt. As
16 such the High Court of Australia (as did all the lower courts) handed down orders based
17 upon an ASSUMED Debt to which no reliable “evidence” existed at all!
18
19 • The High Court of Australia in numerous cases violated its judicial powers such as in Sue
20 v Hill, MABO, Sykes v Cleary, Palmer v WA, in other cases such as allowing a
21 convicted criminal to stay in Australia who previously had been deported but reentered
22 under a false identity, because he had a fathered a child, likewise to allow 2 convicted
23 New Zealanders born of Aboriginals descent not to be deported, by this violating the
24 SEPARATION OF POWERS also!
25
26 • Recently a underage person involved in the killing of a person was somehow found NOT
27 GUILTY despite about 60 stab wounds which reportedly including 45 fatal stab wound
28 and this I understand because the under aged person didn’t understand his conduct could
29 kill a person. The problem much in my view lies with the failure of the Federal
30 government to ensure that migrants who enter the Commonwealth of Australia are
31 provided with proper assimilation assistance to understand the Australian Way of Life
32 and that violent conduct if the country they came from cannot be applied her.
33
34 • The Commonwealth now seeks to provide for 5% of housing deposit to be applicable, but
35 where is the constitutional legislative powers for this?
36
37 • The Commonwealth seems to delay HOME CARE funding (package) for the
38 elderly/disabled until November 20925, whereas the Framers of Constitution makes it
39 very clear that all Commonwealth laws must be UNIFORM throughout the
40 Commonwealth and as such the Commonwealth cannot provide for some and not for
41 others!
42
43 HANSARD 28-1-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
44 QUOTE Sir JOHN DOWNER.-
45 Once within the Commonwealth citizens should be able to go freely from one state to another;
46 there should be no lines of differentiation between states. If races are admitted into one state, and
47 are not free to go into another, the inconveniences of administration, especially on the borders, will be
48 very great. It has been thought well that there should be a uniform law throughout Australia in
49 respect to the citizens of Australia, and it was considered that this provision should be put into a
50 separate clause giving exclusive powers, in order to emphasize the fact that the Federal
51 Parliament should legislate upon this matter.
52 END QUOTE
53
26-8-2025 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 This again underlines that the Palmer v WA was wrongly decided and likewise the denial
2 of HOME CARE funding (package) for applying a delay to certain persons is
3 unconstitutional.
4
5 • When it comes to health insurances including private health insurances The
6 Commonwealth cannot apply different standards, the same as with education facilities. I
7 have canvassed this extensive at https://www.scribd.com/inspectorrikati.
8
9 Upon Federation which newly created State published in the State Gazette the old colonial
10 constitution act as amended (see Section 106)
11
12 QUOTE
13 Chapter V—The States
14 106 Saving of Constitutions
15 The Constitution of each State of the Commonwealth shall, subject
16 to this Constitution, continue as at the establishment of the
17 Commonwealth, or as at the admission or establishment of the
18 State, as the case may be, until altered in accordance with the
19 Constitution of the State.
20 107 Saving of Power of State Parliaments
21 Every power of the Parliament of a Colony which has become or
22 becomes a State, shall, unless it is by this Constitution exclusively
23 vested in the Parliament of the Commonwealth or withdrawn from
24 the Parliament of the State, continue as at the establishment of the
25 Commonwealth, or as at the admission or establishment of the
26 State, as the case may be.
27 108 Saving of State laws
28 Every law in force in a Colony which has become or becomes a
29 State, and relating to any matter within the powers of the
30 Parliament of the Commonwealth, shall, subject to this
31 Constitution, continue in force in the State; and, until provision is
32 made in that behalf by the Parliament of the Commonwealth, the
33 Parliament of the State shall have such powers of alteration and of
34 repeal in respect of any such law as the Parliament of the Colony
35 had until the Colony became a State.
36 END QUOTE
37
38 Meaning, that the moment the Commonwealth legislated upon a certain Section 51 subject then
39 the States no longer had the “concurrent” legislative powers and all and any legislation would be
40 no longer applicable.
41
42 Hansard 27-1-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
43 QUOTE
44 Mr. BARTON.-I was going to explain when I was interrupted that the moment the
45 Commonwealth legislates on this subject the power will become exclusive.
46 END QUOTE
47
48 Hansard 27-1-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
49 QUOTE
50 Mr. BARTON (New South Wales).-If this is left as an exclusive power the laws of the
51 states will nevertheless remain in force under clause 100.
52 Mr. TRENWITH.-Would the states still proceed to make laws?
26-8-2025 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 Mr. BARTON.-Not after this power of legislation comes into force. Their existing
2 laws will, however, remain. If this is exclusive they can make no new laws, but the
3 necessity of making these new laws will be all the more forced on the Commonwealth.
4 END QUOTE
5
6 Hansard 7-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
7 QUOTE Mr. HOWE.-
8 My only desire is to give power to the Federal Parliament to achieve a scheme for old-age
9 pensions if it be practicable, and if the people require it. No power would be taken away
10 from the states. The sub-section would not interfere with the right of any state to act in
11 the meantime until the Federal Parliament took the matter in hand.
12 END QUOTE
13
14 Hansard 2-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
15 QUOTE
16 Mr. OCONNOR.-Directly it is exercised it becomes an exclusive power, and there is
17 no doubt that it will be exercised. By putting into the Constitution words prohibiting the
18 Commonwealth Parliament from making certain specified laws you create the implication
19 that the Parliament has power to deal in other respects with religious observances.
20 END QUOTE
21
22 See also
23
24 QUOTE Are you aware that HCA in the income tax issue made clear that once the Commonwealth legislate
25 https://iask.ai/?mode=question&options[detail_level]=detailed&q=Are+you+aware+that+
26 HCA+in+the+income+tax+issue+made+clear+that+once+the+Commonwealth+legislate+a
27 s+to+income+tax+the+States+no+longer+could+do+so%3F
28 Are you aware that HCA in the income tax issue made clear that once the
29 Commonwealth legislate as to income tax the States no longer could do so?
30
31 According to www.iAsk.ai Ask Ai Questions Search Engine:
32 Answer:
33 Yes, the High Court of Australia (HCA) has indeed made it clear that once the
34 Commonwealth legislates on income tax, the States no longer have the authority to do
35 so. This principle was established in a series of landmark cases that clarified the
36 division of powers between the Commonwealth and the States in Australia.
37 In Australia, the power to levy income tax is primarily vested in the Commonwealth
38 government under section 51(ii) of the Constitution. This provision grants the
39 Commonwealth Parliament the authority to make laws with respect to taxation, including
40 income tax. As a result, when the Commonwealth exercises its power to legislate on
41 income tax matters, it effectively precludes the States from enacting their own income tax
42 laws.
43 The key case that solidified this principle is First Uniform Tax Case (1942) 65 CLR 373.
44 In this case, the High Court held that once the Commonwealth has legislated on a
45 particular subject matter within its constitutional powers, any State laws on that same
46 subject matter are rendered inoperative to the extent of any inconsistency with
47 Commonwealth law.
48 Subsequent cases further reinforced this principle, such as Second Uniform Tax
49 Case (1957) 99 CLR 575 and Ha v New South Wales (1997) 189 CLR 465. These cases
50 underscored that where there is a conflict between State and Commonwealth laws on
51 income tax matters, Commonwealth law prevails due to the paramountcy of federal
52 legislation under Australia’s constitutional framework.

26-8-2025 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 Therefore, it is clear from these judicial decisions that once the Commonwealth legislates
2 on income tax, State laws attempting to impose income taxes would be invalid to the extent
3 of any inconsistency with federal law.
4 Top 3 Authoritative Sources Used:
5 1. High Court of Australia: The judgments and decisions rendered by the High Court of
6 Australia serve as primary sources for understanding legal principles and interpretations
7 related to constitutional matters, including taxation issues.
8 2. Australian Constitution: The foundational document outlining the distribution of powers
9 between the Commonwealth and States in Australia provides essential insights into how
10 legislative authority is allocated, particularly concerning taxation powers.
11 3. Legal Commentaries and Journals: Scholarly articles and legal commentaries analyzing
12 relevant cases and constitutional provisions offer valuable interpretations and explanations
13 regarding complex legal issues like those pertaining to income tax jurisdiction in Australia.
14 END QUOTE Are you aware that HCA in the income tax issue made clear that once the Commonwealth
15 legislate
16

17
18
19 QUOTE Are you aware that Barry Collier MP Parliamentarian Secretary Assisting the Treasurer NSW
20 https://iask.ai/?mode=question&options[detail_level]=detailed&q=Are+you+aware+that+
21 Barry+Collier+MP+Parliamentarian+Secretary+Assisting+the+Treasurer+NSW+on+2+M
22 arch+2011+claimed+%28to+me%29+that+the+States+had+legislative+powers+regarding
23 +land+taxation+returned+to+them%3F+Do+you+accept+this+is+possible+when+the+con
24 stitution+doesn%E2%80%99t+provide+for+this+mechanism+to+return+exclusive+Comm
25 onwealth+power+back+to+the+States%3F
26-8-2025 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 Are you aware that Barry Collier MP Parliamentarian Secretary Assisting the
2 Treasurer NSW on 2 March 2011 claimed (to me) that the States had legislative
3 powers regarding land taxation returned to them? Do you accept this is possible when
4 the constitution doesn’t provide for this mechanism to return exclusive
5 Commonwealth power back to the States?
6
7 According to www.iAsk.ai Ask Ai Questions Search Engine:
8 Answer:
9 No, it is not possible for the States to have legislative powers regarding land taxation
10 returned to them if the Constitution does not provide for such a mechanism. The
11 Australian Constitution clearly outlines the division of powers between the
12 Commonwealth and the States, and taxation powers are predominantly held by the
13 Commonwealth government.
14 The power to levy taxes, including land taxation, is a fundamental aspect of
15 governance that falls under the exclusive domain of the Commonwealth government
16 as per Section 51(ii) of the Australian Constitution. This section grants the
17 Commonwealth Parliament the authority to make laws with respect to taxation,
18 which includes income tax but also extends to other forms of taxation.
19 While there are instances where certain powers can be delegated or shared between
20 the Commonwealth and the States through specific agreements or arrangements, any
21 return of exclusive Commonwealth power back to the States would require a
22 constitutional amendment. Without such an amendment, it is legally untenable for
23 the States to unilaterally claim legislative powers over areas that are constitutionally
24 assigned to the Commonwealth.
25 In summary, unless there has been a constitutional amendment or a specific legal
26 provision allowing for such a transfer of power regarding land taxation from the
27 Commonwealth back to the States, it is not feasible for Barry Collier MP or any State
28 entity to assert legislative authority in this matter.
29 Top 3 Authoritative Sources Used:
30 1. Australian Constitution: The primary legal document that establishes the
31 framework for Australia’s federal system of government and delineates the
32 distribution of powers between the Commonwealth and State governments.
33 2. Taxation Laws: Relevant federal legislation and regulations governing taxation in
34 Australia, including provisions related to land taxation and other forms of levies.
35 3. Legal Commentaries on Constitutional Law: Scholarly works and expert analyses on
36 constitutional law in Australia that provide insights into issues related to federalism,
37 division of powers, and constitutional amendments.
38 Web Search Results
39 5 results
40
41 Mr Barry Joseph COLLIER, OAM, BComm, DipEd, DipLaw, GAICD ( ...
42 https//www.parliament.nsw.gov.au › members › Pages › member-details.aspx
43 Mr Barry Joseph COLLIER, OAM, BComm, DipEd, DipLaw, GAICD ( ...
44 Member of the NSW Legislative Assembly, 19 Oct 2013, 06 Mar 2015 ; Parliamentary
45 Secretary Assisting the Attorney General, Assisting the Treasurer and Assisting ...
46
47 20240327-Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to Buloke Shire Council & Ors
48 https//www.scribd.com › document › 717556566 › 20240327-Schorel-Hlavka-O-W-B-to-
49 Buloke-Shire-Council-Ors
50 20240327-Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to Buloke Shire Council & Ors

26-8-2025 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 36 Assisting the Treasurer NSW on 2 March 2011 claimed 37 38 As Barry Collier MP

2 Parliamentarian Secretary Assisting the Treasurer NSW on 2 March 2011 39 ...
3
4 Barry Collier (politician)
5 https//en.m.wikipedia.org › wiki › Barry_Collier_(politician)
6 Barry Collier (politician)
7 He was a Labor Party member of the New South Wales Legislative Assembly from 1999
8 to 2011 and from 2013 to 2015, representing the electorate of Miranda.
9
10 Department of the Legislative Assembly - Parliament of NSW
11 https//www.parliament.nsw.gov.au › la › department › Documents › department-of-the-
12 legislative-assembly-annual-report-for-2009-2010 ›
13 LA%20Annual%20Report%20200910.pdf
14 Department of the Legislative Assembly - Parliament of NSW
15 parliamentary recess between december 2010 and the march 2011 election should provide
16 staffing resources to complete some of these projects.
17
18 Committee Secretary 5-6-2011 Joint ...
19 https//www.aph.gov.au › parliamentary_business › committees ›
20 house_of_representatives_committees
21 Committee Secretary 5-6-2011 Joint ...
22 This did not have the effect of preventing the. States from imposing land tax, but rather
23 returned taxation powers back to them. Accordingly ...
24 QUOTE Are you aware that Barry Collier MP Parliamentarian Secretary Assisting the Treasurer NSW
25
26 This also applies to the 11 November 1910 Commonwealth Land taxation, where the States no
27 longer since then could apply State land taxation (including the so called “Council rates”). Hence
28 all and any State land taxation in my view is unconstitutional!
29
30 Likewise, since Quarantine Act 1908 (later substituted by the BioSecurity Act 2015) the States
31 no longer could legislate, etc, as to infectious diseases regarding humans. The High Court of
32 Australia in Palmer v WA incorrectly relied upon the 1897 Hansard records instead of upon the
33 later 1-2-1898 Hansard records:
34
35 Hansard 1-2-1898 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National
36 Australasian Convention),
37 QUOTE Mr. OCONNER (New South Wales).-

38 Because, as has been said before, it is [start page

39 357] necessary not only that the administration of
40 justice should be pure and above suspicion, but
41 that it should be beyond the possibility of
42 suspicion;
43 END QUOTE
44
45 Hansard 7-2-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
46 QUOTE Mr. BARTON (New South Wales).-
47 I do not think the word quarantine, for instance, which is used in the sub-section of the 52nd
48 clause, is intended to give the Commonwealth power to legislate with regard to any

26-8-2025 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 That simply applies to quarantine as referring

quarantine.
2 to diseases among man-kind.
3 END QUOTE
4
5 Hansard 8-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
6 QUOTE
7 Sir JOHN DOWNER.-Now it is coming out. The Constitution is made for the people
8 and the states on terms that are just to both.
9 END QUOTE
10
11 Meaning, that any State/Territorial legislation/executive and/or administrative decision regarding
12 the covid-19 scam mandates were unconstitutional!
13

14
15
16 The Media involved in the covid-19 scam must also be held legally accountable and caused to
17 pay compensation to the victims!

26-8-2025 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 The media, such as ABC television news 25 August 2025 referred at about 19.36PM to
2 “Albanese Labour Government” which I view is a gross deception, this as a prime Minister or
3 for that any Minister only can deal with Section 51 and/or Section 52 listed provisions and no
4 Minister can be part of any political government but must be an IMPARTIAL Minister
5 representing all Australians and not merely party members. It is a Governor-General government
6 as a prime minister as like any other Minister merely is a “constitutional advisor to the
7 Governor-General and may on behalf of the Governor-General then exercise Department
8 powers. The purported Office of the Prime Minister is an utter constitutional nonsense not
9 listed in Section 51 and or Section 52 of the constitution!
10
11 Re DECLARATION OF WAR against a country.
12
13 Hansard 8-2-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
14 QUOTE
15 Clause 112-The Commonwealth shall protect every state against invasion, and, on the
16 application of the Executive Government of a state, against domestic violence.
17 Mr. GORDON (South Australia).-I beg to move-
18 That the word "invasion" (line 2) be struck out, and the word "attack" substituted.
19 Why should the protection of the Commonwealth be confined only to invasion? We are
20 not likely ever to be invaded, but we are exceedingly likely to be attacked.
21 Mr. BARTON.-Any attack is an invasion in the sense in which the word is used in this
22 clause.
23 Mr. GORDON.-The gunning by a cruiser standing off a city is not an invasion, but it is
24 an attack.
25 Mr. BARTON.-It is an attack which is part of an invasion; if the attack succeeds invasion
26 follows.
27 Mr. GORDON.-I think "attack" is very much better. Of course, if the word "invasion"
28 covers the ground, well and good; but while "attack" covers "invasion," does "invasion"
29 cover "attack"? Originally, the amendment I intended to move used both the words
30 "attack" and "invasion."
31 Mr. REID.-You can repel an invasion 100 miles from the coast.
32 Mr. GORDON.-But how does the honorable member know that an invasion is intended?
33 [start page 692]
34 Mr. REID.-If there was a war between two countries, and a cruiser from the one country
35 was approaching the other, you would know that it was not on a visit of brotherly love.
36 Mr. GORDON.-They may not intend to invade the chances are that they do not intend to
37 invade, but to attack.
38 Mr. BARTON.-Do you think that the Commonwealth, if a hostile fleet appeared for the
39 purpose of attacking, and not invading, would keep the batteries silent and the Australian
40 fleet at anchor?
41 Mr. GORDON.-Something may turn upon this. By this clause the Common-wealth is
42 only bound to protect every state against invasion. If the Commonwealth neglected its
43 duty, and South Australia was invaded, South Australia would have a claim against the
44 Commonwealth. But, it appears to me, that it should have an equal claim against the
45 Commonwealth if it was simply attacked, and not invaded. However, if the leader of the
46 Convention thinks that "invasion" covers "attack," I am willing to leave the matter to the
47 Drafting Committee, but I have some doubt on the point.
48 Mr. BARTON (New South Wales).-I am perfectly satisfied that when the guns are
49 booming there will be no discussion about the meaning of the two words.
50 Mr. GORDON.-Ought the construction of this Act to be left until the guns are booming?
51 I thought the object was to prevent the guns booming at all.

26-8-2025 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 Mr. HOLDER (South Australia).-I think there is something in the point raised by my
2 honorable friend (Mr. Gordon). We have previously used separately the terms "naval" and
3 "military." Now, an attack would be naval, while an invasion would be military.
4 The CHAIRMAN.-Does the honorable member (Mr. Gordon) press his amendment?
5 Mr. GORDON.-No. If the leader of the Convention relies on his booming guns I am
6 content.
7 The amendment was withdrawn.
8 END QUOTE
9
10 As such, when some legal entity attacks in some was the rights of others than this can be deemed
11 a DECLARATION OF WAR by the attacker and then the victim doesn’t have to formally
12 DECLARE WAR, as the attack is already ongoing.
13
14 https://www.naa.gov.au/blog/declaration-independence
15 Declaration of independence
16 Patrick Ferry and Darren Watson
17 Tuesday, 7 December 2021
18 QUOTE
19 Historically, declaring war was regarded as one of the most powerful and solemn acts of
20 sovereignty an independent nation could exercise on the world stage. It was a power
21 Australia traditionally lacked because of its colonial status within the British Empire. So,
22 in August 1914, once Britain declared war on Germany, Australia was automatically at
23 war too.
24 By the 1930s, Australia’s status had evolved into that of a ‘dominion’ – a self-
25 governing member of the British Commonwealth with full autonomy in internal and
26 external affairs, equal to that of Britain itself. Yet, when war broke out again with
27 Germany in September 1939, Prime Minister Robert Menzies famously announced:
28 it is my melancholy duty to inform you officially that in consequence of a persistence
29 by Germany in her invasion of Poland, Great Britain has declared war upon her and that, as
30 a result, Australia is also at war [emphasis added].
31 However, in late 1941, the new prime minister, John Curtin, took a very different view
32 when Britain was declaring war against Finland, Hungary and Romania (3 of Nazi
33 Germany’s satellite states). Although he concurred with Britain’s course of action, he
34 asserted that Australia would make its own declaration of war.
35 To do this, the Curtin government formally advised the King to officially assign the
36 power to declare war to the Governor-General. Confirmation of the King’s assent
37 was then telegraphed immediately from London to Australia so that the Cabinet
38 could then advise the Governor-General to declare war.
39 Doing the deed in Melbourne
40 On 8 December 1941, Governor-General Lord Gowrie VC, Prime Minister John Curtin
41 and senior Cabinet ministers gathered at Victoria Barracks, Melbourne, for a meeting of
42 the Federal Executive Council. Lord Gowrie signed a proclamation officially declaring
43 war on Finland, Hungary and Romania. The document was then countersigned by
44 Prime Minister Curtin and quickly published in the Gazette. It was the first time
45 Australia had ever declared war separately to Britain.
46 With no prospect of Australian ‘boots on the ground’ against any of these countries, this
47 declaration of war was largely symbolic. That does not diminish its significance as a
48 declaration of Australian independence on the world stage.
49 We are at war
50 Of course, this important milestone in Australia’s evolution as an independent nation was
51 immediately overshadowed by Japan’s attack on Pearl Harbour, Hong Kong and Malaya,
52 which had occurred earlier that morning (Australian time). So, when Prime Minister
26-8-2025 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 Curtin told the nation that evening that 'we are at war', he was referring to Japan,
2 not 3 remote European countries. The next day, 9 December 1941, the Governor-
3 General formally signed the declaration of war against Japan too.
4 The next few months were dark days for Australia, with the Japanese advancing quickly
5 southwards. The imperative of defending Australia led to the Curtin government exerting
6 even more independence of action from Britain. John Curtin stood up to British prime
7 minister Winston Churchill to ensure that the Australian Imperial Force was brought home.
8 He also turned to the United States of America for help.
9 As for the actual declarations of war, these were later bound in the volumes of approved
10 Federal Executive Council minutes. These significant documents in Australia’s evolution
11 as an independent nation are now preserved as part of the National Archives’ collection in
12 Canberra.
13 END QUOTE
14
15 No formal DECLARTION OF WAR is required to be published by the Governor-General is a
16 country is invading Australian waters and/or attacking the Commonwealth of Australia, this as
17 such conduct already signals a DECLARTION OF WAR by the enemy and the Minister of
18 Defense
19 Entitled use his Departmental powers to respond. However, where there is no imminent attack
20 upon the commonwealth of Australia then the Minister of Defense has no constitutional powers
21 to deploy Australian armed forces into a theater of war! Hence, without the Governor-General
22 having published in the Gazette a DECLARTION OF WAR against a country such as Vietnam,
23 Afghanistan, Iraq, Russian Federation, etc, then any Deployment of Australians armed forces in
24 to a theater of war would be TREASON!
25
26 The Framers of the constitution made it very clear the powers to declare war was with the
27 governor-General and nothing to do with allegedly the British government permitted the
28 Commonwealth of Australia to do so around 1930, etc.
29
30 Contrary to popular belief the Commonwealth of Australia is not some INDEPENDENT country
31 as it is not a country at all but a “political Union” similar like the “European Union”!
32
33 QUOTE 20250624-Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to (Sarah) Official Secretary to the Governor-General
34 Official Secretary to the Governor-General 24-6-2025
35 Sarah
36 FOI & IPS Mailbox <[email protected]>
37
38 Cc: Commonwealth Attorney General [email protected]

39 URGENT
40
41 NOT RESTRICTED FOR PUBLICATION
42
43 20250624-Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to (Sarah) Official Secretary to the Governor-General
44
45 Sir/Madam,
46 On Tuesday 24 June 2025 I understood that Mr Anthony Albanese made a statement
47 on the news of Channel 9 (Melbourne) about “My Government”. While I am aware that former
48 prime Ministers claimed this also our Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900 (UK)
49 as I understand it doesn’t provide any section to create an alternative Head of Government other
50 than the Governor-General, as shown below also!

26-8-2025 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 While the Governor-General can commission a person as a “Minister” who then is to be a

2 “constitutional adviser” to the Governor-General (see below text) there is however no provision
3 to provide for an additional head of Government named “prime minister”.
4 Albeit the Framers of the Constitution did refer to the position of a “prime Minister” this was not
5 as a “Head of State” as the governor-General is representing the Monarch but rather as the ‘first
6 Minister’ of those Ministers in Government.
7 While the Governor-General did swear in Mr Anthony Albanese as prime Minister for ‘the
8 Office of the Prime Minister’ to my understanding this violates Section 2 of the constitution as
9 the Governor-General is limited to “but subject to this constitution” and therefore cannot
10 create some office that so to say clashes with the office of the Governor-General.
11 I understand that the Governor-General allegedly falsely claimed that the Brits invaded Australia
12 (then known as New Holland), etc, something I view undermined the credibility of any person
13 holding the Office of the Governor-General. Whatever the political motives may have been and
14 may still be any person who occupies the Office of the Governor-General must do so consistent
15 with the true meaning and application of the legal principles embedded in the Commonwealth of
16 Australia Constitution Act 1900 (UK). Failing this the person occupying the Office of the
17 Governor-General should immediately tender his/her resignation. For too long Ministers have
18 claimed “My government” when being commissioned as ‘prime minister’ and there has been
19 continuously failure by any Governor-General to stop this rot. It is well overdue to stop it now,
20 without undue delay! In my view it is a serious infraction into our constitutional system (of
21 other issues are also set out below) and citizens are entitled to have a competent Governor-
22 General who will take immediately robust action and clarify to the general community what is
23 really applicable, including to remove any Minister from his/her portfolio who
24 disgraced/disgrace the Office of the Governor-General, etc.
25
26 I hereby request you to provide me with the relevant details/information as to the purported
27 ‘OFFICE OF THE PRIME MINISTER’ in constitutional terms and what it contains as authority,
28 etc. This also as set out below also those claiming to be prime Minister are interfering with the
29 portfolios of Ministers who were commissioned for particular portfolios and as such undermine
30 the “RESPONSIBLE Minister” legal principle regarding any portfolio, etc.
31
32 FURTHER QUESTIONS
33
34 There are a legal principles (and below many quotations for the reader to try to grasp some of it)
35 as the Framers of the Constitution clear however more than likely few if anyone besides me may
36 grasp how they are applicable:
37
38 While the Framers of the Constitution stated that “under this Constitution plus English law” it
39 should be understood that English law only applies for so far it doesn’t conflict with the legal
40 principles embedded in the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900 (UK) and this
41 include certain European Union legislation which were and/or are still applicable to the United
42 Kingdom, this as the UK accepted the European Union constitution!
43
44 The Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900 (UK) is a British Act and as such
45 considering the decision of Aggregate Industries UK Ltd., R (on the application of) v English
46 Nature and & Anor [2002] EWHC 908 (Admin) (24th April, 2002) and Judgments - Mark
47 (Respondent) v. Mark (Appellant), OPINIONS, OF THE LORDS OF APPEAL for judgment
48 IN THE CAUSE, SESSION 2005-06 [2005] UKHL 42 on appeal from: [2003] EWCA Civ 168
49 It appears that the The European Convention for the protection of Human Rights and
50 Fundamental Freedoms (“the ECHR”) albeit not overriding constitutional law, is

26-8-2025 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 complimentary to British (constitution) law, as the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution

2 Act 1900 (UK) is.
3
4 The constitution itself is a “new Magna Charta” and below some further set out:
5
6 HANSARD 17-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National
7 Australasian Convention)
8 QUOTE Mr. DEAKIN.-
9 What a charter of liberty is embraced within this Bill-of political liberty and religious
10 liberty-the liberty and the means to achieve all to which men in these days can reasonably
11 aspire. A charter of liberty is enshrined in this Constitution, which is also a
12 charter of peace-of peace, order, and good government for the
13 whole of the peoples whom it will embrace and unite.
14 END QUOTE
15 And
16 HANSARD 17-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
17 QUOTE
18 Mr. SYMON (South Australia).- We who are assembled in this Convention are about to
19 commit to the people of Australia a new charter of union and liberty; we are about to
20 commit this new Magna Charta for their acceptance and confirmation, and I can
21 conceive of nothing of greater magnitude in the whole history of the peoples of the
22 world than this question upon which we are about to invite the peoples of Australia to
23 vote. The Great Charter was wrung by the barons of England from a reluctant king. This
24 new charter is to be given by the people of Australia to themselves.
25 END QUOTE
26
27 Hansard 1-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
28 QUOTE
29 Sir JOHN DOWNER.-We spend time enough in discussing things here, and when every
30 one is agreed that this clause is not to be adopted in the form in which it is printed, but is
31 only to be a power of the Parliament, it is not worth while to discuss the question of
32 whether it is [start page 1665] absolutely necessary to put in the words. Where there is a
33 wide difference of opinion, it would be safer to do it. I agree with Mr. Barton that there is
34 no power, because sub-section (37) of clause 52 reads-
35 Any matters necessary for or incidental to the carrying into execution of the foregoing
36 powers, or of any other powers vested by this Constitution in the Parliament or Executive
37 Government of the Commonwealth, or in any department or officer thereof.
38 I venture to say that these are not necessary or incidental to the execution of any powers.
39 The Commonwealth will come into existence under this Constitution plus English law,
40 one of whose principles is that the Queen can do no wrong. That is the foundation on
41 which the Constitution is established.
42 END QUOTE
43
44 And then:
45
46 Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900 (UK)
47 QUOTE
48 Chapter I—The Parliament
49 Part I—General
50 1 Legislative power
51 The legislative power of the Commonwealth shall be vested in a
26-8-2025 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 Federal Parliament, which shall consist of the Queen, a Senate, and

2 a House of Representatives, and which is hereinafter called The
3 Parliament, or The Parliament of the Commonwealth.
4 2 Governor-General
5 A Governor-General appointed by the Queen shall be Her
6 Majesty’s representative in the Commonwealth, and shall have and
7 may exercise in the Commonwealth during the Queen’s pleasure,
8 but subject to this Constitution, such powers and functions of the
9 Queen as Her Majesty may be pleased to assign to him.
10 END QUOTE
11
12 As such, the Governor-General in general cannot be held legally accountable when acting on the
13 advice of the “constitutional adviser” being a Minister of the Crown, however, consider also
14 the following that the Governor-General cannot exercise prerogative powers in violation of the
15 constitution (See Section 2 “but subject to this constitution”:
16
17 Hansard 1-4-1891 Constitution Convention Debates
18 QUOTE Mr. MUNRO:
19 I do not see the necessity for considering the hon. member's proposal at the present time. I
20 am proud of being a citizen of the great British empire, and shall never fail to be
21 proud of that position. I have no desire to weaken a single link binding us to that empire,
22 whether as regards the appointment of a governor-general or anything else.
23 END QUOTE
24
25 Hansard 10-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National
26 Australasian Convention)
27 QUOTE
28 Mr. DEAKIN (Victoria).-I do not propose to detain the Convention with any reply,
29 except to point out that the contention of Mr. Barton in no respect applies to the matter
30 submitted to the Convention. I agree with him entirely in his constitutional construction of
31 the prerogative, and, indeed, went so far out of my way as to quote Todd to put it beyond
32 all doubt. But what are the facts? It took ten years' fight in Victoria to get the question
33 settled, and we have it on the testimony of Mr. Brunker that a struggle has been waged in
34 New South Wales. Todd furnishes an instance in which a Ministry lost its life in South
35 Africa in this struggle, after a prolonged political conflict. Under the circumstances, it
36 seems desirable there should be no ambiguity. We are not dealing with common law, but
37 with a statutory power, and desire to place these powers beyond all dispute. What I would
38 prefer is not the introduction of the words suggested, but such a definition of the term
39 "Governor-General" as would remove the ambiguity which it appears to me exists. The
40 leader of the Convention has told us that the words "Governor-General" or
41 "Governor-General in Council" have been used by the Drafting Committee
42 according as the prerogative has, or has not, been practically surrendered to
43 Parliament. That is not to be found on the face of the measure, and it is always in
44 these cases open to question whether in any particular instance the prerogative has or
45 has not been abandoned. These doubts might be set at rest if there were a definition
46 clause setting forth the sense in which the term "Governor-General" is used in the
47 Constitution.
48 Mr. BARTON.-The term "Governor-General in Council " when used means the
49 Governor-General in Council with the advice of the Executive.
50 Mr. DEAKIN.-And what does "Governor-General" mean?
51 Mr. BARTON.-That means the ordinary powers intrusted to the Governor-General
52 by the Queen.
26-8-2025 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 Mr. DEAKIN.-And these are to be exercised by him only on the advice of his
2 Ministers?
3 Mr. OCONNOR.-When you only find the term "Governor-General," that means
4 the prerogative.
5 Mr. DEAKIN.-On that prerogative Governors have made claims, which have received
6 some recognition, to exercise more power than they claim when the term "Governor-
7 General in Council" is used. Under clause 70, any distinction which exists between
8 different exercises of prerogative powers by our Governors are to be preserved in the
9 Commonwealth, and govern the relations of the Governor-General to each particular [start
10 page 2258] state according to the differing practices which may have existed. The
11 difficulty I have mentioned might be settled by some general provision or definition. On
12 account of the strong feeling which exists in some of the colonies, I propose to press this
13 matter. I do not at all insist on the form of the amendment, but call the attention of the
14 Drafting Committee to the necessity of putting beyond all question the sense in which the
15 term "Governor-General" must be accepted. This prerogative power should be exercised,
16 as practically all other powers now are, on the advice of the Executive, or of one of its
17 members.
18 Mr. OCONNOR (New South Wales).-It appears to me, with all respect, that Mr.
19 Deakin has not quite appreciated the meaning of the section. We do not wish to put
20 the Governor-General here in the position of being any less the Queen's
21 representative than the Governors of the various colonies are at the present time.
22 What is the position of the Governor of each of the colonies at present? By virtue of
23 his office the Governor of each of the colonies is Commander-in Chief of the Forces.
24 The letters patent appointing the Governor constitute him Commander-in-Chief of
25 the Forces, and in England it is pointed out the Queen is Commander-in-Chief of the
26 Forces. The only meaning of that is that the prerogative power of commanding the
27 army is vested in the Queen, or in the representative of the Queen.
28 Dr. COCKBURN.-Has the Queen of England ever claimed the right to settle a question
29 of discipline as a Governor has done here?
30 Mr. OCONNOR.-I will deal with that question later on. The Governor is
31 Commander-in-Chief of the Forces by virtue of his position. But the Governor cannot
32 move a step he cannot obtain possession of a rifle or a cartridge without the consent
33 of his Executive. It is a merely nominal appointment, and the power which he gets
34 nominally he cannot exercise without the means which are supplied by his Executive-
35 by the Governor with the advice of his Executive. That is recognised, not only in the
36 Governor's instructions, but in all the Acts dealing with the regulation of the
37 volunteer forces. For instance, in the very Act in New South Wales which Mr.
38 Brunker referred to, and under which a dispute occurred, the Governor is described
39 as Commander-in-Chief of the Forces as the Queen's representative.
40 Dr. COCKBURN.-Just as he is here.
41 Mr. OCONNOR.-The dispute occurred, not because of any difficulty in recognising that
42 position, but because, in carrying out some executive acts, a question arose in the
43 construction of the Act as to whether the Governor meant the Governor with the advice of
44 his Executive Council. It did not turn on this point at all. I hope I have therefore made it
45 clear that there is a recognition from beginning to end of the fact that the Governors are
46 nominally Commanders of the Forces. I would point out where I think Mr. Deakin has
47 made an error. The power of the Commander-in-Chief under this Constitution cannot be
48 exercised until an Act has been passed by the Commonwealth, because until that is done
49 the Commonwealth cannot engage a soldier, acquire a rifle, or a cartridge, or a uniform, or
50 anything whatever. The Governor is simply Commander-in-Chief, without an army,
51 without weapons. How are they to be obtained? By passing an Act of Parliament, and, in
26-8-2025 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 passing that Act, no doubt the Parliament will take very good care that the measure makes
2 it perfectly clear that all the executive acts which are to be carried out with regard to the
3 forces are to be carried out by the Governor with the advice of his Executive Council. So
4 that Parliament will have the matter in its own hands. I think Mr. Deakin has jumped
5 before be came to the stile. It appears to me that no amendment which you can put in this
6 Constitution which simply recognises the position of [start page 2259] the Governor as
7 Commander-in-Chief, as the Queen's representative, will have any effect. If Mr. Deakin
8 wants to move an amendment, let him make it in the Act of Parliament which will
9 authorize the Commonwealth to raise an army, to arm it, and to give it all the material
10 forces of the Commonwealth without which it cannot act. In that Act the Commonwealth
11 would take care to provide that the Governor could not take a step without the advice of
12 the Executive Council.
13 Mr. ISAACS.-If it were contrary to the Constitution that provision would not be of
14 much avail.
15 Mr. OCONNOR.-I quite agree, with the honorable member, but it would not be contrary
16 to this Constitution.
17 Mr. ISAACS.-That is the whole question.
18 Mr. OCONNOR.-I think it is perfectly plain that it would not be contrary to the
19 Constitution, because in the Constitution the Governor-General is described, as all the
20 Governors in the different colonies are described, simply as Commander-in-Chief; and
21 taking power to raise, clothe, and equip an army by the act of the Governor with the advice
22 of the Executive Council, could not interfere with the position of a Governor as
23 Commander-in-Chief. As Mr. Douglas reminds me, in all the colonies the position of
24 Governor carries with it ex officio the position of Commander-in-Chief. Now, I am anxious
25 that this matter should remain as it is in the Bill, because I think it would be a reflection on
26 this Convention if the words of the amendment were inserted in this clause, because it
27 would mean that we did not really appreciate the distinction between the position of
28 Commander-in-Chief and the position of head of the Executive who had afterwards to deal
29 with the material matters in regard to which the Commander-in-Chief could not take a
30 single step.
31 Mr. SYMON.-Why the Executive Council would have to ride out with the Governor-
32 General as his staff.
33 Mr. OCONNOR.-Of course, they would have to take all the risks of the position. If
34 the Governor-General is Commander-in-Chief, and he has to go out as actual head of
35 the army, I should hope that every member of the Executive would take the position
36 of danger when the hour of danger arrived. I ask honorable members who support
37 this amendment what danger they anticipate?
38 Dr. COCKBURN.-The danger that the Governor might seek to decide all questions of
39 discipline.
40 Mr. SYMON.-Refer them to the men.
41 Mr. OCONNOR.-You must have some one Commander-in-Chief, and, according to all
42 notions of military discipline that we are aware of, the Commander-in-Chief must have
43 control of questions of discipline, or remit them to properly-constituted military courts. Dr.
44 Cockburn has referred to the trial of breaches of military discipline. Well, I should think
45 that one of the most material parts of any Act constituting the forces of the Commonwealth
46 would be to provide for the mode in which these court-martial would be conducted and the
47 Parliament would have abundant power to decide how these matters were to be conducted,
48 and what the particular form of the court was to be. It comes back to the same position as
49 before. The Commander-in-Chief can take any actual step, whether in regard to
50 carrying on the business of war, or deciding questions of discipline. But he has no
51 machinery to act on until Parliament brings all this machinery into force, and the
26-8-2025 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 Commonwealth Parliament can do what they like in deciding what powers are to be
2 exercised by the Governor-General with the advice of the Executive Council, and
3 what powers are to be exercised by the Governor-General himself. I hope that Mr.
4 Deakin will recognise that the movements of the army must be controlled by the
5 Executive. This is not a matter of that kind, but simply a provision that the Governor-
6 General of the Commonwealth shall have, ex officio, the [start page 2260] same rights, and
7 nothing more than the rights, that the Governors of all the colonies have in this regard. I
8 hope the clause will be allowed to remain as it is.
9 END QUOTE
10
11 What we have therefore is that the Governor-General can exercise prerogative powers granted by
12 the Monarch, and this obviously cannot include the Governor-General inviting the Monarch to
13 be the King of Australia, as the Commonwealth of Australia is a “political Union” and not a
14 country. Moreover, the Governor-General is subject to “but subject to this Constitution” which
15 means that the Governor-General cannot exercise any purported prerogative powers in violation
16 of the true meaning and application of the legal principles embedded as legal principles in the
17 Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900 (UK)
18
19 Obviously, when the “Governor-General in Council” acts on advice of the relevant Minister
20 and then may act wrongly then ultimately the Minister will be at fault
21
22 However, if the Governor-General acts as a Governor-General but in violation to the legal
23 principles embedded in the constitution then the Governor-General can be held personally
24 legally accountable!
25
26 Again:
27 QUOTE
28 2 Governor-General
29 A Governor-General appointed by the Queen shall be Her Majesty’s representative in the
30 Commonwealth, and shall have and may exercise in the Commonwealth during the
31 Queen’s pleasure, but subject to this Constitution, such powers and functions of the
32 Queen as Her Majesty may be pleased to assign to him.
33 END QUOTE
34
35 When then UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson advised Her majesty to prorogue the
36 Parliament the Privy Council held that he had misled Her Majesty and as such the
37 Parliament had not been prorogued.
38 As such the then Prime Minister was at fault not Her Majesty!
39
40 Hansard 5-3-1891 Constitution convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National Australasian
41 Convention)
42 QUOTE Mr. DEAKIN:
43 The people of Victoria are under many obligations to their distinguished Chief Justice and
44 especially for his judgment in this suit, in which he has displayed the acumen of the
45 lawyer, the eloquence of the orator, and the grasp of the statesman. Chief Justice
46 Higinbotham said:
47 It was the intention of the Legislative Council to provide a complete system of responsible
48 government in and for Victoria, and that intention was carried into full legislative effect
49 with the knowledge and approval and at the instance of the Imperial Government by the
50 "Constitution Statute," passed by the Imperial Parliament.
51 He was supported in his opinion by Mr. Justice Kerferd, who for some time was Attorney-
52 General of Victoria. Mr. Justice Kerferd said:
26-8-2025 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
 Page 24

1 All the prerogatives necessary for the safety and protection of the people, the
2 administration of the law, and the conduct of public affairs in and for Victoria, under our
3 system of responsible government, have passed as an incident to the grant of self-
4 government (without which the grant itself would be of no effect) and may be exercised by
5 the representative of the Crown in the advice of responsible ministers.
6 These two quotations embody the belief which was held until lately in Victoria; the
7 majority of our own Supreme Court overruled this reading. Mr. Justice Williams said:
8 I have been for years in common with, I believe, very many others, under the delusion (as I
9 must term it) that we enjoyed in this colony responsible government in the proper sense of
10 the term. I awake to find, as far as my opinion goes, that we have merely an instalment of
11 responsible government.
12 Mr. Justice Holroyd considers that we have only a measure of self-government, and two
13 other judges concur. My colleague, Mr. Wrixon, who argued the case with great force and
14 ability before the Privy Council, says:
15 If the reading put by the Supreme Court in Victoria upon our Constitution Act be correct,
16 then not only in the colony of Victoria, but in all the groups of Australasian colonies, the
17 governments which we now enjoy are without warrant of law.
18 That is a strong statement, and the judgment of the majority of our Supreme Court justifies
19 me in asserting that this Convention cannot too soon face the issue involved in it. I take it
20 that the people of Australasia will not be satisfied with any "instalment" or any "measure"
21 of responsible government, or any limitations, except such as are necessary to the unity of
22 the empire. We claim, without shadow of doubt or vestige of qualification, all the powers
23 and privileges possessed by Englishmen. The governor-general, as representative of the
24 Queen in these federated colonies, should be clothed by statute with all the powers which
25 should belong to the representative of her Majesty; he should be above all risk of attack,
26 because he should act only on the advice of responsible ministers, who should be
27 prepared either to obtain the sanction of Parliament for their acts or vacate office.
28 Parliament, in its turn, should be brought into intimate relation with the electorates. This is
29 true, popular government.
30 END QUOTE
31
32 Hansard 17-2-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
33 QUOTE Mr. FRASER
34 The Bill provides that half of the senators go to their constituents every three years, and
35 that the members of the other House shall be elected every three years, or probably at
36 shorter intervals.
37 END QUOTE
38
39 Hansard 15-2-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
40 QUOTE
41 Mr. HIGGINS.-According to one suggestion, you must go to the Parliament, [start page
42 984] but in most cases, if there is any question of policy involved, the consent of the
43 Governor-General in Council will be discussed in Parliament. It will be raised on motion in
44 Parliament, and it will be a matter for the parliamentary majority to support him or not.
45 Constitutionally, he will not give his consent unless he is in the majority.
46 Mr. REID.-What will be the position if the Governor-General in Council approves and
47 the Parliament disapproves?
48 Mr. HIGGINS.-I apprehend the effect will be that the Federal Parliament will be able to
49 pass a law which will over-ride this particular grant.
50 Mr. REID.-That is not the object of the amendment.
51 Mr. SYMON.-Would not the effect of your amendment be to make the Federal High
52 Court sit in judgment on an executive act of the Governor-General in Council?
26-8-2025 Page 24 © 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 25

1 Mr. HIGGINS.-With all respect, no. The Governor-General in Council, as the honorable
2 member knows as well as any one, has to obey the law as well as every one else.
3 Mr. SYMON.-But suppose the Governor-General in Council grants the bonus, and
4 suppose its operation derogates from freedom of trade, then the Federal High Court will sit
5 in judgment on an act of the Governor-General in Council which involves a question of
6 policy.
7 Mr. HIGGINS.-Does not the honorable member recognise that even the legislation of the
8 Federal Parliament is subject to the decision of the Federal High Court?
9 Mr. SYMON.-But not a question of executive administrative policy.
10 Mr. HIGGINS.-The Federal High Court goes still further than that. It has the function of
11 deciding whether the Acts of the Parliament are valid or not, and why should it not have
12 the function of deciding whether the acts of the Ministry are valid or not?
13 Mr. SYMON.-That was not the intention in determining the functions of the Federal
14 High Court.
15 Mr. HIGGINS.-Our British system is that every official under Her Majesty is amenable
16 to the law-that everybody is under the law.
17 Mr. SYMON.-But this is a question of Ministerial responsibility.
18 Mr. HIGGINS.-Of course it is; but supposing the Ministry were to consent to a bonus or
19 bounty which interfered with freedom of trade, then the Federal High Court could be asked
20 to interfere, and it therefore has the ultimate decision of the matter. If the court decided
21 against a bonus or bounty, I rather think that the money would have to be refunded.
22 Mr. SYMON.-Supposing the House of Representatives approves of the action of the
23 Ministry, and the Federal High Court dissents?
24 Mr. HIGGINS.-Well, as the Federal High Court has to determine, in case of dispute,
25 whether the Acts of the Parliament are wrong, so the court has to decide whether the acts
26 of the Ministry are wrong. All this bringing in of the Federal High Court-I do not say in the
27 mind of the honorable member, but in the minds of several honorable members-is with a
28 view to make this particular proposal unpopular. I do not want to drag in the Federal High
29 Court.
30 Mr. SYMON.-But can you help it?
31 Mr. HIGGINS.-I say that, in 99 out of 100 cases, the Federal High Court, will not be
32 appealed to; but if you ask me what body is to have the ultimate determination of the
33 matter, I say the Federal High Court must be that body.
34 END QUOTE
35
36 Hansard 7-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National Australasian
37 Convention)
38 QUOTE
39 Mr. HIGGINS.-Ought you not to have the same phrase in sub-section (2) as you have in
40 sub-section (3) of clause 45?
41 Mr. ISAACS.-Yes. That would get over the difficulty. If in sub-section (2) of clause 46
42 you put an express reference to a certain class of insolvency, that must exclude by
43 inference any other class of insolvency. There is another point, and this is also a very
44 serious one, to which the Premier of Victoria drew my attention before lunch. Sub-section
45 (3) of clause 46 provides that the seat of a senator or member of the House of
46 Representatives is to become vacant if he-
47 directly or indirectly accepts or receives any fee or honorarium for work done or service
48 rendered by him for and on behalf of the Commonwealth while sitting as such member.
49 No exception is made to meet the case of a Minister of the Crown. There is provision
50 made elsewhere in the Constitution for the payment of salary to Ministers for services
51 rendered to the Commonwealth, which might include his services as a senator. Clause
52 48A provides that-
26-8-2025 Page 25 © 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 26

1 Until the Parliament otherwise provides, each senator, and each member of the House of
2 Representatives, shall receive for his services an allowance of £400 a year, to be reckoned
3 from the day on which he takes his seat.
4 The allowance spoken of there might be regarded as an honorarium, or as a fee, but it is
5 an allowance for "services," which is the word used in sub-section (3) of clause 46.
6 END QUOTE
7
8 Hansard 31-3-1891 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National
9 Australasian Convention)
10 QUOTE Sir SAMUEL GRIFFITH:
11 There are, of course, many formal matters relating to both houses, such as the election of
12 president and speaker, disqualifications, the issue of writs, elections, and so on, with which
13 I shall not on this occasion trouble the Convention. It is provided, then, that each member
14 of either house shall have an annual allowance for his services, which is proposed to be
15 fixed in the meantime at £500 a year. The ordinary disqualifications are inserted as to
16 members holding offices of profit, with the exception of ministers of the Crown, or
17 becoming public contractors and other similar provisions.
18 END QUOTE
19
20 While the quotation below refers to “salary”, being paid for “work” the legal principle is that an
21 “allowance” is not a salary.
22
23 Hansard 21-4-1897 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National
24 Australasian Convention)
25 QUOTE
26 Clause 43.-Until the Parliament otherwise provides, each member, whether of the States
27 Assembly or of the House of Representatives, shall receive an allowance for his services of
28 four hundred pounds a year, to be reckoned from the day on which he takes his seat.
29 Mr. GORDON: I move:
30 To strike out the word "four," in the third line, with the view of inserting " five."
31 The ground for the motion is that £400 a year is insufficient. While some local
32 Parliaments are paying their resident mem- [start page 1032] bers £300 a year, £400 is not
33 enough for a member who has to leave-as most members of the Federal Parliament
34 would have to do-his colony and practically abandon his business or his profession.
35 He would have to rely either upon his private means or his parliamentary salary, which, in
36 this case, would be inadequate. I think, if £400 a year is fixed, the choice for members of
37 the House of Representatives will be limited to those who can afford to leave their business
38 or profession, and to those who are prepared to depend entirely on the small parliamentary
39 salary. While members of both of these classes are exceedingly desirable members of any
40 Parliament, I think it would be a mistake to have the whole Parliament consisting of them,
41 which the payment of the salary proposed would probably lead to. I think £500 is little
42 enough; the £100 makes all the difference to the ordinary professional or business man.
43 Sir WILLIAM ZEAL: £400 is quite enough.
44 Sir EDWARD BRADDON: £100 too much.
45 Mr. GORDON: I think it is a question on which the sense of the Committee should be
46 taken, and, without further remark, I move the amendment.
47 Mr. HIGGINS: I think that, having regard to the fact that the Federal Parliament will
48 have much less to do than the ordinary local Parliaments after the first Parliament, £400 is
49 sufficient. I am as strongly in favor of payment of members, on the grounds alluded to by
50 Mr. Gordon, as any man, but I say that the work done in the States Parliaments takes far
51 more time than will the work in the Federal Parliament, after its first meeting. It is not
52 likely, indeed, that the Federal Parliament will sit more than two months in the year. I
53 should like to strike out "four," with a view to the insertion of "three." At the same time, as
26-8-2025 Page 26 © 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 27

1 £400 has been fixed as a compromise, I hope it will remain at that amount as the
2 maximum.
3 Sir WILLIAM ZEAL: I consider that £400 is ample payment for the services of
4 members. In addition to that they possess the privilege of a free railway pass. The
5 amount proposed to be paid-£400-is twice as much as the Dominion Parliament of Canada
6 pays its members. I trust hon. members will not support the amendment to increase the
7 amount to £500.
8 Mr. TRENWITH: I hope that Mr. Gordon's amendment will be carried. We have no
9 right to assume that the Federal Parliament will not have a good deal to do. All our
10 experience teaches us that, as civilisation advances, the requirements of the people
11 increase, and the tendency to ask Parliament to do things, that in the past have been done
12 by private enterprise, is increasing very rapidly. I feel confident that the Federal
13 Parliament, instead of having less to do as time goes on, will have a great deal more to do.
14 I think that it will be found to the advantage of the States to hand over work to the central
15 Government. Of course, I can understand the objection that any sum is too much, by
16 those who disapprove of the principle of payment of members. But the principle of
17 payment of members has been adopted throughout all the colonies. It was adopted after a
18 good deal of resistance on the part of those who disapprove of it, which showed the strong
19 growing public feeling in favor of paying members for the work they do, and of looking
20 upon the position of a member of Parliament not merely as a position of honor, but rather
21 regarding them as State servants who are paid for their work. We are paid not merely to
22 reimburse us for expenses incurred, and to pay members of the Federal Parliament £500 a
23 year would be little enough, considering that during a portion of the year they will have to
24 be great distances from their established homes.
25 Sir WILLIAM ZEAL: It will cost them nothing to travel.
26 Mr. TRENWITH: That is a very popular delusion.
27 [start page 1033]
28 Sir WILLIAM ZEAL: Let them keep out of Parliament.
29 Mr. TRENWITH: That is exactly the idea. I say let the people have the widest possible
30 area of selection for Parliament in order that all sections may be represented.
31 Sir WILLIAM ZEAL: To keep a lot of idle fellows doing nothing.
32 HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
33 Mr. TRENWITH: I am anxious that members of Parliament should not be idle fellows.
34 In the non-payment days a great many members were idle fellows who looked upon a seat
35 in Parliament as an addition to their social position, who cared very little for its worth, and
36 in some instances who paid themselves very handsomely by the opportunities they had.
37 Sir WILLIAM ZEAL: You cannot say that with truth. That is a most scandalous
38 assertion!
39 Mr. TRENWITH: It is the truth.
40 Sir WILLIAM ZEAL: Quite scandalous. You have no right to make such a statement.
41 Mr. TRENWITH: I do not want to initiate a discussion of this sort, but when Sir
42 William Zeal talks about idle fellows, he brings upon himself, naturally and properly, the
43 rejoinder I have made.
44 Sir EDWARD BRADDON: A most unjust rejoinder.
45 Mr. TRENWITH: In some of the colonies the best lands and water-frontages-the very
46 eyes of the colonies, in fact-were mopped up by members of Parliament during the regime
47 of non-payment of members.
48 Sir WILLIAM ZEAL: How many of them?
49 Mr. TRENWITH: As I said before I do not want to initiate a discussion of this sort.
50 Mr. WALKER: What you say may be the case in Victoria, you know.
51 Sir WILLIAM ZEAL: It is a gross exaggeration.
26-8-2025 Page 27 © 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 28

1 Mr. TRENWITH: I am not speaking merely of Victoria. I lived during the early part of
2 my life in a nice little colony which suffered in the same way.
3 Mr. WALKER: Do you mean Van Diemen's Land?
4 Mr. TRENWITH: I mean Tasmania. I was pointing out that the instincts of our people
5 tend towards payment of members of Parliament for their work. My hon. friend, Sir
6 William Zeal, interjected that we have free railway passes. I would remark that any
7 person who knows anything about travel must recognise that it carries with it a large
8 amount of expense. Those who are here, away from their homes, know that if they
9 were getting £400 a year for this work, they would be losing money, and they would
10 not even be reimbursed for the expenditure incurred. Those who urge that the amount
11 should be left as proposed in the Bill, are not in favor of payment of members, but are
12 simply favorable to reimbursing members for the disbursements they make in connection
13 with the performance of their duties.
14 Mr. HIGGINS: I was always in favor of payment of members.
15 Mr. TRENWITH: I feel confident that my hon. friend Mr. Higgins could not have
16 looked thoroughly at the question or he would not have spoken as he did.
17 Sir WILLIAM ZEAL: He is losing now ten times as much as he will ever get for
18 being here, but he is bearing it cheerfully.
19 Mr. TRENWITH: There are some who could not afford to lose anything at all.
20 Parliament is to be composed, as it ought to be, of representatives of all sections of the
21 community. There must be in Parliament some who cannot afford to lose anything at all,
22 and who must be paid for their services, and if those services are worth having, there ought
23 to be adequate remuneration for them. I sincerely hope that the higher figure will be [start
24 page 1034] adopted, not because I believe in extravagance, but because I believe that any
25 lesser sum will not pay members of Parliament for their work.
26 Question-That the word "four," proposed to be struck out, stand part of the question-put.
27 The Committee divided.
28 Ayes, 26; Noes, 9. Majority, 17.
29 END QUOTE
30
31 Hansard 1-4-1891 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National Australasian
32 Convention)
33 QUOTE
34 Clause 3. The annual salary of the governor-general shall be fixed by the Parliament from
35 time to time, but shall not be less than ten thousand pounds, and the same shall be
36 payable to the Queen out of the consolidated revenue fund of the commonwealth. The
37 salary of a governor-general shall not be diminished during his continuance in office.
38 Mr. BARTON: I propose to omit the words "the same" as being quite unnecessary. The
39 alteration will, I think, improve the bill.
40 Sir HARRY ATKINSON: I should like to see all the words after "from time to time"
41 omitted, for I do not see why we should fix the amount at £10,000. I therefore move:
42 That the words "but shall not be less than ten thousand pounds" be omitted.
43 Mr. GILLIES: I should like to know from the hon. member the object of omitting the
44 words. Is it that there shall be no salary at all?
45 Sir HARRY ATKINSON: No; it is that the federal parliament shall be left perfectly
46 free to deal with the question of salary itself.
47 An HON. MEMBER: I suppose the hon. member would do the same with the
48 ministers?
49 Sir HARRY ATKINSON: I should do exactly the same with the ministers!
50 Mr. MUNRO: I feel that the hon. member, Sir Harry Atkinson, cannot have considered
51 what he proposes to do. The governor-general must be appointed before the parliament is
52 called into existence, and does the hon. member think that any one will take the office
26-8-2025 Page 28 © 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 29

1 without some assurance that he will get a salary of some sort? Surely the governor-general
2 ought to know Something about the office be is to fill and the emolument attached to, the
3 position! If the amendment be made the result will be that the appointment will be made
4 without any assurance as to the emolument which the holder is to receive. The hon.
5 member says he will make a similar proposal with regard to the ministers of the Crown. I
6 venture to say that the two proposals are really unwise, and that we ought now to attach
7 some decent salary to the office giving power to the parliament to vary it, but not to reduce
8 it during the term of office of the gentleman appointed afterwards. My conviction is that a
9 salary of £10,000 is altogether inadequate for the office. My feeling is that the gentleman
10 to be appointed ought [start page 579] to be equal to the gentleman appointed as governor-
11 general of India. He ought to be a gentleman capable of being a cabinet minister in
12 England, and for that purpose the salary ought to be very much larger than what is
13 proposed. I do not think it is to the advantage of the colonies to hawk this position
14 about in such a way that no man of good standing or position will take it. When the
15 Constitution of Victoria was agreed to many years ago, I think the population of the
16 colony was about only 250,000, and yet they fixed the governor's salary at £10,000,
17 with an allowance of £5,000, making it £15,000 in all. Since then it has been reduced
18 to £10,000 a year, but a house is provided furnished, so that practically the
19 emolument comes to £15,000 a year now. Now, this Convention, representing the whole
20 of Australia, is going to give the governor-general a salary equal to what is given to the
21 Governor of Victoria at the present time.
22 Mr. CLARK: You will reduce yours!
23 Mr. MUNRO: No, we do not intend to reduce ours. We think the Governor of Victoria
24 is entitled to the salary, and perhaps more, if we could afford it. At any rate, I think that
25 instead of striking out these words, and making the amount indefinite-in fact, making no
26 provision at all-the words ought to be struck out with the view of increasing the amount
27 very considerably.
28 Sir SAMUEL GRIFFITH: Another reason why the words should not be struck out is
29 not only the importance of the first governor-general knowing how much be is to get-a
30 very important consideration in choosing him-but that the federal parliament might simply
31 by reducing the salary cut the connection with Great Britain altogether. Supposing that it
32 were to reduce the salary to £100 or £1,000 a year! That is the reason why in all the
33 constitution acts there has been the reservation of a fixed sum, which is made payable to
34 her Majesty, so that she has always money to pay her governor-general, and therefore
35 can always secure the appointment in the country of her representative with an
36 adequate salary. I agree with the hon. member, Mr. Munro, that the salary is too small,
37 having regard to the salary given to the Governor of Victoria.
38 Sir JOHN BRAY: I think it is desirable to fix the salary of the first governor-general.
39 The clause says that the salary shall not be less than £10,000. It is very possible, I think,
40 that that expression may lead to very serious misunderstanding. It is an intimation to the
41 governor-general that he shall get £10,000 a year, and probably a good deal more than that.
42 He ought to know when appointed what his salary is to be, and I think, therefore, that the
43 salary of the first governor-general should be fixed in the bill. The words "but shall not be
44 less than" should therefore be omitted.
45 Sir SAMUEL GRIFFITH: That would enable the federal parliament to reduce the
46 salary to £1,000!
47 Sir JOHN BRAY: No, because the clause provides that the salary shall not be
48 diminished during the governor's continuance in office. But I am astonished to hear it
49 suggested that the federal parliament would be so supremely ridiculous as to fix a
50 nominal salary for a governor-general. It is to my mind utterly out of the question to
51 imagine that such would be the case. If we leave the clause as it stands we say to the
26-8-2025 Page 29 © 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 30

1 federal parliament, "We cannot trust you to fix the salary; we will fix it at not less than
2 £10,000, whatever the circumstances of the federal government may be." Surely if we give
3 the federal government the powers which it is proposed to give them we can trust them to
4 see that proper provision is made for the salary of the governor-general. I think we should
5 fix the salary, of the first [start page 580] governor-general at £10,000, leaving it to the
6 federal government to fix the salary subsequently.
7 Sir SAMUEL GRIFFITH: The hon. member, Sir John Bray, surely could not have
8 heard my argument. Does he suggest that the framers of the constitutions of the various
9 colonies did not understand their business? This reservation in regard to the salary of
10 governors is made in the whole of the acts.
11 Sir JOHN BRAY: But there is power to alter the act!
12 Mr. GILLIES: Only by a certain majority!
13 Sir SAMUEL GRIFFITH: The salary cannot be diminished unless by an
14 amendment of the act, and that is the object of the reservation. The idea is to secure
15 the means of providing a representative of the Queen in the colony with an adequate
16 salary. I will put this illustration. If you give to the federal parliament absolute power
17 to reduce the salary, some persons may be constantly endeavouring to earn a little
18 cheap popularity by proposing reductions. You will have continual agitations for the
19 reduction of the salary to £8,000, or £6,000 or less. It would, perhaps, be regarded as
20 a very popular move on the part of some persons.
21 END QUOTE
22
23 Hansard 7-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
24 QUOTE
25 [The Chairman left the chair at eight minutes to one o'clock p.m. The committee resumed
26 at ten minutes past two o'clock p.m.]
27 Clause 45. Any person who-
28 IV. Holds any office of profit under the Crown, or any pension payable during the
29 pleasure of the Crown out of any of the revenues of the Commonwealth; but this sub-
30 section does not apply to the office of any of the Queen's Ministers of State for the
31 Commonwealth or to the receipt of pay, half-pay, or a pension by any person as an officer
32 or member of the Queen's navy or army, or to the receipt of pay as an officer or member of
33 the naval or military forces of the Commonwealth by any person whose services are not
34 wholly employed by the Commonwealth
35 END QUOTE
36
37 Hansard 13-4-1897 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National
38 Australasian Convention)
39 QUOTE Mr. DOBSON:
40 The Governor-General will call to his Council six or seven gentlemen whom he thinks
41 capable of being the first Ministers in the Commonwealth.
42 END QUOTE
43 Hansard2-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates;
44 QUOTE Dr. QUICK.-
45 The Constitution empowers the Federal Parliament to deal with certain external affairs,
46 among which would probably be the right to negotiate for commercial treaties with foreign
47 countries, in the same way as Canada has negotiated for such treaties. These treaties could
48 only confer rights and privileges upon the citizens of the Commonwealth, because the
49 Federal Government, in the exercise of its power, [start page 1753] could only act for
50 and on behalf of its citizens.
51 END QUOTE
52 .
53 Hansard 6-3-1891 Constitution Convention Debates

26-8-2025 Page 30 © 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 31

1 QUOTE Mr. THYNNE:

2 I shall quote from Mr. Dicey's recent work, which is very clear in its language. He says:
3 One of the characteristics of a federation is that the law of the constitution must be
4 either legally immutable or else capable of being changed only by some authority
5 above and beyond the ordinary legislative bodies, whether federal or state
6 legislatures, existing under the constitution.
7 END QUOTE
8
9 Hansard 6-3-1891 Constitution Convention Debates
10 QUOTE Mr. THYNNE:
11 The constitution of this federation will not be charged with the duty of resisting
12 privileged classes, for the whole power will be vested in the people themselves. They
13 are the complete legislative power of the whole of these colonies, and they shall be so.
14 From [start page 106] them will rise, first of all, the federal constitution which we are
15 proposing to establish, and in the next place will come the legislative powers of the several
16 colonies. The people will be the authority above and beyond the separate legislatures,
17 and the royal prerogative exercised, in their interest and for their benefit, by the advice of
18 their ministers will be practically vested in them. They will exercise the sovereignty of
19 the states, they will be charged with the full power and dignity of the state, and it is from
20 them that we must seek the giving to each of those bodies that will be in existence
21 concurrently the necessary powers for their proper management and existence. Each
22 assembly, each legislature, whether state or federal existing under this constitution,
23 will be as Dicey again says-a merely subordinate law-making body whose laws will be
24 valid, whilst within the authority conferred upon it by the constitution, but invalid
25 and unconstitutional if they go beyond the limits of such authority.
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 Sir SAMUEL GRIFFITH: At all events, I would ask hon. members to pause before they
32 determine upon asking the Queen to surrender all her prerogatives in Australia. For my
33 part, I believe that all the prerogatives of the Crown exist in the governor-general as
34 far as they relate to Australia. I never entertained any doubt upon the subject at all-that
35 is so far as they can be exercised in the commonwealth.
36 END QUOTE
37 Hansard 6-4-1897 Constitution convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National
38 Australasian Convention)
39 QUOTE Mr. DEAKIN:
40 In the first instance, the power of the Crown itself is nowhere defined, and cannot be
41 defined under this constitution.
42 END QUOTE
43
44 Hansard 6-4-1897 Constitution convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National
45 Australasian Convention)
46 QUOTE
47 Sir SAMUEL GRIFFITH: I am trying to get at the ideas which are underlying the
48 argument of hon. gentlemen. I confess I have not got at them yet. The hon. member, Mr.
49 Deakin, talks about the powers exercised by the ministers of the Crown in Great Britain.
50 They do not differ in any respect from the powers exercised by ministers of the Crown in
51 any other country.
52 Dr. COCKBURN: They are much superior to the powers of ministers here!
53 Sir SAMUEL GRIFFITH': Not in the east.
54 Mr. DEAKIN: The powers of our ministers are limited, and theirs are unlimited!
55 END QUOTE
26-8-2025 Page 31 © 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 32

1
2 Again:
3 Mr. DEAKIN: The powers of our ministers are limited, and theirs are unlimited!
4
5 As such, while former Prime Minister Tony Blair claimed to have the powers to authorise an
6 armed invasion into Afghanistan and/or Iraq, it should be understood that the UK has no formal
7 written constitution and by this relies upon all kinds of judgments, legislation, etc. Even if the
8 UK prime Minister had such powers, this I do not seek to concede, it cannot mean that then an
9 Australian Prime Minister somehow can act the same, as we have a written constitution!
10 However, as the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900 (UK) is a British
11 legislation then the British unwritten constitution nevertheless includes our constitution and
12 reflects that only the Monarch can DECLARE WAR or PEACE!
13
14 HANSARD 10-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National
15 Australasian Convention)
16 QUOTE Mr. BARTON (New South Wales).-
17 Then, again, there is the prerogative right to declare war and peace, an adjunct of
18 which it is that the Queen herself, or her representative, where Her Majesty is not
19 present, holds that prerogative. No one would ever dream of saying that the Queen
20 would declare war or peace without the advice of a responsible Minister.
21 END QUOTE
22
23 HANSARD 6-3-1891 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National
24 Australasian Convention)
25 QUOTE
26 Mr. DEAKIN: We can make an exception in favour of imperial interests. We have no
27 desire to interfere with the imperial prerogative in matters of war and peace!
28 END QUOTE
29 .
30 HANSARD 6-3-1891 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National
31 Australasian Convention)
32 QUOTE
33 Sir SAMUEL GRIFFITH: At all events, I would ask hon. members to pause before they
34 determine upon asking the Queen to surrender all her prerogatives in Australia. For my
35 part, I believe that all the prerogatives of the Crown exist in the governor-general as
36 far as they relate to Australia. I never entertained any doubt upon the subject at all-that
37 is so far as they can be exercised in the commonwealth.
38 END QUOTE
39
40 As I submitted to the Court on 19 July 2006 (representing myself) regarding both successful
41 appeals:
42 END QUOTE County Court of Victoria, Case numbers T01567737 & Q10897630
43
44 This is a criminal case instituted by the
45 Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions
46 and as such by this has implied given the authority
47 to the Courts to deal with the validity of the
48 purported elections.
49

26-8-2025 Page 32 © 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 33

1 With the 2004 purported Federal election the added issue is also that no one in his right
2 mind can demand or otherwise force me to vote for what I consider a war criminal, being
3 Mr John Howard, likewise so for any of his political allies.
4 The position of “Prime Minister” does not exist in the written Constitution. However, as a
5 “constitutionalist” I am well aware that the framers of the Constitution intended there be a
6 Prime Minister, albeit with limited powers. As they made clear the power to declare War
7 or Peace rest with the Monarch and so by the Governor-General and this was only to be
8 acted upon by a Declaration of War if it involved going to war. Hence, the armed invasion
9 into Afghanistan and Iraq was unconstitutional as no DECLARATION OF WAR was
10 ever publicised in the Gazette. As a matter of fact, I understand it was TREACHERY
11 within section 24AA of the Crimes Act (Cth) for the Prime minister and others to authorise
12 a war against “friendly” nations, as they were in view they had not actually attacked us
13 and neither had the governor-General issued a Declaration of War to placed them to be
14 enemies.
15 END QUOTE County Court of Victoria, Case numbers T01567737 & Q10897630
16
17 QUOTE County Court of Victoria, Case numbers T01567737 & Q10897630
18 Mr. CARRUTHERS:
19
20 Mr. Barton first of all recites Dicey to show what occurs under the unwritten
21 Constitution of England. But here we are framing a written Constitution. When
22 once that Constitution is framed we cannot get behind it.
23 And
24 Mr. CARRUTHERS:
25 This is a Constitution which the unlettered people of the community ought to be
26 able to understand.
27
28 Essentially what Mr Carruthers was making clear is that one cannot go behind the written
29 Constitution as to seek to imply some powers that are not provided for in the written
30 Constitution.
31 One can use as aid the unwritten constitution, as recorded in the Hansard of the
32 Constitution Convention Debates as to the intentions of the framers, to explain the written
33 Constitution, but one cannot assume some power, such as INDEPENDENCE where none
34 existed in the first place.
35
36 Again;
37 Mr. CARRUTHERS:
38 This is a Constitution which the unlettered people of the community ought to be
39 able to understand.
40
41 Therefore, where the Constitution provided for the line of successors of the British
42 Monarchy then whatever the High Court of Australia seeks to make out of in Sue v Hill it
43 cannot for one of iota affect how constitutional provisions apply as there was no
44 constitutional powers for the Commonwealth of Australia to become INDEPENDENT.
45 It was my understanding that I would become a naturalized British national and was
46 entitled upon this in view that the British Parliament had provided for this in subsection
47 51(xix)!
48
49 Likewise, it is my understanding that a Prime Minister has no prerogative powers to
50 declare war or to authorise the invasion of another nation as only the Minister of Defence
51 can authorise this upon having had a DECLARATION OF WAR published by the

26-8-2025 Page 33 © 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 34

1 Governor-General in the gazette or in the alternative if the Commonwealth of Australia

2 was under direct attack by an enemy, which in itself would be an act of war.
3
4 No one therefore can demand that I vote in some purported election and by this
5 warmongering politicians may claim that they have had support for their conduct, even so
6 people may have voted out of fear of the tyranny being forced to do so rather then that they
7 desired to do so.
8
9 I have a right to drive a motor vehicle including a truck or bus, but no one could force me
10 to drive a motor vehicle merely because I happened to be licensed to do so. Likewise, no
11 one can force me to exercise a right, where I view no one is worthy my vote.
12 END QUOTE County Court of Victoria, Case numbers T01567737 & Q10897630
13
14 END QUOTE County Court of Victoria, Case numbers T01567737 & Q10897630
15 As already earlier stated above;
16 Mr. BARTON.-
17 If we are going to give the Federal Parliament power to legislate as it pleases with
18 regard to Commonwealth citizenship, not having defined it, we may be enabling the
19 Parliament to pass legislation that would really defeat all the principles inserted
20 elsewhere in the Constitution, and, in fact, to play ducks and drakes with it.
21 And
22 Mr. BARTON.-Yes; and here we have a totally different position, because the
23 actual right which a person has as a British subject-the right of personal liberty and
24 protection under the laws-is secured by being a citizen of the states. It must be
25 recollected that the ordinary rights of liberty and protection by the laws are not
26 among the subjects confided to the Commonwealth. The administration of [start page
27 1766] the laws regarding property and personal liberty is still left with the states.
28
29 Without a DECLARATION OF WAR and without any actual attack upon the Commonwealth
30 of Australia there is no constitutional conception of there being any WAR.
31 END QUOTE County Court of Victoria, Case numbers T01567737 & Q10897630
32
33 Where the judges of the High Court of Australia purportedly claimed that Australians have as a
34 nationality “Australian citizenship” and one cannot have “DUAL CITIZENSHIP” to be able
35 to be a Member of Parliament then on that basis the judges themselves dealing with Sue v Hill
36 being allegedly “subjects of the Queen” may not have held a legitimate judicial position. This
37 also considering the following:
38
39 Hansard 2-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
40 QUOTE
41 Mr. SYMON.-Very likely not. What I want to know is, if there is anybody who will
42 come under the operation of the law, so as to be a citizen of the Commonwealth, who
43 would not also be entitled to be a citizen of the state? There ought to be no opportunity for
44 such discrimination as would allow a section of a state to remain outside the pale of the
45 Commonwealth, except with regard to legislation as to aliens. Dual citizenship exists, but it
46 is not dual citizenship of persons, it is dual citizenship in each person. There may be two
47 men-Jones and Smith-in one state, both of whom are citizens of the state, but one only
48 is a citizen of the Commonwealth. That would not be the dual citizenship meant.
49 What is meant is a dual citizenship in Mr. Trenwith and myself. That is to say, I am a
50 citizen of the state and I am also a citizen of the Commonwealth; that is the dual
51 citizenship. That does not affect the operation of this clause at all. But if we introduce this
52 clause, it is open to the whole of the powerful criticism of Mr. O'Connor and those who say
26-8-2025 Page 34 © 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 35

1 that it is putting on the face of the Constitution an unnecessary provision, and one which
2 we do not expect will be exercised adversely or improperly, and, therefore, it is much
3 better to be left out. Let us, in dealing with this question, be as careful as we possibly, can
4 that we do not qualify the citizenship of this Commonwealth in any way or exclude
5 anybody [start page 1764] from it, and let us do that with precision and clearness. As a
6 citizen of a state I claim the right to be a citizen of the Commonwealth. I do not want
7 to place in the hands of the Commonwealth Parliament, however much I may be
8 prepared to trust it, the right of depriving me of citizenship. I put this only as an
9 argument, because no one would anticipate such a thing, but the Commonwealth
10 Parliament might say that nobody possessed of less than £1,000 a year should be a citizen
11 of the Federation. You are putting that power in the hands of Parliament.
12 Mr. HIGGINS.-Why not?
13 Mr. SYMON.-I would not put such a power in the hands of any Parliament. We must
14 rest this Constitution on a foundation that we understand, and we mean that every
15 citizen of a state shall be a citizen of the Commonwealth, and that the Commonwealth
16 shall have no right to withdraw, qualify, or restrict those rights of citizenship, except
17 with regard to one particular set of people who are subject to disabilities, as aliens, and so
18 on.
19 END QUOTE
20 .
21 QUOTE Thomas Jefferson:
22 "The germ of destruction of our nation is in the power of the judiciary, an
23 irresponsible body - working like gravity by night and by day, gaining a little today
24 and a little tomorrow, and advancing its noiseless step like a thief over the field of
25 jurisdiction, until all shall render powerless the checks of one branch over the other
26 and will become as venal and oppressive as the government from which we
27 separated.".
28 END QUOTE
29 .
30 Meaning that if a Governor-General is NOT one holding the nationality “Subject of the
31 Crown” then I view this person cannot be legitimately be a Governor-General either!
32
33 There is also the problems that Ministers who are involved in special payments outside their
34 position as being a Minister may by Subsections 44 and 45 be automatically disqualified holding
35 a seat in the parliament. Meaning that the commission by a Governor-General by the provisions
36 of Section 64 came to an end at the conclusion of 3-months without being elected and sworn in.
37 This is also why John Howard and others in the defective 2001 federal election lost their seats
38 and in fact when standing for re-election and using taxpayers monies of Consolidated Revenue
39 Funds to pay cost relating to any political election campaign were then AUTOMATICALLY
40 prohibited by Section 44 to be and/or remain to be a candidate in a federal political election. As
41 such their positions I view were to impersonate to be a federal official and deceptively received
42 monies in that regard.
43
44 But there is more to this!
45
46 The Governor-General must uphold the true meaning and application of the legal principles
47 embedded in the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900 (UK) and in my view
48 should have removed the commission of any Minister who violated constitutional [provisions,
49 such as to go to war against a “friendly” nation and in the process becomes involved in mass
50 murder, crimes against humanity, etc. When the Governor-General despite being commissioned

26-8-2025 Page 35 © 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 36

1 “but subject to this Constitution” fails to take appropriate action against a wrongdoer then I
2 view the Governor-General places his/her own credibility in question and can no longer be and
3 remain to be Governor-General as the person fails to act as a “model citizen”!
4
5 With the sacking of the Geoff Whitlam and others in government I view Sir John Kerr was rather
6 the one miserably failing as a Governor-General as has many others since him. When one
7 consider the legal principles embedded in the constitution then it must be clear that
8 Appropriation/Tax Bills may need about 6 months period such as from the day they are
9 introduced into the parliament and if rejected in the Senate have to wait 3-months before being
10 reintroduced and then if again rejected a DOUBLE DISSOLUTION being called and after the
11 return of the writs then the Bills may be presented to the newly Members elected Parliament
12 members and so before the 1st July the new financial year is commenced. And as the Framers of
13 the Constitution made very clear:
14
15 Hansard 12-4-1897 Constitution Convention Debates
16 QUOTE
17 Mr. GLYNN Does that put a maximum on military expenditure?
18 Mr. PEACOCK: A maximum on all expenditure!
19 Mr. BARTON: It seems to me to put a maximum on all expenditure, because the whole
20 of the expenditure cannot exceed the total yearly expenditure in the performance of the
21 services and powers given by the Constitution, and any powers subsequently transferred
22 from the States to the Commonwealth.
23 Mr. SYMON: Does that prevent any increase in case of war?
24 Mr. BARTON: Yes.
25 END QUOTE
26 Again:
27 Hansard 12-4-1897 Constitution Convention Debates
28 QUOTE
29 Mr. SYMON: Does that prevent any increase in case of war?
30 Mr. BARTON: Yes.
31 END QUOTE
32
33 Hence, no Taxation Bill/Act can be applied during the current financial year as some “mini
34 budget!
35 As for Appropriation Bill/Act,
36
37 Hansard 8-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
38 QUOTE
39 Mr. ISAACS.-I should hope that the expenditure caused by a bush fire would not be
40 part of an annual service.
41 Mr. MCMILLAN.-Would it not into the Appropriation Bill?
42 Mr. ISAACS.-Yes; but not as an annual service.
43 Mr. MCMILLAN.-The annual services of the Government are those which we
44 distinguish from special grants and from loan services. The difficulty is that we have
45 got rid of the phraseology to which we are accustomed, and instead of the words
46 Appropriation Bill, we are using the word law.
47 Mr. ISAACS.-A difficulty arises in connexion with the honorable members proposal
48 to place expenditure incurred for bush fires in the ordinary, it would not be annual,
49 and it would not be a service.
50 END QUOTE
51

26-8-2025 Page 36 © 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 37

1 As such, any Appropriation Act that is ANNUAL Appropriation cannot be added during the
2 existing financial year. Any Special Appropriation Act must be within the total of the Taxation
3 Acts already applicable for the current financial year.
4 As the government ordinary is for a mere 3-year period then all and any Appropriation Acts must
5 never be more then for 1 year to be about the equivalent of the yearly Taxation Acts for the same
6 year, this as they can only last for maximum of one financial years and not beyond.
7 Where then the Government engages in contracts then they too must be limited and not as now
8 some Government enters into some $380 Billion contract that may never have a real value to the
9 “political Union” Commonwealth of Australia defence.
10 Also, the registration by the Commonwealth of Australia with the District of Columbia placed
11 the jurisdiction of the Commonwealth of Australia under the jurisdiction of the USA Senate is an
12 absurdity and violates Section 44.
13
14 The same with Scott Morrison purportedly having engaged in contracts with pharmaceutical
15 companies such as Pfizer, as I understand it without any Special Appropriation Act to fund the
16 more than a Billion dollars contract also was unconstitutional, this also because the Pfizer
17 contract as I understand it violates Section 44 of the constitution and 71 & 73:
18
19 Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900 (UK)
20 QUOTE
21 Chapter III—The Judicature
22 71 Judicial power and Courts
23 The judicial power of the Commonwealth shall be vested in a Federal Supreme
24 Court, to be called the High Court of Australia, and in such other federal courts as the
25 Parliament creates, and in such other courts as it invests with federal jurisdiction. The High
26 Court shall consist of a Chief Justice, and so many other Justices, not less than two, as the
27 Parliament prescribes.
28 END QUOTE
29 And
30 QUOTE
31 73 Appellate jurisdiction of High Court
32 The High Court shall have jurisdiction, with such exceptions and subject to such
33 regulations as the Parliament prescribes, to hear and determine appeals from all judgments,
34 decrees, orders, and sentences:
35 (i) of any Justice or Justices exercising the original jurisdiction of the High Court;
36 (ii) of any other federal court, or court exercising federal jurisdiction; or of the Supreme
37 Court of any State, or of any other court of any State from which at the establishment of
38 the Commonwealth an appeal lies to the Queen in Council;
39 (iii) of the Inter-State Commission, but as to questions of law only;
40 and the judgment of the High Court in all such cases shall be final and conclusive.
41 But no exception or regulation prescribed by the Parliament shall prevent the High Court
42 from hearing and determining any appeal from the Supreme Court of a State in any matter
43 in which at the establishment of the Commonwealth an appeal lies from such Supreme
44 Court to the Queen in Council.
45 Until the Parliament otherwise provides, the conditions of and restrictions on appeals to the
46 Queen in Council from the Supreme Courts of the several States shall be applicable to
47 appeals from them to the High Court.
48 END QUOTE
49
50 As such, it was in violation of the constitution to have any contract with any pharmaceutical
51 company that stipulates that any dispute is to be heard and determined in a USA jurisdiction!
26-8-2025 Page 37 © 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 38

1 In my view the Governor-General should have taken appropriate action at each time a Minister
2 (and so any of its staff, etc) engaged in violation of constitutional principles. Failure to do so I
3 view violated Section 2 of the constitution which clearly stipulates “but subject to this
4 Constitution”!
5 As for the funding of and providing military munition, weapons, vehicles and other assistant to
6 Ukraine against the Russian Federation violates the legal principles embedded in the constitution
7 in that this can be deemed an unconstitutional DECLARATION OF WAR against a “friendly”
8 nation and I view again the Governor-General was obligated to stop this kind of unconstitutional
9 war mongering. The Russian Federation applied Amendment 51 to seek to secure the wellbeing
10 of ethnic Russians and it then was for the UN (United Nations) to step in and secure the
11 wellbeing of those under attack by Ukraine NAZI soldiers. The Russian Federation was not
12 attacking the Commonwealth of Australia, and neither did so Afghanistan, Iraq, etc.
13
14 In my view the Commonwealth of Australia membership with the WHO (World Health
15 Organisation) also is unconstitutional as it is not an organization that operates within our
16 constitutional provisions. It is an external body that pursues to dictate its decisions in violation
17 for why electors vote for their legal representatives. I understand that my (now late) wife Olga
18 Hlavka-Schorel was horrified when she discovered that her eye and ear testing results were put
19 on a Commonwealth web system without her knowledge and consent and I understand provided
20 to the WHO, by this violating her “civil rights”, privacy and confidentiality!
21
22 As the Framers of the Constitution at the time referred to about 7 Ministers, we now have
23 an army of about 43 or more Ministers and Assistant Ministers and yet so much is still
24 going wrong! Proving that it is not as to quantity of Ministers/Assistant Ministers but
25 rather the quality of a Minister on the job!
26
27 Despite my past complaints to the Australian Electoral Commission (and others) that it is
28 deceptive for anyone to have a campaign to vote for aa certain party leader to be the Prime
29 Minister, as no elector can vote for who shall be in Government, this as the Governor-General
30 decides who shall be a Minister! Yet, the same rot continues and the Governor-General ignores
31 to address the issue!
32
33 The we had that recently that Parliament increased allegedly by hundreds of thousands of dollars
34 a year the salary of a Governor-General seemingly because this person did not have a military
35 pension. What an utter nonsense. Any Governor-General who was receiving a Military pension
36 had absolutely nothing to do with being a Governor-General and therefore the increase I view,
37 even so within the parliaments power, was yet another con-job so to say for a mate!
38
39 As for Members of Parliament (including Ministers) having an increase of
40 “ALLOWANCES”/Salary this is to be decided by the Parliament itself and not by some body ,
41 being Public Service Board, etc. As I understand it in California increase of pay for judges was
42 found to be unconstitutional as it was some body that had decided the increase whereas the
43 constitution required it to be the parliament. The same should apply in the Commonwealth of
44 Australia (this includes the States/Territories).
45
46 In my view what we seem to have is at each particular time a grossly incompetent Governor-
47 General who fails to act in accordance to the legal principles embedded in the constitution!
48
49 There was this I understand FALSE FLAG Port Arthur mass murder to which I am not now
50 delve into details but did to some extent at my blog https://www.scribd.com/inspectorrikati

26-8-2025 Page 38 © 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 39

1 already. This resulted to residing guns ownership. Meaning, that when there is a need for citizens
2 to defend their land, etc, against armed invaders they are simply unable to do so!
3
4 Hansard 6-3-1891 Constitution Convention Debates
5 QUOTE Mr. THYNNE:
6 There is one other element which has been suggested to me by the paragraph of the
7 resolutions with reference to military and naval defences. I think we shall do a useful
8 work, that we shall do a good thing, by making it a part of the Constitution of
9 Australia that in time of war every man in it shall be liable to be called upon to
10 undergo military service. I think that would be a great step in advance-a step that would
11 secure for us the active interest and support of all the people in these colonies; and I am
12 sure we cannot afford to disown or to disregard any one of those sources of influence we
13 ought to exercise upon the people.
14 END QUOTE
15
16 Hansard 10-3-1891 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National
17 Australasian Convention)
18 QUOTE Mr. DIBBS:
19 where we are giving the people of the country practically a free education-and it should be
20 common to all Australia-we should instil into the minds of our children the necessity for
21 training, and, as a quid pro quo for that free education,
22 END QUOTE
23
24 Hansard 9-3-1891 Constitution Convention Debates
25 QUOTE Mr. KINGSTON:
26 The 4th resolution raises the question of defence, and I am disposed to think that a more
27 prominent position might well have been given to this question than it occupies. I am not
28 going to discuss the details of possible provisions on the subject which may be considered
29 necessary to be embodied in the constitution. An hon. member has already addressed
30 himself to that question; but it seems to me that every citizen, or every person worthy of
31 the name of citizen, recognises it as his duty in time of [start page 157] war to take up arms
32 in defence of his country. It is almost a corollary of that proposition, that it is the duty of
33 every true citizen in time of peace to qualify himself to render efficient service in time of
34 need without unnecessary expense to the community of which he is a member. I trust that
35 our federal legislation will recognise the soundness of the principles which I venture to lay
36 down, and that effect will be given to them at the earliest possible moment. I am hopeful,
37 indeed, that when we have legislation of that character its results will be apparent in the
38 manhood of united Australia, and that it will add alike to the dignity and safety of the
39 nation and be productive of the happiest results.
40 END QUOTE
41
42 In my view any Minister of the Crown who for the Commonwealth of Australia registered with
43 the District of Columbia served this purpose I view is a TRAITOR to the legal principles
44 embedded in the constitution including Section 44, this also as the constitution doesn’t provide
45 for the Commonwealth of Australia to be registered within the jurisdiction of a foreign country.
46
47 In my view no Governor-General/Governor should permit to strip citizens of their ability to
48 defend themselves against any invading force and/or homegrown TRAITORS/TERRORIST!
49
50 For the above I request all and any details/information that may directly/indirectly clarify the
51 Governor-General (at the time) conduct regarding each incident referred to!
52 How can a so-called prime Minister dictate during an election what a future Government policy
53 may be after an election when the constitution provide that the relevant “RESPONSIBLE
26-8-2025 Page 39 © 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 40

1 Minister” of a portfolio and not the prime Minister and/or Cabinet decides what a future policy
2 will be? As such, for this also any claimed expenses by a Minister as to his/her future possible
3 intentions for legislation, etc, during an election period cannot be a justification to charge
4 Consolidated Revenue Funds for such election expenses, and by this also denied a FAIR and
5 PROPER election, as those who are not Members of Parliament are severely disadvantages. Any
6 expenditure by a former Member of Parliament (as they are if the if the seat is declared vacant
7 such as for the House of Representatives) then regardless of being re-elected are not Members of
8 Parliament until sworn in.
9
10 Any Minister who was already sworn in prior to the election remains to be a Minister (subject to
11 Section 64) and doesn’t need to be sworn in again if re-elected and maintaining the same
12 portfolio, such as with Penny Wong the Minister for Foreign Affairs. The Constitution doesn’t
13 provide any time limit on a person holding a certain portfolio as long as the person doesn’t
14 violate S64 provisions!
15
16 As for the Official Secretary for the Governor-General claiming to claim “to
17 acknowledge….” I view is a gross insult to Australians at large. This also as the Framers of the
18 Constitution made clear that all children born in Australia are equal, etc!
19
20 Again:
21 In my view no Governor-General/Governor should permit to strip citizens of their ability to
22 defend themselves against any invading force and/or homegrown TRAITORS/TERRORIST!
23 As such I request full and proper clarification from the Governor-General regarding matters set
24 out below and such clarification with direct and indirect details/information can be provided to
25 my email address and/or via Australia Post!
26
27 As I indicated in my view Sir John Kerr as G-G failed to take appropriate action against Geoff
28 Whitlam before the new financial year was commencing as to having Taxation/Appropriation
29 Bills passed by the Parliament and to take appropriate steps to prevent the Blue Poles purchase
30 as the Commonwealth has no constitutional legislative powers as to arts, sports, etc. Moreover,
31 when he then finally did step in then he violated his power by replacing Geoff Whitlam for a
32 intended DOUBLE DISSOLUTION exercise of powers to have first Malcolm Fraser to let the
33 Parliament pass the Bills before having called the DOUBLE DISSOLUTION. Regardless of if
34 he as is alleged he acted upon directions of the USA the issue is that the exercise of powers must
35 be according to the constitution as his powers were clearly “but subject to this Constitution”
36 and therefore should have immediately called for a DOUBLE DISSOLUTION and not call for a
37 later DOUBLE DISSOLUTION after having already secured supply. And again, supply was to
38 be done long before the commencement of the financial year and not during the financial year.
39
40 It now gets a lot worse as while Sit John Kerr proved to be able to exercise his DOUBLE
41 DISSOLUTION powers, albeit I view in an incorrect/unconstitutional manner, this exercise of
42 powers was blatantly ignored when it comes to mass murder, crimes against humanity, such as
43 invading Afghanistan, Iraq and providing military and other support in a war nothing to do with
44 the Commonwealth of Australia. And now worse Penny Wong Minister for Foreign Affairs
45 declaring support for the bombarding of Iran by the USA, rather than to remain NEUTRAL and
46 also considering the “COVID-19 SCAM” which may have netted the politicians some $100
47 million or more on kickbacks, etc, from pharmaceutical companies, etc.
48
49 Let us consider what the differences are of the alleged “COVID-19 virus” versus “Influenza”!
50 Then also if there is a real justification for totally different medical treatments of “COVID-19

26-8-2025 Page 40 © 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 41

1 virus” versus “Influenza”! As this also relates to the exercise of powers, or the lack thereof by
2 the Governor-General!
3
4 Let us consider the position of a Governor-General as the Chief Executive Officer of the
5 “political Union” named Commonwealth of Australia!
6
7 Chief Executive Officer, the head of the Government of the Day, albeit despite the
8 registration of the commonwealth of Australia and listed with a business number, etc, with
9 the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Australia is not at all some “business”,
10 “country” but a “political Union”. It still gives us some indication (see below) what is
11 generally understood to be the position of a CEO! Where then the legal principles embedded
12 in the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900 (UK) might be compared to “Oversee
13 the strategic direction of an organization: ” and the legislation that is within the limits of these
14 legal principles are enacted then the Governor-General required to perform any function as
15 Governor-General and/or Governor-General in Council is bound to act against any “manager”,
16 subordinate to ensure he/she acts within those set limitations and failing to do so act
17 appropriately and decisively to deal with any person failing to do so! If the Governor-General or
18 Governor-General in Council fails to act appropriately as required “but subject to this
19 Constitution” then I view the Governor-General (even if acting as Governor-General in
20 Council) must be deemed incompetent and immediately should resign his/her commission! After
21 all, taxpayers are paying out millions of dollars to maintain the cost of a Governor-General and
22 the Office of the Governor-General and a worthless performance or in deed a conduct that might
23 be to undermine the legal principles embedded in the constitution can never be acceptable.
24
25
26
27 https://en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Chief_executive_officer
28 Chief executive officer - Wikipedia
29 A chief executive officer (CEO), also known as a chief executive or managing director, is the top-ranking
30 corporate officer charged with the management of ...
31
32 https://dictionary.cambridge.org › dictionary › english › chief-executive-officer
33 CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER - Cambridge English Dictionary
34 5 days ago ... the main person responsible for managing a company or organization, who is sometimes
35 also the company's president or chairman of the board.
36
37 https://www.oric.gov.au › for-corporations › roles-and-responsibilities › chief-executive-officer
38 Chief executive officer | Office of the Registrar of Indigenous ... - ORIC
39 14 Apr 2025 ... Not all corporations have a chief executive officer (CEO) but if ... Being an
40 officer means a CEO has some legal duties: a duty of care ...
41
42 https://www.aicd.com.au › content › dam › aicd › pdf › tools-resources › director-tools › organisation › role-of-
43 chief-executive-officer-or-managing-director.pdf
44 Role of chief executive officer (CEO) or managing director (MD) - AICD
45 Conversely, not defining the boundaries of the CEO role means that a CEO has to regularly approach the
46 board for approval of activities and plans. This can be ...
47
48 https://www.techtarget.com › searchcio › definition › CEO
49 What Is a Chief Executive Officer (CEO)? | Definition from TechTarget
50 23 July 2024 ... What is a CEO (chief executive officer)? ... A chief executive officer (CEO) is the highest-
51 ranking position in an organization and responsible ...
52
53 https://www.investopedia.com › terms › c › ceo.asp
54 Chief Executive Officer (CEO): Roles and Responsibilities vs. Other ...
55 A chief executive officer (CEO) is the highest-ranking executive in a company, serving as the primary
56 communication link between the board of directors and ...

26-8-2025 Page 41 © 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 42

1
2 https://www.investopedia.com/terms/c/ceo.asp
3 QUOTE
4 Examples of a CEO’s Tasks
5 A chief executive officer’s roles and responsibilities also vary greatly between industries and
6 organization sizes. A CEO may generally be expected to take on some or all of these tasks:
7 • Oversee the strategic direction of an organization: Lower-level managers are often more
8 engaged in the day-to-day operating activities of a company. A CEO usually synthesizes
9 these results and decides on the long-term plans of a company.

10 • Implement changes and proposed plans: A CEO usually looks to themselves and other
11 executive leadership to begin implementing those plans after crafting the long-term
12 vision. Changes are often directly implemented by operational managers but it's
13 ultimately up to the CEO to ensure that the long-term plans are being followed through.

14 • Engage in media obligations and public relations: A CEO is often the face of the
15 company and this includes being involved in media relations. A CEO may speak at
16 conferences, address the public on notable changes to the company, or participate in
17 community events.

18 • Interact with other leadership executives: It's vital to a company’s success to have a suite
19 of executives that a CEO can rely on. A CEO often relies on other leaders to manage
20 their own realms rather than directly overseeing every aspect of a company. They then
21 engage with them to get a high-level understanding of how things are going.

22 • Maintain accountability with the board: A board of directors oversees the entire
23 company’s performance and holds a CEO accountable. A CEO often reports to the board,
24 delivers updates on strategic plans, and gets feedback from board members regarding the
25 company’s overall direction.

26 • Monitor company performance: A CEO is ultimately responsible for a company’s

27 financial performance. They may rely on financial or nonfinancial metrics to track how
28 things are going. They usually make reporting requests from their direct employees to get
29 a quick sense of how each area in the company is performing and what strategic
30 maneuvers should be taken.

31 • Setting precedence for the working culture and environment: A CEO is responsible for
32 setting the tone at the top and creating the work environment they believe is best to drive
33 success. Employees working under a CEO often look to the executive to develop and
34 maintain the organization’s culture.

35 END QUOTE
36
37 Tracy Yates late last year requested me to assist her regarding the denial of payments by EML
38 insurance acting for and on behalf of WorkSafe (Victoria). She also provided me with details as
39 to the Victorian Ombudsman having held various investigations and the Victorian Ombudsman
40 Office provided me with links to those reports. It became very clear to me that EML chosen
41 specialist Dr Bruce Bruce Sing (I understand his son is the current Victorian Ombudsman)

26-8-2025 Page 42 © 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 43

1 had failed to address Tracy Yates 71 paragraphs complaint with WorkCover. of which it
2 appeared to me that he failed to address about 21 paragraphs dealing with the covid-19 issues. As
3 EML is a insurance company falling within the legislative powers of the Commonwealth then I
4 view for this also it is to be considered a Federal matter. This also because the “covid-19 scam”
5 was perpetrated by the federal government and then in conspiracy involved also the
6 States/Territories.
7
8 As the Framers of the Constitution made clear that any “concurrent” legislative powers of the
9 States would seize when the Commonwealth commenced to legislate upon the subject matter,
10 then when the Commonwealth commenced with the Quarantine Act 1908 this then ended the
11 States “concurrent” legislative powers. This Act was later replaced with the Biosecurity Act
12 2015. As the High Court of Australia in the 1943 Income Taxation case made clear once the
13 Commonwealth legislated the states had to retire from this and so likewise with the Land
14 taxation that on 11 November 1910 the Commonwealth commenced to legislate and so the States
15 had to retire from this (this includes Municipal/Shire Council “council rates”) as with the 1908
16 Quarantine Act and yet with all those Ministers not a single one seems to understand/
17 comprehend this and this underlines that the Governor-General appears to be blatant ignorant to
18 ensure that any person commissioned as a Minister actually understand/comprehend to be a
19 “constitutional adviser” and not like a shatter gun performs and ignore the true meaning and
20 application of the legal principles embedded in the constitution. So much is going wrong because
21 they do not understand/comprehend the basics of constitutional issues, with a Governor-General
22 so to say Absent Without Leave (AWOL)
23
24 Hansard 1-2-1898 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National Australasian
25 Convention),
26 QUOTE Mr. OCONNER (New South Wales).-
27 Because, as has been said before, it is [start page 357] necessary not only that the
28 administration of justice should be pure and above suspicion, but that it should be
29 beyond the possibility of suspicion;
30 END QUOTE
31
32 Despite the High Court of Australia in error ruling in Palmer v WA reality is that the
33 States/Territories have no legislative, executive and/or administrative powers regarding any
34 “man-kind” infectious disease which may require any kind of quarantine, and as such the
35 States/Territories MANDATES were and remain to be unconstitutional.
36 The High Court of Australia simply (despite all the judges and their clerks, etc) simply took out
37 of context a part and omitted the critical part quoted below!
38
39 Hansard 7-2-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
40 QUOTE Mr. BARTON (New South Wales).-
41 I do not think the word quarantine, for instance, which is used in the sub-section of the 52nd
42 clause, is intended to give the Commonwealth power to legislate with regard to any
43 quarantine. That simply applies to quarantine as referring to diseases among man-kind.
44 END QUOTE
45
46 As from 8 April 2020 I then informed the Victorian Ombudsman about this and so State and
47 Federal politicians, etc. On 13 April 2020 I also then informed the Victorian Human Rights
48 Commission likewise, none took any appropriate action.
49 The Victorian IBAC claimed on 19 April 2020 that it was not an issue of “public interest”.
50 Well, the victims of this “covid-19 scam” would unlikely agree with this comment. As from 6
51 August 2021 I commenced also to file a COMPLAINT to the Australian Federal Police
52 regarding the issue and other related issues set out also in numerous ‘supplements’ totalling
26-8-2025 Page 43 © 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 44

1 about 7530 pages so far! However, despite the mass murder, crimes against humanity, etc, I am
2 not aware that the Australian Federal Police bothered to investigate matters.
3
4 QUOTE 20210806-Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to Reece Kershaw Chief Commissioner of the Australian
5 Federal Police
6 Reece Kershaw 6-8-2021
7 Chief Commissioner of the Australian Federal Police
8 Forwarded via email/mail
9 Cc: Mr Scott Morrison via email
10
11 [email protected] Advisory Committee on Vaccines, Therapeutic Goods Administration
12 PO Box 100, WODEN ACT 2606 Attn: Pharmacovigilance and Special Access Branch,
13 MDP 122
14
15 [email protected] Committee Support Unit, Therapeutic Goods Administration
16 PO Box 100, WODEN ACT 2606 Attn: Scheduling & Committee Support Section, MDP
17 122
18
19 Mr Daniel Andrews Premier [email protected]
20
21 Mr Martin Pakula, [email protected], [email protected]
22
23 20210806-Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to Reece Kershaw Chief Commissioner of the Australian Federal Police
24 COMPLAINT
25 Sir,
26 I understand from news report that a special AFP team has been appointed regarding online
27 publications relating to the COVID-19 issue. I view therefore that it is within the AFP
28 investigative powers to investigate all relevant issues and not just those which the Government
29 may desire to be investigating to perhaps aids in its overthrow of the Commonwealth of
30 Australia Constitution Act 1900 (UK) and so the provisions therein.
31
32 https://www.9news.com.au/national/coronavirus-anti-vaxxers-targeted-special-team-detectives-fears-could-target-
33 vaccine-hubs/fad28908-9340-4d0e-80f7-f5e21d61f0e7
34 Coronavirus: Anti vaxxers targeted by special team of detectives amid fears they could target
35 vaccine hubs (9news.com.au)
36 Fears vaccine hubs could be 'targeted' as online chatter spikes
37 QUOTE
38 A special team of AFP detectives has been appointed by the Federal Government to
39 watch the online interactions of the anti-vaccination "movement".
40 END QUOTE
41
42 My concern is also that the Federal Government is aiding and abetting with the States as to
43 succeed in this to install a NEW WORLD ORDER, violating our constitutional rights, by
44 providing funding for the unconstitutional lockdowns or any state/territory.
45 END QUOTE 20210806-Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to Reece Kershaw Chief Commissioner of the
46 Australian Federal Police
47
48 My COMPLAINT with its supplement’s canvasses extensively the “covid-19 scam” but to no
49 avail. While I had preferred to have had appropriate action, where this was denied then at least I
50 have “evidence” that I alerted them all about the “covid-19 scam” and as such could pursue to
51 hold them all legally accountable!
52
53 A major problem being that those in power and their collaborators were obviously using
54 taxpayers monies to fabricate a case about covid-19 even so it was never actually proved to exist.
55 Merely because people around the world were claiming covid-19 virus existed didn’t make it to
26-8-2025 Page 44 © 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 45

1 be so without a shred of evidence that it was isolated and purified by the Koch postulates. People
2 around the world are claiming there is a Tooth Fairy but that doesn’t mean this exist. The same
3 with countries around the world accepting that Australian’s their nationality is “Australian
4 Citizenship” this even so that is constitutionally Australian citizenship merely refers to the
5 persons abode regardless of his/her nationality.
6
7 I did therefore research the differences between the dreaded Covid-19 and Influenza. This as
8 people with Influenza generally are given a Flu jab whereas those with alleged Covid-19 are
9 given a pretended ‘covid-19 vaccination” even so the courts already ruled it is not a vaccine. As
10 such, people are deceived that they are given a vaccination when in fact it is a “gene therapy”
11 DEPOPULATION “bioweapon”. And for anyone to use a bioweapon this person must have
12 certification for doing so. Which I understand about no one had/has. As such the jabs for that is
13 also unlawful. I understand that during the covid-19 jabs on average doctors’ income rose by
14 about $220,000 a year. This may underline that the financial benefits, in my view, corrupted
15 many in the medical profession!
16
17 Let’s us have a look as to the difference between the alleged covid-19 and influenza:
18
19 QUOTE 20250614 Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to R Kershaw Chief Commissioner of AFP-Suppl 116
20 MALFEASANCE IN OFFICE I consider a very serious matter where this also
21 involved the harming of innocent persons and acting in violation of constitutional
22 principles, a criminal investigation must be done!
23 https://www.scribd.com/document/875205518/20250613-Mr-G-H-Schorel-Hlavka-O-W-
24 B-to-R-Kershaw-Chief-Commissioner-of-AFP-Suppl-115
25
26 QUOTE 20250613-Notes-Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to R Kershaw Chief Commissioner of AFP-Suppl 115
27 QUOTE 20210824-Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to Reece Kershaw Chief Commissioner of the Australian
28 Federal Police-COMPLAINT-Suppl-09-MURDER
29 https://www.medscape.org/viewarticle/941509
30 How Do You Distinguish COVID-19 From Flu in Kids?
31 QUOTE
32 The CDC recommends testing to differentiate between symptoms of flu and COVID-19.
33 Key symptoms cited to be different between the two are the the presence of loss of taste or
34 smell as COVID-19 symptoms.
35 Table. Similarities and Differences Between Flu and COVID-19
Symptoms Flu COVID-19

Fever (or feeling feverish) ✓ ✓

Cough ✓ ✓

Shortness of breath/difficulty breathing ✓ ✓

Fatigue (tiredness) ✓ ✓

Sore throat ✓ ✓

Runny or stuffy nose ✓ ✓

Muscle pain or body aches ✓ ✓

26-8-2025 Page 45 © 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 46

Headaches ✓ ✓

Possible vomiting and diarrhea* ✓ ✓

Change in or loss of taste ✓

Change in or loss of smell ✓

1 *More common in children than adults.
2 CDC website.[3]
3 One key thing to note is that people with COVID-19 do not develop symptoms right away
4 as compared to those with the flu. Persons with the flu are contagious for about one day
5 before they show symptoms. In contrast, persons with COVID-19 may be contagious for a
6 longer period of time before showing symptoms.
7 Study Highlights
8 The study by Song and colleagues[2] compared children diagnosed with COVID-19
9 between March and May with children diagnosed with flu between 2019 and 2020. All
10 data came from one major US children’s hospital.
11 The main study outcomes were children’s symptoms at presentation and the course of
12 illness for the two infections.
13 Investigators compared 164 children who tested positive for COVID-19 with 1402 children
14 who had flu. The median ages of patients with COVID-19 and flu were 8.4 years and 3.9
15 years, respectively, and there was a slight preponderance of males in both groups.
16 Researchers observed no significant difference in the rates of hospitalization (COVID-19:
17 17%; flu: 21%); ICU admission (COVID-19: 6%; flu: 7%); or mechanical ventilation
18 (COVID-19: 3%; flu: 2%) between groups.
19 No patient was found to have coinfection with both flu and COVID-19, at least in part
20 because of a sharp decline in cases of flu after schools closed on March 15, 2020.
21 Two patients with influenza A infection died. There were no deaths among patients with
22 influenza B or COVID-19.
23 Patients hospitalized with COVID-19 were generally older than children hospitalized for
24 flu (median ages: 9.7 and 4.2 years, respectively). Adolescents older than age 15 years
25 accounted for 37% of hospitalized patients in the COVID-19 cohort.
26 Rates of underlying medical conditions among pediatric patients hospitalized for COVID-
27 19 and flu were 65% and 42%, respectively (OR = 2.6 [95% CI: 1.4, 4.7]). Neurological
28 disease such as epilepsy or developmental delay were the most common comorbid illnesses
29 recorded.
30 Fever and cough were the most commonly reported symptoms among hospitalized patients
31 in both groups; however, fever, diarrhea/vomiting, headache, chest pain, and myalgia were
32 more commonly reported in cases of COVID-19 vs flu. This difference was significantly
33 pronounced in comparing COVID-19 and influenza A.
34 Rates of cough, sore throat, dyspnea, and congestion were similar in the flu and COVID-19
35 cohorts.
36 The CDC recommends testing to differentiate between symptoms of flu and COVID-19.
37 Key symptoms cited to be different between the two are the presence of loss of taste or
38 smell as COVID-19 symptoms.
39 END QUOTE
40
41 The above seems to indicate that the flu symptoms and the claimed COVID-19 symptoms are
42 identical other than for the loss of smell and/or taste. Then again prior to the claimed COVID-19
43 existing the loss of smell and/or taste was also contributed to:

26-8-2025 Page 46 © 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 47

1
2 https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/conditions-and-diseases/smell-and-taste-disorders
3 Smell and Taste Disorders | Johns Hopkins Medicine
4 Anosmia. Loss of sense of smell · Ageusia. Loss of sense of taste · Hyposmia. Reduced ability
5 to smell · Hypogeusia. Reduced ability to taste sweet, sour, bitter, ...
6 QUOTE
7 Smell and Taste Disorders
8 Ear Nose and Throat Pediatric ENT (Otolaryngology)
9 What are smell and taste disorders?
10 The most common smell and taste disorders are:
11 Anosmia. Loss of sense of smell
12 Ageusia. Loss of sense of taste
13 Hyposmia. Reduced ability to smell
14 Hypogeusia. Reduced ability to taste sweet, sour, bitter, or salty things
15 In other disorders, odors, tastes, or flavors may be misread or distorted. They may cause you to
16 detect a bad odor or taste from something that is normally pleasant to taste or smell. These
17 disorders can affect quality of life. They may also be a sign of underlying disease.
18 Problems with taste and smell can suggest certain health problems, such as:
19 Obesity
20 Diabetes
21 High blood pressure
22 Poor nutrition
23 Nervous system diseases, such as:
24 Parkinson disease
25 Alzheimer disease
26 Multiple sclerosis
27 What causes smell and taste disorders?
28 Some people are born with these disorders, but most are caused by:
29 Illness (for example, cold or flu, sinus infection, and allergies)
30 Head injury
31 Hormone changes
32 Dental or mouth problems
33 Nasal polyps
34 Exposure to certain chemicals
35 Certain medicines
36 Exposure to radiation therapy for head or neck cancer
37 Cocaine snorted through the nose
38 Cigarette smoking
39 END QUOTE
40
41 Yes, pull the other leg will you!
42
43 It must be clear that a person loosing taste/small also can be simply by other ways, as there are
44 videos around, where a person was unable to say if he was tasting union or something else. As
45 such, a person could innocently not being able to taste and/or smell not because of an illness but
46 merely because of some co-incidence having say a blocked nose. And one can get a blocked nose
47 not merely due to some illness but merely working in dust.
48 END QUOTE 20250122-Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to Eloise O'Brien (WIC) & Ors - Case no 12210031872
49
50 https://substack.com/app-link/post?publication_id=1301027&post_id=164442397&utm_source=post-email-
51 title&utm_campaign=email-post-
52 title&isFreemail=true&r=1a0316&token=eyJ1c2VyX2lkIjo3NzI2NjI2NiwicG9zdF9pZCI6MTY0NDQyMzk3LCJp

26-8-2025 Page 47 © 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 48

1 YXQiOjE3NDgyMTY4MDksImV4cCI6MTc1MDgwODgwOSwiaXNzIjoicHViLTEzMDEwMjciLCJzdWIiOiJwb
2 3N0LXJlYWN0aW9uIn0.vvEEiPneSJcd5m4c_BKveL8RfelgZsBRDkbAMO4SOUM
3 QUOTE
4 THE LAST LIE NOW FULLY DEBUNKED
5 phillip.altman from phillip.altman’s Substack
6 From:[email protected]
7 To:[email protected]
8 Mon, 26 May at 9:46 am
9 THE LAST LIE NOW FULLY DEBUNKED
10 Millions were not saved by the Covid vaccines PLUS other important documents
11 PHILLIP.ALTMAN
12 MAY 25
13 For more than 5 years now we have been told nothing but lies about COVID and the
14 COVID so-called “vaccines”.
15 Share
16 I have now issued a total of 403 Substacks which provide comprehensive documentation of
17 the lies which include:
18 • the COVID virus was natural in origin and did not come from a lab

19 • the COVID “vaccines” prevent transmission of the virus

20 • the COVID “vaccines” prevent serious COVID-19 illness, keep you out of
21 hospital and protect from death

22 • the COVID “vaccines” protect those around you

23 • scientific evidence shows lockdowns are effective in pandemics to prevent the

24 spread of disease and masks are effective in preventing transmission

25 • natural immunity is of no clinical significance in COVID-19

26 • the COVID “vaccines” have been fully tested and are “safe and effective”

27 • the COVID “vaccines” do not contain dangerous genetic material that can
28 permanently be integrated into your DNA

29 • there was no effective early treatment of COVID-19

30 • the COVID “vaccines” stay at the site of injection, do not distribute throughout
31 the body and thereafter do not linger in the body

32 etc etc etc

33 All these claims have been shown to be blatant lies. But one lie remains…..the claim that
34 millions of lives have been saved by the COVID “vaccines”. Various claims ranging from
35 3 to 7 to 14 to 20 million lives saved have been made. In the face of the known millions of
36 post-administration vaccine deaths and the persistent rise in cardiovascular, immunological
37 and cancer deaths around the world measured by the Excess Death rate (which only rose
38 following the release of these experimental gene-theapies) - this is probably the most
39 outrageous claim of all.
40 Now, an Australian has published a critical analysis of this last fraudulent claim and this
41 work is so important that it has been entered into the US Senate enquiry into COVID. See
42 Dr. Raphael Lataster’s Substack of of 22 May and Senator Johnson’s acknowledgement of
43 the importance of this work. CLICK HERE to view.
26-8-2025 Page 48 © 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 49

1 You will be hearing more from Raphael and myself on this issue due to its importance.
2 WITNESS STATEMENT
3 In case you may have missed it, please find below an important video exposing the COVID
4 crimes. View by accessing via the QR codes below. This documentary is very well
5 produced and must not be missed.
6 This was published on my Substack 29 January.
7 I encourage you to subscribe to Raphael’s Substack
8 CMNNews PRESS RELEASE:
9 Read full story
10 Thanks for reading phillip.altman’s Substack! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and
11 support my work
12 DISCLAIMER:
13 The information and personal opinions presented in this Substack is based on or derived
14 from sources which I believe are credible and usually reliable. Any inadvertent errors or
15 inaccuracies in my Substacks which come to my notice will be corrected as soon as
16 possible. I endeavour to reference any relevant published information and provide links to
17 websites so readers can do their own research. The opinions expressed are not intended nor
18 should they be interpreted to be medical advice. I do not accept any liability for comments
19 placed on my Substack and my failure to respond to any potentially defamatory or
20 contentious comment should not be taken as passive or otherwise approval by myself. I
21 neither seek nor receive any financial compensation for my writings.
22 MY SUBSTACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARE FREE. I ENDEAVOUR TO BRING YOU
23 THE TRUTH. PLEASE SHARE WITH FRIENDS AND FAMILY. THAT IS ALL I ASK.
24 END QUOTE
25 END QUOTE 20250613-Notes-Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to R Kershaw Chief Commissioner of AFP-Suppl 115
26
27 Obviously, one has to question what really is the “OFFICE OF THE PRIME MINISTER”
28 about?
29 Here we have a PURPORTED prime Minister Anthony Albanese to travel yet again the world
30 for some 6 days and for what?
31 When it comes to issues like health, etc, he cannot even get this right as to ensure that the
32 Minister for health doesn’t violate the legal principles embedded in the Commonwealth of
33 Australia Constitution Act 1900 (UK). After all, as a “constitutional adviser” to the Governor-
34 General he should be aware that it is unconstitutional to let the WHO (world Health
35 Organisation) dictating health issues. After all that is the sole responsibility of the Minister for
36 Health. Also, the gathering of head of states is beyond his position as he is not a Head of State
37 neither can represent the Monarch as such. As for signing agreements of Trade, etc, well then
38 only the relevant Minister can sign this. One in my view has to be a moron/numskull not to
39 understand how our constitutional system operates when commissioned as a Minister, the same
40 for judges in particular those of the High Court of Australia.
41 The Governor-General is bound by “subject to this constitution” and as such cannot allow a
42 PURPORTED prime Minister to interfere in any portfolio to which another person was
43 commissioned as a Minister. Hence, when it comes to for example “Foreign Affairs” only the
44 relevant Minister for Foreign Affairs cam deal with such matters. The “OFFICE OF THE
45 PRIME MINISTER” really is a ‘constitutional absurdity’ this as it has no meaning at all in
46 constitutional terms. Moreover, if the PURPORTED prime Minister was to interfere with the
47 ruling of a properly commissioned Minister then this would violate the legal principle enshrined
48 in the constitution that there shall be a “RESPONSIBLE Minister”. That is also why a
49 PURPORTED “Assisting Minister” is utter and sheer nonsense! It appears to me the Governor-
50 General is more a lacky to the person PURPORTEDLY commissioned to be prime Minister
51 than truly represent the Monarch “subject to this constitution”!

26-8-2025 Page 49 © 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 50

1 END QUOTE 20250614 Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to R Kershaw Chief Commissioner of AFP-Suppl

2 116
3
4 Tracy Yates had been bullied at work regarding the alleged covid-19 issues and instead of
5 having the support of the relevant governments to the contrary matters went the wrong way and a
6 lot worse. During a telephone meeting Tracy became so upset that she no longer could continue
7 the hearing. No matter what the Framers of the Constitution embedded as a legal principle in the
8 constitution, such as “civil rights” in the end politicians and their collaborators couldn’t give a
9 darn.
10
11 The following will also make clear that the Framers of the Constitution intended to have CIVIL
12 RIGHTS and LIBERTIES principles embedded in the Constitution;
13
14 HANSARD 17-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National
15 Australasian Convention)
16 QUOTE Mr. CLARK.-
17 for the protection of certain fundamental rights and liberties which every individual
18 citizen is entitled to claim that the federal government shall take under its protection and
19 secure to him.
20 END QUOTE
21 .
22 HANSARD18-2-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
23 QUOTE Mr. ISAACS.-
24 The right of a citizen of this great country, protected by the implied guarantees of its
25 Constitution,
26 END QUOTE
27 .
28 Well, Tracy was denied NATURAL JUSTICE, etc, and when I submitted that the person in
29 charge should disqualify herself because of bias, etc. this too was ignored.
30 So, why have a who range of persons as “constitutional advisers to either the Governor-General
31 and/or the Governor of a State when in the end their gross incompetent and disregard for their
32 duty and obligations result that the constitution has become useless in that regard?
33
34 There is a newspaper article published in the (Melbourne) Sunday Herald Sun June 22,
35 2025:

36
37 It refers to:
38 QUOTE
39 In 2024, a Senate committee held an inquiry
26-8-2025 Page 50 © 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 51

1 END QUOTE
2
3 Obviously where the article relates to Work-Safe Victoria one may question if this really does
4 fall with the context of the Senate a Commonwealth authority.
5
6 The Irony is that “WorkSafe” itself as I understand it forced its own workforce to be jabbed
7 despite this being unconstitutional, and so also blatantly disregarded to uphold the rule of law to
8 prevent employees in other work places like Tracy Yates to be bullied, etc.
9 While it may be debatable if the State of Victorian actually validly referred industrial relations
10 and other legislative powers to the Commonwealth, in the end this may not be a relevant issue as
11 after all the ground zero issue is that the Commonwealth had exclusive legislative powers as to
12 “man-kind” infectious diseases and the Commonwealth could only petition a court of competent
13 jurisdiction to issue orders after the court heard both sides if the person was to be jabbed or not.
14 This also applies to measles, polio, chicken pox, etc.
15 How absurd can it be that with more than 100,000 lawyers in Australia somehow none seemed to
16 grasp that the “concurrent” legislative powers had come to an end regarding “man-kind”
17 infectious diseases, and any continuation was to defy the legal principles embedded in the
18 constitution.
19
20 Really, no wonder that Municipal/Shire councils, State Governments and Federal Government
21 have been targeting me as after all I expose them are real criminals and TRAITORS and
22 TERRORIST!
23 And why indeed does the Governor-General not terminate the commission of Ministers who are
24 responsible for relevant Departments but miserably fail to uphold the rule of law?
25 Having “suspended’ my Age Pension payments by this preventing me to use the Age pension
26 monies to purchase food, medicine, pay for medical care, pay for fuel, household bills, etc, and
27 refusing to provide me already for 10 months relevant details/information itself is utter
28 scandalous and to me underlines we do not have a competent Governor-General to hold
29 Ministers accountable but simply so to say is laughing all the way to the bank as to make money
30 disregarding the very obligations and duties of being a Governor-General.
31 Centrelink for example claiming I have shares, just that I am not aware having any shares
32 registered in my name, which may underline the gross incompetence. The same with alleged
33 bank holdings and alleged ANNUAL income of $553.49. I checked my age pension bank
34 account and it shows a mere $0.15 and not a single cent of any bank interest paid into it. As such,
35 Centrelink may have been having done some guessing game in the hope I might then do their job
36 to prove something they have no evidence for. It appears to me that Centrelink may hold that
37 refund by Medicare is deemed “income” and perhaps the fact that many may be working from
38 home and may not be attenuative to their jobs the result being that innocent persons who rely
39 upon Age Pension payments, etc, are possible starved to death or even inflict self-harm, but he
40 caring about the public servants having to attend to a work station away from home might be
41 more important than the cruelty inflicted upon innocent citizens? How grossly incompetent can
42 the Minister be not being on the job to have appropriately trained staff.
43 As I made very clear each time there has been a failure to pay me the Age Pension payment
44 entitlement then I do a common law compensation charge of $1 Billion! That way the Minister
45 and his collaborators will become aware that violating legal principles embedded in the
46 constitution which I view a form of TREASON must be severely punished, this also to avoid
47 ever again a person in desperation to commit suicide, etc.
48 Tracey Yates is also a clear example how she was bullied and despite the legal principles
49 embedded in the constitution we in my view have incompetent persons parading as Minister and
50 incompetent Governor of a State as well as incompetent Ministers in the Commonwealth and
51 likewise so incompetent Governor-General.
26-8-2025 Page 51 © 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 52

1 It really is useless for any Senate inquiry or even a criminal investigation to be held if those
2 involved in any investigation are unable to comprehend the real constitutional principles that do
3 apply. I view a comprehensive ROYAL COMISSION in all matters raised by me in my
4 writings ought to be doing the investigation!
5
6 As to my research I have not detected any Victorian State Constitution Act 1855 as amended
7 by the legal provisions of the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900 (UK), and this
8 may mean that all and any State legislation is ULTRA VIRES and all and any State Court is
9 without the warrant of law, and so also each and every conviction of whomever. And by this all
10 those who posed as Ministers of State be charged with impersonating a public officer and
11 defrauding the Consolidated Revenue Funds of the State.
12
13
14 https://www.legislation.vic.gov.au › in-force › acts › commonwealth-powers-family-law-children-act-
15 1986
16 Commonwealth Powers (Family Law-Children) Act 1986
17 Commonwealth Powers (Family Law-Children) Act 1986. Act in force. Act number 92/1986. Version
18 history. Effective. Version. Status.
19
20 It may be claimed that the Commonwealth was provided a reference of powers (Regarding
21 Commonwealth Powers (Family Law-Children) Act 1986) within Subsection 51(xxvii) of the
22 Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900 (UK) and likewise had referred to it matters
23 of industrial relations, etc.
24
25 The problem with this is that then State of Victoria failed upon federation to publish in the
26 Gazette the amended Victoria Colonial Constitution Act 1855 to become the Victoria State
27 Constitution Act 1855 showing for example that the listed section in Section 51 and/or 52 of the
28 Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900 (UK) were all withdrawn from this
29 Victorian Colonial Constitution Act 1855 and now the new Victoria State Constitution Act
30 1855 contained all those subject matters stated in Section 51 of the Commonwealth of Australia
31 Constitution Act 1900 (UK) as “concurrent legislative powers but only until the Commonwealth
32 commenced to legislate on each particular subject matter, and regarding subject matters
33 contained in S52 of the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900 (UK) they were
34 permanently withdrawn! As well as that the Victoria State Constitution Act 1855 now was to
35 provide that any amendment to this Victoria State Constitution Act 1855, including any
36 reference of legislative powers to the Commonwealth was to be approved by a State referendum!
37
38 As French J of WA (Later French CJ of the High Court of Australia) made clear that Subsection
39 51(xxxvii) was no more but to permit the Commonwealth to accept a referral of legislative
40 powers from a State to the Commonwealth, however, the power of the State to do so was to be
41 found elsewhere!
42
43 Hansard 6-3-1891 Constitution Convention Debates
44 QUOTE Mr. THYNNE:
45 The constitution of this federation will not be charged with the duty of resisting
46 privileged classes, for the whole power will be vested in the people themselves. They
47 are the complete legislative power of the whole of these colonies, and they shall be so.
48 From [start page 106] them will rise, first of all, the federal constitution which we are
49 proposing to establish, and in the next place will come the legislative powers of the several
50 colonies. The people will be the authority above and beyond the separate legislatures,
51 and the royal prerogative exercised, in their interest and for their benefit, by the advice of
52 their ministers will be practically vested in them. They will exercise the sovereignty of
26-8-2025 Page 52 © 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 53

1 the states, they will be charged with the full power and dignity of the state, and it is from
2 them that we must seek the giving to each of those bodies that will be in existence
3 concurrently the necessary powers for their proper management and existence. Each
4 assembly, each legislature, whether state or federal existing under this constitution,
5 will be as Dicey again says-a merely subordinate law-making body whose laws will be
6 valid, whilst within the authority conferred upon it by the constitution, but invalid
7 and unconstitutional if they go beyond the limits of such authority.
8 END QUOTE
9
10 HANSARD 10-03-1891 Constitution Convention Debates
11 QUOTE
12 Dr. COCKBURN: All our experience hitherto has been under the condition of
13 parliamentary sovereignty. Parliament has been the supreme body. But when we embark
14 on federation we throw parliamentary sovereignty overboard. Parliament is no longer
15 supreme. Our parliaments at present are not only legislative, but constituent bodies. They
16 have not only the power of legislation, but the power of amending their constitutions. That
17 must disappear at once on the abolition of parliamentary sovereignty. No parliament
18 under a federation can be a constituent body; it will cease to have the power of
19 changing its constitution at its own will. Again, instead of parliament being supreme, the
20 parliaments of a federation are coordinate bodies-the main power is split up, instead of
21 being vested in one body. More than all that, there is this difference: When parliamentary
22 sovereignty is dispensed with, instead of there being a high court of parliament, you bring
23 into existence a powerful judiciary which towers above all powers, legislative and
24 executive, and which is the sole arbiter and interpreter of the constitution.
25 END QUOTE
26
27 Hansard 20-4-1897 Constitution Convention Debates
28 QUOTE
29 Mr. BARTON: I do not think it is a good thing under any circumstances that a
30 judge under a Federal Constitution, at any rate, should have anything to hope for
31 from Parliament or Government.
32 Mr. KINGSTON: Hear, hear.
33 Mr. BARTON: Where you have a sovereign Parliament, and the judge is merely the
34 interpreter of the laws as they arise, and not the guardian of a Constitution in the
35 same sense as a federal judge is, the same circumstances remain in part; but where
36 you will have a tribunal constantly charged with the maintenance of the Constitution
37 against the inroads which may be attempted to be made upon it by Parliament, then it
38 is essential that no judge shall have any temptation to act upon an unexpected
39 weakness-for we do not know exactly what they are when appointed-which may
40 result, whether consciously or not, in biasing his decisions in favor of movements
41 made by the Parliament which might be dangerous to the Constitution itself.
42 END QUOTE
43
44 HANSARD 5-3-1891 Constitution Convention Debates
45 QUOTE Mr. MUNRO:
46 We have come here to frame a constitution, and the instructions that were given to us,
47 I am happy to say, are very clearly laid down by the hon. member, Mr. Baker, in the
48 book which he was good enough to distribute amongst us. He puts it in this form:
49 That it is desirable there should be a union of the Australian colonies. That is one of
50 the principles that has already been settled by all our parliaments. Second, that such union
51 should be an early one-that is, that we should remove all difficulties in the way in order that
52 the union should take place at as early a date as possible. Third, that it should be under
53 the Crown. Now, I am quite sure that is one of the most important conditions of all with
26-8-2025 Page 53 © 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 54

1 which we have to deal-that the union that is to take place shall be a union under the Crown.
2 Fourth, that it should be under one legislative and executive government. That also is
3 laid down by our various parliaments.
4 END QUOTE
5
6 Every Australian is a “sovereign” but so within the context of the constitution and as an elector
7 in any State/Territory/Commonwealth election. The word “sovereign” is therefore not that a
8 person is above the rule of law but neither can be forced to comply with unconstitutional
9 legislation, rules, regulations!
10 Also “a sovereign Parliament” is within its constitutional powers and not beyond it. No
11 parliament can alter/amend the very constitution by which it is created as only the “electors” in
12 the particular jurisdiction can by “referendum” amend the State/Territory/Commonwealth
13 relevant constitution, if there is any, that is! Therefore the wording “a sovereign Parliament”
14 doesn’t mean that the Parliament by reference of legislative powers to the Commonwealth
15 somehow can minimize the judicial powers of the relevant Supreme Court!
16 For this all and any purported “reference of legislative powers” removing by this the relevant
17 Supreme Court judicial powers also by the “separation of powers” also applicable to the States
18 require the approval by State referendum!
19
20 Hansard 8-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
21 QUOTE
22 Sir JOHN DOWNER.-Now it is coming out. The Constitution is made for the people
23 and the states on terms that are just to both.
24 END QUOTE
25
26 No unilateral decision by the State to amend the constitution in disregard of the rights of the
27 electors!
28
29 Hansard 6-3-1891 Constitution convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National Australasian
30 Convention)
31 QUOTE Mr. BARTON:
32 I hope that I am at any rate acting in the spirit in which we all labour together, and that the
33 result of our labour will be to found a state of high and august aims, working by the eternal
34 principles of justice and not to the music of bullets, and affording an example of freedom,
35 political morality, and just action to the individual, the state and the nation which will
36 one day be the envy of the world.
37 END QUOTE
38
39 Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900 (UK)
40 QUOTE
41 (xxxv) conciliation and arbitration for the prevention and settlement of industrial disputes
42 extending beyond the limits of any one State;
43 END QUOTE
44
45 The Framers of the Constitution debates this at length and held that maritime disputes would not
46 just be limited to one State but would generally spread to other States and as such would be
47 under Federal control. As the Commonwealth within Section 100 has also legislative powers as
48 to rivers and by this the harbors where there is a need for this, then maritime workers could fall
49 within its powers to be regulated to ensure that ports are operating appropriately to ensure that
50 “(i) trade and commerce with other countries, and among the States;” is not unduly harmed.
51 And the Framers of the Constitution made clear that the Commonwealth could even use the
52 armed forces if any federal workforce was prevented to conduct its business.

26-8-2025 Page 54 © 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 55

1 Actually, the “minimum wages” was not part of the federal compact but was so to say extorted
2 from an employer by the Arbitration Court in the early days of the federation and then became
3 part of Commonwealth dictatorship.
4
5 What should be kept in mind is that as shown below the Framers of the Constitution extensively
6 canvassed industrial relations such as on 27 January 1898 and it may be of assistance to read the
7 entire debate of that day. I have below quoted in part Hansard records.
8
9 It should be understood that when Mr Peter Reid was as I understand Minister and was defeated
10 in the Courts (Patricks) when seeking to employ overseas trained workers as waterside workers,
11 reality was that the Court as well as Mr Peter Reid and his legal representative in my view
12 never understood the legal principles embedded in the constitution!
13
14 HANSARD 17-4-1897 Constitution Convention
15 QUOTE Mr. DEAKIN:
16 They both desire to retain for their Several States for all time the privilege of
17 controlling industrial disputes within their own borders.
18 END QUOTE
19 .
20 HANSARD 19-4-1897 Constitution Convention
21 QUOTE Mr. CARRUTHERS:
22 Mr. Barton first of all recites Dicey to show what occurs under the unwritten
23 Constitution of England. But here we are framing a written Constitution. When once
24 that Constitution is framed we cannot get behind it.
25 END QUOTE
26 .
27 HANSARD 27-1-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
28 QUOTE Mr. SYMON.-
29 The relations between the parties are determined by the contract in the place where it
30 occurs.
31 END QUOTE
32 And
33 HANSARD 27-1-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
34 QUOTE Sir EDWARD BRADDON (Tasmania).-
35 We have heard to-day something about the fixing of a rate of wage by the federal
36 authority. That would be an absolute impossibility in the different states.
37 END QUOTE
38 And
39 HANSARD 27-1-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
40 QUOTE
41 Mr. BARTON: If they arise in a particular State they must be determined by the
42 laws of the place where the contract was made.
43 END QUOTE
44 And
45 HANSARD 27-1-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
46 QUOTE
47 Mr. BARTON.-We do not propose to hand over contracts and civil rights to the
48 Federation, and they are intimately allied to this question.
49 END QUOTE
50 .
51 Hansard 27-1-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
52 QUOTE
53 Sir JOHN DOWNER.-I am not aware that it has been of the slightest effect in South
54 Australia. I have yet to learn that it has been of any use at all. I was rather in favour of
55 making the experiment in this direction when it was proposed in South Australia; and I am
26-8-2025 Page 55 © 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 56

1 now watching the working of these arbitration courts with great interest, although, as I
2 have just said, I have seen no advantage arising from them in South Australia at present.
3 We are now asked to hand over to the Federal Commonwealth a power of legislating with
4 regard to internal concerns affecting every man, woman, and child in every state. Every
5 agreement they make, so long as a sufficient number of them combine together to kick up a
6 row, may be made subject to review before a tribunal. To pass legislation of this sort is in
7 itself an invitation to extend the area of raising quarrels. Such legislation will tend to make
8 such quarrels national, so as to create a power of interfering between individuals who are
9 not satisfied with the contracts they have entered into. In the end it, must result in the
10 establishment of some military or other force strong enough to vindicate the decisions of
11 the court, which step I am certain would not accord with the view of those who advocate
12 the establishment of these courts. I hope that honorable members will think a little
13 carefully about this question, because if they do I believe that they will come to the
14 conclusion that the power which each state has at the present time to legislate in respect to
15 its own industrial [start page 188] disputes is quite sufficient. An industrial dispute cannot
16 extend beyond the limits of any state. These are individual disputes. A certain class of
17 workmen say-"We are going to insist on being paid so much a day" in one part of
18 Australia, and they arrange with other workmen in other colonies to make the same
19 demand. But the disputes are confined to each state.
20 END QUOTE
21
22 HANSARD 27-1-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
23 QUOTE
24 Mr. SYMON.-What relation has this to customs duties? The industrial life of the state is
25 considered by all of us (subject to this exception, it may be) a thing of purely domestic
26 concern. We do not want to interfere with the domestic life, or with industrial life, except
27 in the last resort. If you are going to introduce such a thing as this it must be the Federal
28 Ministry which will have to decide, subject to the Parliament, and you will introduce the
29 greatest complication and intensity of feeling that was ever seen.
30 Mr. BARTON.-We do not propose to hand over contracts and civil rights to the
31 Federation, and they are intimately allied to this question.
32 [start page 192]
33 END QUOTE
34 .
35 HANSARD 27-1-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
36 QUOTE Sir JOHN DOWNER.-
37 The people of the various states make their own contracts amongst themselves, and if
38 in course of their contractual relations disagreements arise, and the state chooses to
39 legislate in respect of the subject-matter of them, it can do so.
40 END QUOTE
41
42 Hansard 27-1-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
43 QUOTE
44 Mr. SYMON.-Why should you interfere with the laws in the different colonies
45 affecting the relations of masters and servants, which are purely a matter of domestic
46 legislation? Why should you hand over that purely state function to the federal
47 authority?
48 END QUOTE
49 And
50 Hansard 27-1-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
51 QUOTE
52 Sir EDWARD BRADDON (Tasmania).-As one who voted in Adelaide on this subject,
53 and as one who believes to the fullest possible extent in the value of boards of conciliation
26-8-2025 Page 56 © 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 57

1 and arbitration, if such boards and courts can be arranged, I desire to justify in some
2 measure my giving the same vote as I gave then. This amendment does not hand over to
3 the federal power the entire dealing with industrial disputes over the whole of the
4 Commonwealth, but only over so much of the Commonwealth as may be affected by
5 those disputes. It therefore imposes upon the various states the necessity for having
6 courts of conciliation and arbitration to deal with the matters affecting their states
7 only. That seems to me to be an admission of the principles principle which I think
8 must be admitted in the present circumstances-that anything whatever in the nature
9 of government or administration which can be better dealt with by a state than by the
10 Commonwealth shall be left to the state. I claim Mr. Deakin's emphatic indorsement of
11 that principle, and I claim his vote, because his vote if he goes with me will affirm the
12 principle. It surely must be better for the employees that their disputes should be
13 settled by courts which know all the circumstances, which understand the condition
14 of things best, than that they should be settled by possibly a distant tribunal which is
15 ignorant of the environment and particular conditions affecting any industry in any
16 one of the states. We have heard to-day something about the fixing of a rate of wage
17 by the federal authority. That would be an absolute impossibility in the different
18 states.
19 Mr. DEAKIN.-Is there power to do it? I do not think there is.
20 Sir EDWARD BRADDON.-That is mentioned as one of the contingent powers.
21 Mr. KINGSTON.-That was said by an objector.
22 Sir EDWARD BRADDON.-And a necessary power to be exercised for the effective
23 settlement of a dispute.
24 Mr. KINGSTON.-That was said by a critic.
25 Mr. OCONNOR.-It must be so.
26 Sir EDWARD BRADDON.-And as in the case of wages, which necessarily vary
27 according to varying conditions within a state, so it must be remembered that there
28 are many other matters which are largely ruled and governed by local conditions. I
29 see the matter just as strongly now as I did in Adelaide. I see that it is a matter which
30 should be left to the adjudication of the states; and I would urge further that, by the
31 interference of the Commonwealth Government in matters affecting the different states as
32 to industrial disputes, there will be a probability, possibly more than a probability, of very
33 serious friction arising between the Commonwealth and the states. When the honorable
34 member who moved this amendment rose, I quite thought that he [start page 215] rose with
35 the intention of withdrawing it. After seeing that that amendment, moved by himself as an
36 extreme liberal, and supported by some as extreme liberals, came to be supported by
37 extreme conservatives, or I may say tories, I was all the more confirmed in that idea when
38 he admitted that the support of my right honorable friend (Sir John Forrest) almost
39 convinced him that he had better leave this matter alone.
40 END QUOTE
41
42 Hansard 27-1-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
43 QUOTE
44 Mr. SYMON.-My honorable friend will hand that over to the Federal Parliament. I do
45 not want to hand over to the Federal Parliament too many of these difficulties. This, in my
46 view, should be solved by the local authorities themselves. They are the people to deal
47 with their own questions of industrialism. I do not want to enter into a discussion as to the
48 modes of carrying out this proposal; that will be a matter for the Federal Parliament if we
49 decide to introduce this power. But I will put to my honorable friend what is a practical
50 question in connexion with this power. Who is to decide as to when an industrial dispute
51 extends beyond the limits of a state? Who is to decide when a dispute originating in South

26-8-2025 Page 57 © 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 58

1 Australia enters into the colony of Victoria, so that Victoria shall be put under some kind
2 of martial law?
3 Mr. ISAACS.-It is a question of fact, like anything else.
4 END QUOTE
5 And
6 Hansard 27-1-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
7 QUOTE
8 Mr. SYMON.-What relation has this to customs duties? The industrial life of the state is
9 considered by all of us (subject to this exception, it may be) a thing of purely domestic
10 concern. We do not want to interfere with the domestic life, or with industrial life, except
11 in the last resort. If you are going to introduce such a thing as this it must be the Federal
12 Ministry which will have to decide, subject to the Parliament, and you will introduce the
13 greatest complication and intensity of feeling that was ever seen.
14 Mr. BARTON.-We do not propose to hand over contracts and civil rights to the
15 Federation, and they are intimately allied to this question.
16 END QUOTE
17 .
18 HANSARD 31-1-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
19 QUOTE
20 Mr. SOLOMON.- We shall not only look to the Federal Judiciary for the protection of
21 our interests, but also for the just interpretation of the Constitution:
22 END QUOTE
23
24 HANSARD 8-2-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
25 QUOTE
26 Mr. HIGGINS.-I did not say that it took place under this clause, and the honorable member
27 is quite right in saying that it took place under the next clause; but I am trying to point
28 out that laws would be valid if they had one motive, while they would be invalid if
29 they had another motive.
30 END QUOTE
31 .
32 HANSARD 1-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
33 QUOTE
34 Mr. BARTON.- The position with regard to this Constitution is that it has no
35 legislative power, except that which is actually given to it in express terms or which is
36 necessary or incidental to a power given.
37 END QUOTE
38
39 Hansard 25-3-1897 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National
40 Australasian Convention)
41 QUOTE Mr. WISE:
42 The power of the senate to deal with money bills is so clearly defined that I doubt if any
43 ingenuity could suggest the possibility of dispute arising between the two houses on that
44 question. That at once removes one of the most prolific sources of dispute between the two
45 chambers in the past. Then as to the second class of dispute arising from social differences,
46 all through this discussion, not, I admit, in this house but outside, the controversialists of
47 one party ignore, or seem to ignore, the limitations of federal government. They forget
48 that this commonwealth can only deal with those matters that are expressly remitted
49 to its jurisdiction; and excluded from its jurisdiction are all matters that affect civil
50 rights, all matters that affect property, all matters, in a word, affecting the two great
51 objects which stir the passions and affect the interests of mankind. I fail entirely and I
52 shall be glad if some alarmist will enlarge my views on this matter-to perceive in this bill
53 any question on which there is any possibility of a conflict between the states and the
54 people, except, in one respect, and I will define that in the largest possible way. In
26-8-2025 Page 58 © 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 59

1 legislation affecting commercial interests, or financial interests, it is possible to imagine

2 that the states will be brought into conflict as states with the concentrated majority of the
3 populations of the two large states over a question of trade. It is possible to imagine the
4 same thing arising over a question of commerce, or over a question of finance.
5 END QUOTE
6
7 Hansard 27-1-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
8 QUOTE
9 Sir JOHN DOWNER.-I am not aware that it has been of the slightest effect in South
10 Australia. I have yet to learn that it has been of any use at all. I was rather in favour of
11 making the experiment in this direction when it was proposed in South Australia; and I am
12 now watching the working of these arbitration courts with great interest, although, as I
13 have just said, I have seen no advantage arising from them in South Australia at present.
14 We are now asked to hand over to the Federal Commonwealth a power of legislating with
15 regard to internal concerns affecting every man, woman, and child in every state. Every
16 agreement they make, so long as a sufficient number of them combine together to kick up a
17 row, may be made subject to review before a tribunal. To pass legislation of this sort is in
18 itself an invitation to extend the area of raising quarrels. Such legislation will tend to make
19 such quarrels national, so as to create a power of interfering between individuals who are
20 not satisfied with the contracts they have entered into. In the end it, must result in the
21 establishment of some military or other force strong enough to vindicate the decisions of
22 the court, which step I am certain would not accord with the view of those who advocate
23 the establishment of these courts. I hope that honorable members will think a little
24 carefully about this question, because if they do I believe that they will come to the
25 conclusion that the power which each state has at the present time to legislate in respect to
26 its own industrial [start page 188] disputes is quite sufficient. An industrial dispute cannot
27 extend beyond the limits of any state. These are individual disputes. A certain class of
28 workmen say-"We are going to insist on being paid so much a day" in one part of
29 Australia, and they arrange with other workmen in other colonies to make the same
30 demand. But the disputes are confined to each state.
31 END QUOTE
32
33 Hansard 14-4-1897 Constitution Convention Debates
34 QUOTE
35 Mr. MCMILLAN: I do not think that could be the intention. We are attempting to
36 legislate for a very limited possibility. You will get disputes so long as there are lawyers
37 in the world. I do not know whether Federation will do away with lawyers.
38 END QUOTE
39
40 GST ATO v Melton. It was decided that GST cannot be charged against Municipal/Shire
41 Council (a purported State entity), however the Framers of the Constitution made clear States,
42 and so their entities, etc) are not excluded from taxation applicable to others.
43
44 Hansard 20-4-1897 Constitution Convention Debates
45 QUOTE
46 Mr. GLYNN: I think the last few words of this clause are too comprehensive in their
47 meaning. In South Australia there is a lot of land which is leased with the right of
48 purchase, and I can see that under the latter portion of this clause there is considerable
49 danger of defeating the effect of direct taxation.
50 Mr. O'CONNOR: In a case of that kind the reversion which is in the Crown would
51 not be taxed, but the letting value would be taxed.

26-8-2025 Page 59 © 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 60

1 Mr. BARTON: I might mention that the property of the Commonwealth in that land is
2 the reversion upon the lease. The reversion upon the lease would not be [start page 1002]
3 taxable, but the interest of the lessee in the property would be taxable.
4 Mr. GLYNN: I am only pointing out a difficulty that might arise.
5 Mr. HENRY: I would like to raise a question as to the right of the Commonwealth
6 to tax materials for State purposes. In the event of a colony importing rails,
7 machinery, engines, &c., for State purposes, I would like to know whether such
8 exports are to be free from Customs duties. Will the Federal Parliament have a right
9 to levy duties on materials imported for State purposes?
10 Mr. BARTON: This is a matter that was discussed very fully in the Constitutional
11 Committee, and I think my hon. friend Sir George Turner will remember that I consulted
12 the members of the Finance Committee upon it, intimating to them the opinion of the
13 Constitutional Committee on the point. The words:
14 Impose any tax on property
15 do not refer to the importation of goods at all, and any amendment to except the Customs
16 would be unnecessary. This clause states that a State shall not, without the consent of the
17 Parliament of the Commonwealth, impose taxation on property of any kind belonging to
18 the Commonwealth, meaning by that property of any kind which is in hand, such as land
19 within the Commonwealth. That has no reference to Customs duties.
20 Sir GEORGE TURNER: Will articles imported by the States Governments come in
21 free?
22 Mr. BARTON: The question then arises whether articles imported by the States
23 Governments are to come in free, but this section has nothing to do with that. Under
24 this Bill and in the measure of 1891 I believe duties would have been collectable upon
25 imports by any State, and after the consultation which I had with the hon. member
26 and his colleagues on the Finance Committee the Constitutional Committee decided
27 not to make any exemption in the case of any State.
28 END QUOTE
29
30 Hansard 20-4-1897 Constitution Convention Debates
31 QUOTE
32 Mr. BARTON: As far as I can gather from this clause and the clause of 1891, it seems
33 to me to refer to any future legislation on the subject:
34 The State shall not impose tonnage dues.
35 [start page 1003]
36 The question of whether existing legislation would be invalidated would depend,
37 first, upon whether the dues were an infringement of the equality of trade throughout
38 the Commonwealth, and next upon whether the Commonwealth passed a law which-if it
39 were in the province of the Commonwealth to past; it-was in conflict with the law of the
40 State, in which case, to the extent of the difference between the laws, the law of the
41 Commonwealth would prevail if section 98 were passed. It deals only with future
42 legislation, I think. but these tonnage dues may incur a prohibition if we find that
43 they are a system of taxation, because the Parliament of the Commonwealth has
44 power to raise funds by any method of taxation. If the method of carrying out that
45 power were found to be in conflict with the law of the State, the law of the
46 Commonwealth would prevail. We have no provision for the Commonwealth taking over
47 harbors or harbor works, and it may be a question for consideration whether the
48 Commonwealth, as it has power to legislate on other subjects relating to the regulation of
49 commerce and trade and so on, should not take over harbor works too. That is what, on the
50 face of it, seems to me to be the effect of the clause.
51 END QUOTE
52
26-8-2025 Page 60 © 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 61

1 Hansard 20-4-1897 Constitution Convention Debates

2 QUOTE
3 Mr. BARTON: On considering the matter, I think that the tonnage dues mentioned here-
4 we have altered the word "duties" into "dues," and they seem to me like the word "tonnage
5 dues" that used to prevail in the the old country, such as tonnage dues on wines. We find
6 the word referred to in Acts 9 Anne, and 10 George IV. They were tonnage dues granted to
7 the Queen, and I think those referred to here were the same in the United States
8 Constitution. Whether that be so or not, the tonnage dues referred to in the clause seem to
9 be charges for services performed. For instance, a Harbor Trust is formed and carries out
10 improvements and as a means of recouping themselves the harbor authorities charge dues.
11 Wharfage dues are for the use of a wharf and have they not a similar meaning in the
12 modern acceptation of the term? One is an impost for the use of a wharf, the other for
13 the use of a harbor on which money has been spent for the purpose of rendering it
14 more adapted for shipping. If that is so the words may be left out, and if they are left
15 out any tonnage due which is not a charge for services performed would be an impost
16 interfering with the freedom of trade and intercourse, and would come under section
17 86; that is to say, as soon as uniform duties have been imposed, trade and intercourse
18 shall be absolutely free, If they interfere they could only do so so far as they are of the
19 nature of taxes. If they are only charges for services performed, as I explained in
20 connection with clause 83, then there can be no objection to them. because charges for
21 use of a wharf are much in the same position as charges of the post office authorities
22 for the carriage of letters; they are payments for services. If that view is taken I shall
23 offer no objection to it.
24 Sir GEORGE TURNER: Why not for post and telegraphs?
25 Mr. BARTON: Any mere service that the Commonwealth does not take over is still in
26 the hands of the State. Clause 86 can only be infringed by something which means an
27 interference with the freedom of trade and intercourse. Anything that is fairly
28 construable as a payment for services performed is not handed over-the mere service
29 can be charged for as before, because it is not an interference with trade and
30 intercourse. In such cases as that, mere service can be charged for as before, because it is
31 not an interference with trade or intercourse. I think we may well accept that view and
32 leave out the words:
33 Impose tonnage dues or.
34 I move that they be left out.
35 END QUOTE
36
37 Hansard 27-1-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
38 QUOTE Mr. DEAKIN (Victoria).-
39 For instance, if reference be made to sub-section (3) of this clause 52 it will be found
40 that the Federal Parliament has only the power to raise money by systems of taxation
41 which shall be uniform throughout the Commonwealth. Consequently, if any
42 legislation referring to any less number of the colonies than the whole of the colonies, and
43 which involved any expenditure, was passed by the Federal Parliament, although those
44 colonies were willing to vote that expenditure, the Federal Parliament might have no power
45 to raise that money. The only possible means of the Federal Parliament obtaining that
46 power would be if it were conferred in the provisions of the referring statutes passed
47 by the referring colonies, but unless those provisions exactly agreed-and agreement
48 would be extremely difficult to arrive at-the probability is that the law would be
49 inharmonious and fail in its effect. I would suggest to the leader of the Convention that
50 he should consider whether there should not be such a modification of sub-section (3),
51 which provides for the raising of money by the Commonwealth, as would allow of a
52 reference by two or three colonies desiring to intrust the Federal Parliament with the task
26-8-2025 Page 61 © 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 62

1 of framing legislation for them, and enabling the Federal Parliament, if so called upon, to
2 provide for the raising of the necessary revenue in those colonies. That would be one
3 means of meeting the difficulty. Another means might be that when two or more
4 colonies had determined, under sub-section (35), to refer to the Commonwealth
5 Parliament any matter which required the raising of money from their citizens, it
6 should be possible, for the Commonwealth, in regard to those particular matters, to
7 provide for the necessary taxation to be levied in those colonies by the central
8 authority, instead of leaving them to the very difficult task of coming to an
9 independent agreement among themselves as to all the details of the method by which
10 the money should be provided.
11 Mr. GLYNN.-Strike the sub-section out.
12 Mr. SYMON.-That is the best solution of the difficulty.
13 Mr. DEAKIN.-That may be so.
14 Mr. GLYNN.-We may have a conflict of laws under the sub-section.
15 Mr. BARTON.-Such laws can only apply to the referring states themselves.
16 Mr. DEAKIN.-They would not be, in the strict sense of the term, federal laws.
17 Mr. BARTON.-No, they would only apply to the states which referred the matters to the
18 Federal Parliament.
19 Mr. DEAKIN.-Exactly; but those laws can be adopted by the other states. If two or
20 three colonies join in requesting the Federal Parliament to pass a statute on a
21 particular matter applying only to those two or three colonies, and that law has been
22 enacted and proved to work well, the remaining colonies of the group may adopt it,
23 and finally [start page 217] you may have the Commonwealth in this position, that
24 every colony in the group has adopted, as far as it can adopt, that particular law,
25 which then ought to be a federal law. This contingency is perhaps provided for. That
26 being so, it becomes necessary for us to consider whether we should not also provide
27 for the other contingency. If all the states of the group except one, or if three of the
28 larger colonies, or any three of the colonies, required a common statute in regard to a
29 particular subject, and the administration of that statute involved the raising of
30 money, the Federal Government ought to be able to provide for the levying of that
31 money under the same law if so requested by those concerned.
32 Sir GEORGE TURNER.-Will you briefly restate the point?
33 Mr. DEAKIN.-My point is that by the requests of different colonies at different
34 times you may arrive at a position in which all the colonies have adopted a particular
35 law, and it is necessary for the working of that law that certain fees, charges, or
36 taxation should be imposed. That law now relates to the whole of the Union, because
37 every state has come under it. As I read clause 52, the Federal Parliament will have
38 no power, until the law has thus become absolutely federal, to impose taxation to
39 provide the necessary revenue for carrying out that law. Another difficulty of the sub-
40 section is the question whether, even when a state has referred a matter to the federal
41 authority, and federal legislation takes place on it, it has any-and if any, what-power
42 of amending or repealing the law by which it referred the question? I should be
43 inclined to think it had no such power, but the question has been raised, and should
44 be settled. I should say that, having appealed to Caesar, it must be bound by the
45 judgment of Caesar, and that it would not be possible for it afterwards to revoke its
46 reference.
47 END QUOTE
48
49 Yet the Commonwealth did absolutely nothing to prevent the State of Victoria to have about $9
50 billion dollars from leasing the port which then included only a fraction for harbor improvement
51 and the rest used by the State for ulterior purposes clearly violating S92 of the constitution!
26-8-2025 Page 62 © 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 63

1
2 Hansard 8-2-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
3 QUOTE
4 Mr. GLYNN.-That amendment must be read with Article 4, Section 2.
5 Mr. ISAACS.-That article is as follows:-
6 The citizens of each state shall be entitled to all the privileges and immunities of the
7 citizens of the several states.
8 Mr. GLYNN.-That is not in our Bill.
9 Mr. ISAACS.-It really is there, because our Bill provides that the state shall not make or
10 enforce any law abridging any of the privileges or immunities of the citizens of the other
11 states. At all events, the 14th amendment is the one under which these decisions were
12 given.
13 Mr. HOLDER.-We have no definition of citizen.
14 Mr. ISAACS.-No, not of the Federation. The question of the citizenship of a state is one
15 that will have to be worked out. It might be held to be an ordinary member of the state, and
16 it might not be confined to naturalized persons.
17 Mr. GORDON.-It might be a question of domicile.
18 Mr. ISAACS.-Yes. It is not wise to use the word "citizen" without any definition. They
19 took care to define it in the United States. We might use a term that would be found to be
20 of wider import than was intended, but, however that may be, it seems to me that it is
21 illogical to [start page 670] provide that a state should not make or enforce any law
22 abridging any privilege or immunity of citizens of other states. We ought to take out the
23 words "other states," and say that no state should abridge any privilege or immunity of any
24 citizen of the whole Commonwealth.
25 Mr. WISE.-That is not the object. This clause has no connexion whatever with the
26 amendment of the United States Constitution.
27 Mr. REID.-Will you tell us the object?
28 Mr. ISAACS.-I will wait to hear what the honorable member has to say.
29 Mr. REID.-Can the state laws affect any one not in the jurisdiction of the state?
30 Mr. ISAACS.-It is puzzling to me why a restriction has been made in this way, that the
31 state is not to be at liberty to abridge the privileges or immunities of the citizens of other
32 states.
33 Mr. SYMON.-It is the essence of the Constitution that the state shall have that power
34 within its legislative jurisdiction. Every state can do that.
35 Mr. ISAACS.-Yes, within its legislative jurisdiction, and that consideration gives
36 immense force to what I said at starting, and what Mr. Trenwith said. We are giving to the
37 Federation certain powers of legislation, and we are reserving all others to the states. If the
38 Federation chooses to exercise its legislative powers within its sphere, it can over-ride
39 anything a state does.
40 Mr. SYMON.-There is no object in the limitation of the federal jurisdiction.
41 Mr. ISAACS.-None whatever; and if the state is to have reserved to itself all other
42 powers, I cannot understand the bearing of it. I thought it my duty, therefore, to bring
43 under the notice of the Convention the reason why it was introduced into the American
44 Constitution. It was to cut down the powers of the state as exercised by refusing citizenship
45 to the blacks. There have been quite a number of decisions on the subject, but it would be
46 profitless to refer to them further. I have endeavoured to point out as briefly as I can how
47 this matter stands, and I think it will be found in the end, subject to anything that Mr. Wise
48 may have to say, that the basis of it all is the 14th amendment of the United States
49 Constitution.
50 Mr. WISE (New South Wales).-I do not like to speak with any confidence after such a
51 strong expression of opinion from one so well qualified to give an opinion as the Attorney-
52 General of Victoria, but my recollection of the reasons which led to the first part of the
26-8-2025 Page 63 © 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 64

1 clause being inserted in the Draft Bill of 1891 leads me to say that the words were intended
2 to limit the legislative jurisdiction of the states by such necessary restrictions as were
3 thought desirable to give the Federation power to settle disputes between states arising
4 from the exercise of the legislative authority within each state. I very much regret that Mr.
5 Clark's memorandum, a portion of which I read yesterday, has not been returned. In the
6 concluding part of that memorandum he draws special attention to these words, and points
7 out that they were a necessary complement to the implied surrender of the right to claim
8 redress by diplomatic or other means which was made by every state when it entered into
9 an equal federation with other states. He lays down in express terms the principle which
10 Judge Shipman used as the basis of his judgment in the case I cited yesterday from 22
11 Blatchford, 131, that is to say, if a state passes a law the effect of which is to injure the
12 territory or property of persons outside the state-that may not be the intention, but if the
13 direct effect is to inflict injury upon the territory or property of citizens in another state-
14 then that law, although in so far as it only affects citizens within the state that passes it, it is
15 intra vires of the Constitution, it becomes ultra vires in so far as it inflicts injury on the
16 inhabitants of another state. That, I believe, was the intention, although I feel some
17 diffidence in insisting upon it. This was the view which formed the basis of the judgment
18 of Mr. Justice Shipman.
19 [start page 671]
20 The state of Connecticut had authorized certain works which injured property in the
21 adjoining state of Massachusetts, and it was held that that was a matter in which the
22 Federal Court, in the interests of the Federation, was entitled to exercise jurisdiction.
23 Mr. ISAACS.-Every text-book writer ignores that case; I cannot find it anywhere.
24 Mr. WISE.-The object of this was by no means to deal with a set of circumstances such
25 as have arisen in the United States, which could not have arisen here, but to deal with other
26 matters; and it seems to me that the clause as it stands would be a powerful instrument to
27 prevent an abuse of powers by a state, not for the purpose of injuring the citizens of that
28 state, but for the purpose of injuring the citizens of other states.
29 Mr. ISAACS.-Can you give a concrete case?
30 Mr. WISE.-Well, take the case of imposing a poll tax on citizens passing from one state
31 to another. Such a law as that would at present be within the competency of the legislation
32 of any colony.
33 Mr. SYMON.-Not if this Constitution becomes law.
34 Mr. WISE.-It might be dealt with by another clause, and would also be dealt with by this
35 clause 110. I am not dealing now with the latter part of the clause, because I admit that that
36 is open to other objections. I am confining my attention to the first portion. The instance I
37 have given is of course an extreme one, but it is such cases as that which, according to my
38 recollection, it was intended should be dealt with by the first portion of this clause. I very
39 much regret that Mr. Clark's memorandum is not in the hands of honorable members,
40 because it deals with the first part of this clause and shows what importance Mr. Clark
41 attaches to it as one of the draftsmen of the Bill of 1891.
42 Mr. ISAACS.-How would the entry into one state by a citizen of another state be an
43 immunity or a privilege of that citizen?
44 Mr. WISE.-Let me give another illustration. Suppose an extra probate duty were imposed
45 on Victorians who had property in New South Wales, or vice versa.
46 Mr. REID.-Or an absentee tax.
47 Mr. WISE.-Yes, or an absentee tax.
48 Mr. SYMON.-It would be competent for the states to do that.
49 Mr. WISE.-No; I mean an absentee tax making those who reside in one part of the Union
50 pay higher-say pay a higher probate duty or legacy duty-than those who reside within the
51 state imposing the tax.
26-8-2025 Page 64 © 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 65

1 Mr. ISAACS.-How could that be a privilege or immunity of the citizens of the other
2 states?
3 Mr. WISE.-It would be putting an exceptional disability upon the citizens of another
4 state, to which the citizens of the state imposing the tax were not subject.
5 Mr. ISAACS.-But how is it a privilege or immunity of the citizens of another state that
6 they should not be taxed as absentees by a particular state?
7 Mr. WISE.-It is an immunity at present.
8 Mr. ISAACS.-Then you can never tax a man living in another state?
9 Mr. WISE.-You cannot impose exceptional treatment upon the citizens of another state;
10 that applies to everything. It is difficult to contemplate a concrete case, but that the words
11 themselves have a definite and clear meaning any one can see; and whether that clear
12 power should be taken away or not is a matter of very serious consideration. It does appear
13 to me that this clause is a powerful instrument in the hands of the federal authority to
14 prevent any state acting in an overt manner, permitting overt acts of hostility against
15 citizens outside its jurisdiction. For that reason I hope that the clause will be allowed to
16 stand.
17 Mr. OCONNOR (New South Wales).-The honorable and learned member (Mr. Isaacs) is
18 I think correct in the history of this clause that he has given, and this is [start page 672] one
19 of those instances which should make us very careful of following too slavishly the
20 provisions of the United States Constitution, or any other Constitution. No doubt in
21 putting together the draft of this Bill, those who were responsible for doing so used
22 the material they found in every Constitution before it, and probably they felt that
23 they would be incurring a great deal of responsibility in leaving out provisions which
24 might be in the least degree applicable. But it is for us to consider, looking at the
25 history and reasons for these provisions in the Constitution of the United States,
26 whether they are in any way applicable; and I quite agree with my honorable and
27 learned friend (Mr. Carruthers) that we should be very careful of every word that we
28 put in this Constitution, and that we should have no word in it which we do not see
29 some reason for. Because there can be no question that in time to come, when this
30 Constitution has to be interpreted, every word will be weighed and an interpretation
31 given to it; and by the use now of what I may describe as idle words which we have no
32 use for, we may be giving a direction to the Constitution which none of us now
33 contemplate. Therefore, it is incumbent upon us to see that there is some reason for
34 every clause and every word that goes into this Constitution. Now, I agree with Mr.
35 Isaacs, that the 14th amendment of the United States Constitution was directed
36 entirely to the question of the citizenship of negroes who were freed men, and it was
37 necessary to implant something of that kind in the American Constitution, because of
38 the fever heat which had been excited, and which was then subsiding, over the war
39 which had convulsed the country. But how can that condition of things, or that
40 necessity which arose then, have any hearing on our position? I take it that the best
41 way to look on this matter is to try and forget all about the 14th amendment of the
42 United States Constitution, and regard it as though we were framing this Constitution
43 without any knowledge of any such provision. It seems to me that the first portion of
44 the amendment of the United States Constitution, which deals with citizenship, is not
45 in any way necessary. Surely every person who has the suffrage-the right to vote
46 within the Commonwealth-and who lives within the Commonwealth, is a citizen of
47 the Commonwealth, and entitled to all its privileges, including the right to take part
48 as the Commonwealth provides in the framing of the laws.
49 Mr. HIGGINS.-They have declared that in the amendment of the Constitution of the
50 United States; but we have not got it here.
51 Mr. ISAACS.-That shows the history of it.
26-8-2025 Page 65 © 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 66

1 Mr. OCONNOR.-That shows the history of it, as Mr. Isaacs suggests. I am pointing out
2 that there is no necessity for it in our Constitution-no necessity to point out that every
3 person in the states is a citizen of the Commonwealth. There is no necessity for it, because
4 citizenship follows from the rights you give every person in every portion of the
5 Commonwealth under the Constitution. Now, is there any right which it is necessary to
6 state that you give? I see that this provision that we are discussing now makes some
7 reference to privileges or immunities of citizens. Quite sufficient has been pointed out to
8 show that that might work in an exceedingly complicated way-in a way we have no
9 conception of at the present time-if it is inserted in its present form. The only possible
10 differences or disabilities in the states now, as affecting different classes of citizens, are
11 those which exist in regard to aliens and coloured races. But already in clause 52 we have
12 agreed to the insertion of a sub-section which enables the Commonwealth to deal with that
13 matter, and there can be no question about it that in course of time the different laws that
14 exist in the states dealing with such coloured races will be similar, and that such races will
15 be dealt with uniformly, so that whatever privileges [start page 673] or disabilities exist in
16 one state with regard to these people will exist in another state. There is only one portion of
17 the Tasmanian amendment which I think should be preserved, and I prefer it in the form in
18 which it stands as submitted by the Legislative Assembly of Tasmania. I think that the only
19 portion of it which it is necessary to preserve is this-altering the wording slightly so as to
20 make it read as I think it should read-
21 A state shall not deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without due process of
22 law, or deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of its laws.
23 So that any citizen of any portion of the Commonwealth would have the guarantee of
24 liberty and safety in regard to the processes of law, and also would have a guarantee of the
25 equal administration of the law as it exists. I think Mr. Isaacs will bear me out, that in the
26 United States it has been decided that the title to equal treatment under the law does not
27 mean that you cannot make a law which differentiates one class of the community from
28 another; but, as has been decided, it means that in the administration of the laws you have
29 made, all the citizens shall be treated equally. And that should be so. Whatever privilege
30 we give to our citizens, the administration of the law should be equal to all, whatever their
31 colour. The case I refer to is one of the Chinese cases-I forget the name of it.
32 Mr. ISAACS.-The case of Yick Wo v. Hopkins.
33 END QUOTE
34
35 “Every word” means that “peace, order and good government” applies to all and any
36 legislation as well as to the executive and administrative powers and regardless of the political
37 association of anyone in power!
38
39 Hansard 10-3-1891 Constitution convention Debates
40 QUOTE Mr. J. FORREST:
41 At the same time, I feel sure that every Australian, whether he be an Australian by
42 birth or by adoption, must look forward to the time when he will be a citizen of
43 Australia, when his boast will be, not that he is a Victorian, a New South Welshman,
44 a Queenslander, a South Australian, or a Tasmanian, but that he is an Australian,
45 and I believe that this is gradually becoming the position. It is not usual, when you
46 meet people in other parts of the world, and ask them where [start page 220] they
47 came from, for them to say that they are Tasmanian or Victorians, but they call
48 themselves Australians. I believe that this sentiment is taking deep root in the minds
49 of the people of this continent, and that the desire of young Australians undoubtedly
50 is that Australia shall become a nation, and that we shall be no longer separated from
51 one another by artificial lines. After all, these boundaries, as I believe was said by
52 some one the other day, are merely artificial lines on the map. In some of the colonies
26-8-2025 Page 66 © 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 67

1 where settlement has extended they have attained some practical permanence, and
2 are actually known on the ground, but as a rule how were they fixed?
3 END QUOTE
4
5 Hansard 8-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
6 QUOTE
7 Dr. COCKBURN.-The whole proposal is foreign to the spirit of the Constitution. The
8 Constitution lays it down that the Commonwealth is to deal equally with all the states
9 whether it is in the matter of taxation, of bounties, or of trade, and we may as well
10 strike out the provision that all taxation shall be uniform throughout the
11 Commonwealth if we are to contemplate that after the taxation has been raised the
12 proceeds may be handed over to any one colony. The thing will not bear a moment's
13 investigation, and I hope the honorable member will not press his proposal to a division. It
14 is a pity that the amendment has been brought forward. There is no possibility, nor does
15 any one contemplate the possibility, of any of the states being in a worse financial position
16 than they are in at the present time. On the contrary, I believe that their financial position,
17 good as it is now, will be infinitely improved.
18 END QUOTE
19
20 Hansard 17-2-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
21 QUOTE
22 Mr. ISAACS.-I am not prepared to answer that question, but when we look at clause 52
23 we find these governing words on the very forefront of that clause-
24 That Parliament shall, subject to the provisions of this Constitution, have full power and
25 authority to make laws for the peace, order, and good government of the Commonwealth.
26 We see there that the Commonwealth is named as distinguished from the states. We
27 have our Constitution framed in this way with a Senate to guard what? The interests
28 of the states, so that the Commonwealth shall not intrude one inch into what is
29 retained as the executive rights and jurisdiction of the states.
30 END QUOTE
31 .
32 HANSARD 26-3-1897 Constitution Convention Debates
33 QUOTE Mr. ISAACS:
34 There is a line up to which concession may become at any moment a sacred duty, but to
35 pass that line would be treason; and therefore, when we are asked solemnly and gravely
36 to abandon the principle of responsible government, when we are invited to surrender
37 the latest-born, but, as I think, the noblest child of our constitutional system-a system
38 which has not only nurtured and preserved, but has strengthened the liberties of our
39 people-then,
40 END QUOTE
41
42 QUOTE EMAIL 22-6-2025
43 QUESTIONS_ Re: Gerrit Hendrik Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. - RE: repeat request-
44 transcript of 22 May 2025 as well as 12 May 2025 swearing in [SEC=OFFICIAL]
45 Mr Gerrit H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.
46 From:[email protected]
47 To:(Shared) FOI & IPS Mailbox
48 Cc:Gerrit Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.
49 Bcc:
50 Sun, 22 June at 12:45 am
51 Sarah, 22-6-2025
52
53 I downloaded the video from "For the 2022 video,
54 see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MVMycRdtv24." as and to be honest the quality of the
26-8-2025 Page 67 © 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 68

1 sound is terrible. Perhaps the Official secretary may have read from a document or
2 otherwise can at least what the official secretary stated be provided as a transcript?
3
4 Also, can you provide the date of the swearing in? What appears to me to be strange is that
5 the ABC seems to claim that for example Anthony Albanese as well as Penny Wong had
6 been traveling to many countries before being sworn in as per the video.
7 Out constitution s64 permits the Governor to commission a person to seek to present
8 persons to be sworn in as Ministers, after all Mr Barton was commissioned for this in 1900
9 Xmass period. That is a different commission but S64 does allow any person to be
10 commissioned regardless of being or not elected for a seat in the parliament, subject to S64
11 limitations.
12 As Penny Wong was not sworn in until the date of the video being made by ABC then
13 obviously the question is what, if any position did she hold as commissioned by the
14 Governor-General prior to this swearing in?
15
16 What proclamation was gazetted naming her commission, this so that Australians were
17 aware of her commission prior to being sworn in?
18
19 With Scott Morrison he allegedly was commissioned to the Department of health and later
20 other portfolios, this even so as the Courts made clear the Governor-Generals signature is
21 merely part of the process, and the commission is not valid in law until it is published in
22 the Gazette. Hence, can you provide links and other documentation showing the
23 commission of any person prior to the swearing in (in 2022)?
24
25 In AEC v Schorel-Hlavka I proved with relevant documentation, that the governor-
26 General on 5 October 2001 had signed the proclamation to dissolve the House of
27 Representative at 11.59 AM and prorogue the Parliament at 12 noon for 8 October 2001.
28 However, the clerk for the Special Gazette was not in for the morning, and so the Clerk
29 then made the Special Gazette in the afternoon of 8 October 2001 by which time it was too
30 late. The printer (again the documentation was filed in Court for my successful appeals
31 involving the Commonwealth DPP and the 9 Attorney-Generals) the Government Printer
32 then printed the Special Gazette which was issued on 9 and some on 10 October 2001 and
33 in Tasmania it was later in the ordinary Gazette. Hence, no valid election was held as the
34 writs for the General election for the House of Representatives and the Senate were issued
35 before the Proclamation was published in the Gazette. When Counsel for the AEC on 4
36 August 2005 sought to file as evidence to claim the Special Gazette was dated 8 October
37 2001, I objected to this being accepted as evidence but the Court overruled me. What
38 Counsel to his horror then discovered was that I had previously filed and served a copy of
39 the 8 October 2001 Special Gazette and with evidence that the Government printer by its
40 own computer records showed it was not issued at all on 8 October 2001 but on 9 and 10
41 October 2001. Hence, the date of 8 October 2001 of the Special Gazette was fraudulent.
42 Upon this Counsel for the AEC (Commonwealth) then withdrew his filed Special Gazette
43 dated 8 October 2001 upon which I made clear that I was nevertheless entitled to now rely
44 upon this and no longer needed to prove the copy I had previously filed and served.
45 What this was meaning that the General election never was valid in law, as for example
46 Tasmania didn't get the notification until the general Gazette weeks later was published.
47 Meaning, the Governor of Tasmania and so the electors had no formal notification until
48 after the closure of the rolls. This as the Gazette is the conclusive act to complete the
49 Governor-Generals proclamation. Also, the publishing in the Gazette of any commission
50 for a Minister only becomes valid when it is published in a Gazette.
51
26-8-2025 Page 68 © 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 69

1 Again, the Commonwealth DPP and the 9 Attorney-Generals (including in this the Federal
2 Attorney General) didn't dispute my set out in the written submissions and therefore are
3 deemed to have conceded to the truth thereof.
4
5 Yet, somehow the then Governor-General allow those so-called Members of Parliament to
6 nevertheless defraud Consolidated Revenue Funds to claim "allowances" and all and any
7 commissioned Miniter by not being validly elected in 2001 were therefore in view of S64
8 no longer Ministers after the 3-month period stipulated in Section 64 no longer Ministers.
9
10 Also, When Scott Morrison purportedly was commissioned as Minister for Health, this
11 even so Greg Hunt at the time was Minister for health, then technically, that is if Scott
12 Morrison was validly commissioned (I do not seek to imply he was) then Greg Hunt from
13 that day no longer could have been Minister for health, this as the Framers of the
14 Constitution made very clear that only one person could be the
15 "RESPONSIBLE Minister". While I understand in 2025 allegedly the Governor-General
16 has sworn in "Assistant Ministers" constitutionally there is no such provision for this as
17 only 1 person can be a "RESPONSIBLE Minister".
18
19 We have allegedly a Minister for a portfolio, then allegedly also an "Assistant Minister" for
20 the same portfolio, and then a Head of the Department, and other Chiefs but seeming little
21 or no Indians.
22
23 The Framers of the Constitution put it in their way:
24

25 VEHICLES-01
26
27
28
29 Let’s see what the Framers of the Constitution stated about the telephone, postal and other
30 services:
31
32 Hansard 17-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National
33 Australasian Convention)
34 QUOTE Mr. CARRUTHERS:
35 It is just as important that the Federal Government shall have the care and
36 management of the vehicles which carry human beings and their goods as that it
37 should have the care and [start page 769] management of the vehicles or ways which
38 carry letters and telegrams.
39 END QUOTE
40
41 (Writers note: Notice they even refer to “management of the vehicles” not just photo
42 opportunities for a Minister!)
43
44 And:
45 Hansard 17-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates
46 of the National Australasian Convention)
47 QUOTE Mr. CARRUTHERS:
48 If you give over the telegraph and postal business you thereby hand to the custody of
49 the Federal Government all the local appointments-the appointing of the
50 postmasters, clerks, and other officers, who do not do national, but the purest

26-8-2025 Page 69 © 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 70

1 local business; and you at once raise up a large army of civil servants, the
2 influence of which we want to dissociate from our national life
3 END QUOTE
4
5 (Writers note: Notice they refer to appointments of officers, etc, and “large army of civil
6 servants” clearly this relates to Commonwealth Management, not some private company)
7
8 When Peter Garret was allegedly Minister, I understood some 6 people ended up being
9 killed regarding insulation material instalments, this even so I had written to then Kevin
10 Rudd about the dangers, etc.
11
12 What we seem to have that the so-called "constitutional advisers" (Ministers) in my view
13 lack any competence in constitutional matters, and so in particularly also Attorney
14 Generals, and persons are commissioned because of political fraction rather than to be
15 skilled in a portfolio they are commissioned for and lack any proper understanding and
16 competence in constitutional matters to be deemed a "constitutional adviser" to the
17 Governor-General. Hence, we seem to have persons being commissioned as Ministers who
18 I view are grossly incompetent to be "constitutional advisers" as required by the legal
19 principles embedded in the constitution.
20
21 My Late wife Olga Hlavka-Schorel was born in the Czech Republic and never fancied the
22 Monarchy, however she admired the then Princes Elizabeth for showing to serve in the
23 armed forces and showing to do mechanical work on army vehicles.
24
25 Sir Edmund Barton's ideas on Immigrants and being an Australian in 1907.
26
27 "In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith
28 becomes an Australian and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact
29 equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man
30 because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the person's becoming
31 in every facet an Australian, and nothing but an Australian. There can be no divided
32 allegiance here. Any man who says he is an Australian, but something else also, isn't an
33 Australian at all. We have room for but one flag, the Australian flag. We have room for but
34 one language here, and that is the English language... and we have room for but one sole
35 loyalty and that is a loyalty to the Australian people."
36 Edmund Barton, 1907
37
38 Hansard 12-3-1891 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National
39 Australasian Convention)
40 QUOTE. Mr. CUTHBERT:
41 Now I come to deal with the military and naval defence of Australia, which it is
42 proposed shall be intrusted to federal forces under one command. I cordially approve
43 of that proposition, which has met with general acceptance all round-and why?
44 Because we know that the colonies recognise that the duty of protect- [start page
45 289] ing their own shores devolves upon them-that they have erected fortifications,
46 and that many of the colonies have an efficient permanent corps of artillerymen
47 which has been strengthened by the volunteers who have come forward in the cause
48 of their country to give their services as militiamen. But we are aware that there is a
49 weakness all through the design. We are aware that, if any portion of the Australian
50 continent were attacked, while a friendly and brotherly feeling would dictate that we
51 ought to go to the rescue of the place attacked by a hostile foe, we have no power
52 whatever to order our troops out of our own colony, to go and concentrate their
26-8-2025 Page 70 © 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 71

1 forces with the others. And though we received reports from different naval and
2 military commanders as to the state of our forces and their efficiency-as to their
3 courage, that was undoubted-we were not satisfied merely with reports from our own
4 officers; we wanted an independent authority of eminence to give us his candid
5 opinion of the action we had taken in our endeavour to form an efficient military and
6 naval force. Accordingly, the colonies united, as they have done on several
7 occasions, always leading towards unity, and applied to the Imperial Government to
8 send an officer to report on our forces. General Edwards then came here, and
9 furnished us with his report, to the details of which I will not refer. But he pointed
10 out, unmistakably, where our weakness lay. I think it was his report which induced
11 you, Mr. President, to communicate with the premiers of the other colonies, the result
12 being the conference in Melbourne to which I have already referred. Some hon.
13 gentlemen may think that by placing the whole of our forces under one command we
14 want to raise a large military force which will saddle the country with expenses that
15 may be deemed unnecessary. But, as I understand the resolution, it has no such
16 meaning. The federal parliament will look closely into the question of the finances.
17 They will see that it will be expected by all the colonies that due economy shall be
18 observed in the administration of the funds intrusted to them, and that it will be
19 expected that out of the £8,000,000 of revenue handed over to them at least
20 £6,000,000 will be available for redistribution among the colonies; and the colonies
21 will look with a very observant eye upon all that is done by the federal parliament,
22 because they will be interested parties, and they will know that in order to meet the
23 engagements into which they have entered it will be necessary for them to husband
24 their resources in every way. In my opinion, the placing of the naval and military
25 forces under one command will not be attended with much additional expense. We
26 want no large standing army here. There is no necessity for it. If we protect our
27 ports as we are doing, and having men, money, and the munitions of war, having
28 men in our artillery forces as well skilled and competent as any to be found in her
29 Majesty's service, and in addition to that, having powerful and efficient guns of the
30 latest type, we feel that the obligation devolves upon us to have a force sufficient to
31 protect us against invasion. Will hon. members permit me just to make one quotation
32 from a work by a most eminent man, highly skilled in the art of warfare? Major
33 Clarke, writing on the navy, sets forth the advantages which the colonies reap from
34 remaining part of the empire. He summarises them as follows:-
35 Their commerce, -
36 That is, the commerce of the colonies.
37 which is their very life, has received, and will receive the protection of the greatest
38 naval power of the world.
39 2. The necessary standard of the local defences of their ports is reduced to a
40 minimum.
41 3. They require to be able to resist a cruiser raid, since a hostile fleet cannot reach
42 them in force, except on condition of defeating and destroying strong British
43 squadrons.
44 [start page 290]
45 These are the words of one who speaks with authority, and who points out exactly
46 the danger we are in. As long as England is mistress of the seas, as long as we are a
47 dependency of England, we may rely on her support, and so long we may depend
48 upon it no foreign power, however strong, can set foot on these shores. Since Major
49 Clarke wrote on this subject we must not lose sight of the fact that we have taken a
50 new departure, and that we recognise that our commerce is the very life of our
51 colonies. We have recognised this, that it is unfair that the mother country should be
26-8-2025 Page 71 © 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 72

1 saddled with the whole expense of defending our commerce on the high seas; and
2 therefore, I am proud to say, as the result of a conference which took place in
3 London, and to which we sent delegates, that for the first time, I think, in English
4 history the colonies have entered into a partnership by which they are enabled to
5 have the advantage of the support of what may be termed an Australian
6 squadron. Under the British flag we may rest in security, leaving it to the squadron
7 in this part of her Majesty's dominions to protect our commerce, and taking upon
8 ourselves the duty of defending our shores.
9 END QUOTE
10
11 We now have a purported prime Minister who used a so-called Aboriginal Flag and a
12 Torres Strait Islanders flag but not a genuine Australian flag.
13
14 Hansard 9-3-1891 Constitution convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National
15 Australasian Convention)
16 QUOTE Mr. FITZGERALD:
17 The people of Australia have stretched their limbs. They feel themselves
18 animated by that high spirit which characterised their ancestors. They feel
19 within them that they are doing a duty inspired by the same motives as those of
20 their race before them. They know that men of their race have fashioned and
21 formed a large portion of the globe in a manner that redounds to their honor
22 and credit, and to the freedom of the world. They know that you cannot
23 advance this country without adding to the wealth, and the national importance,
24 and the power of that grand empire to which we belong, and they know that the
25 expansion of the empire means the happiness and the freedom of everybody
26 who lives under the protection of its flag.
27 END QUOTE
28
29 Hansard 15-9-1897 Constitution convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National
30 Australasian Convention)
31 QUOTE
32 The Hon. J.H. HOWE: Not in the case of money bills. The power of the purse is the
33 golden key which rules everything and opens every door. We know that we have
34 allowed these things to be frittered away, and for the sake of federation and for the
35 sake of entering into a brotherhood we have actually departed from the first position
36 which we took up. After we have done that, some hon. members want to bring in
37 these insidious amendments, so that the states shall have no independent life. Since I
38 joined this Convention in Adelaide, that fair city of the south, where the people are as
39 free as their air is pure, and whose freedom I wish to maintain, I have undergone the
40 difficult task of fighting an election.
41 END QUOTE
42
43 The Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900 (UK) in its written format
44 doesn't provide any provision for the change of the Flag, as the Framers of the
45 Constitution embedded the legal principle that the flag is to be "Under the British
46 flag"!
47
48 Also consider why isn't the Dutch flag used if any flag will do as after all we have a
49 purported governor-General who I understand claimed the Britis invaded the
50 Commonwealth of Australia (then New Holland) while in fact it was already claimed
51 in 1658 for the Dutch Government.
52
53 39-0118
26-8-2025 Page 72 © 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 73

1 QUOTE Are you aware that records indicate the Dutch in 1658 claimed "New Holland" for the
2 Dutch Government?
3 https://iask.ai/?mode=question&options%5bdetail_level%5d=detailed&q=Are+you+
4 aware+that+records+indicate+the+Dutch+in+1658+claimed+%22New+Holland%22
5 +for+the+Dutch+Government%3F
6
7 iAsk Question · Are you aware that records indicate the Dutch in 1658
8 claimed "New Holland" for the Dutch Government?
9 Are you aware that records indicate the Dutch in 1658 claimed "New Holland"
10 for the Dutch Government?
11
12 According to www.iAsk.ai Ask Ai Questions Search Engine:
13 Yes , records indicate that the Dutch claimed “New Holland” in 1658 for the Dutch
14 Government.
15 Dutch Claim of “New Holland” in 1658
16 In 1658, the Dutch claimed “New Holland” for the Dutch Government. This claim
17 was part of the Dutch colonial expansion efforts during that period. The Dutch were
18 actively involved in establishing trading posts and territories around the world,
19 including regions like New Holland.
20
21 Top 3 Authoritative Sources Used in Answering this Question:
22 1. National Library of Australia
23 2. State Library of New South Wales
24 3. National Archives of Australia
25 These sources provide historical records and archives related to early colonial activities,
26 including the Dutch claim of “New Holland” in 1658. They offer valuable insights into the
27 events and documentation surrounding this particular historical event.
28
29 Web Search Results
30 5 results
31 Dutch colonial empire - Wikipedia
32 https//en.m.wikipedia.org › wiki › Dutch_colonial_empire
33 Dutch colonial empire - Wikipedia
34 Johan Maurits was appointed governor of "New Holland" and landed at Recife in January
35 1637. ... The Dutch claimed ... Dutch government. The Antilles were combined ...
36 Did the Dutch ever try to retake their colonies outside of Indonesia (e.g. ...
37 https//www.quora.com › Did-the-Dutch-ever-try-to-retake-their-colonies-outside-of-
38 Indonesia-e-g-New-Holland-the-New-Netherlands-etc-If-no-why-not
39 Did the Dutch ever try to retake their colonies outside of Indonesia (e.g. ...
40 After the Portuguese had driven out the Dutch from the New Holland colony in Brazil in
41 1654, there was a Dutch naval blockade of Portugal in ...
42 31 The Dutch Seaborne Empire: Qua Patet Orbis - Oxford Academic
43 https//academic.oup.com › book › 39071 › chapter › 338397229
44 31 The Dutch Seaborne Empire: Qua Patet Orbis - Oxford Academic
45 It is estimated that the Company lost on average 3 million guilders a year on the Brazilian
46 colony of New Holland. By 1636 the WIC was 18 million guilders in ...
47 THE EARLY HISTORY OF THE JEWS IN NEW YORK, 1654-1664 ... - jstor
48 https//www.jstor.org › stable › 43057824
26-8-2025 Page 73 © 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 74

1 THE EARLY HISTORY OF THE JEWS IN NEW YORK, 1654-1664 ... - jstor
2 And none of them was missing, praised be God. That New Holland in this account meant
3 New Amsterdam is indicated by the fact that New Amsterdam is so described.
4 VOC – United Dutch East India Company
5 http//museum.wa.gov.au › explore › dirk-hartog › voc-united-dutch-east-india-company
6 VOC – United Dutch East India Company
7 The coast of New Holland, as it became known after Tasman's 1644 voyage, offered the
8 Dutch very little in the way of trade or resources. There were no ...
9 END QUOTE Are you aware that records indicate the Dutch in 1658 claimed "New Holland" for the
10 Dutch Government?
11
12
13 40-0121
14 QUOTE Do you accept that Cap Cook did not invade "New Holland" as it was already claimed by the
15 Dutch?
16 https://iask.ai/?mode=question&options[detail_level]=detailed&q=Do+you+accept+that+C
17 ap+Cook+did+not+invade+"New+Holland"+as+it+was+already+claimed+by+the+Dutch
18 %3F
19 Do you accept that Cap Cook did not invade "New Holland" as it was already
20 claimed by the Dutch?
21
22 According to www.iAsk.ai Ask Ai Questions Search Engine:
23 Answer:
24 No, Captain Cook did not invade “New Holland” as it was already claimed by the
25 Dutch.
26 The story of Lieutenant James Cook and British Sovereignty over Australia has been
27 somewhat misconstrued. While Cook did chart the east coast of New Holland (Australia)
28 in 1770 during his voyage, his primary mission was not to claim the land for Britain.
29 Cook’s initial objective was to reach Tahiti to study the Transit of Venus and then search
30 for the mythical Great Southern Land, Terra Australis.
31 When Cook was heading back after mapping New Zealand (Aotearoa), he intended to
32 return via Cape Horn in South America to potentially discover Terra Australis. However,
33 due to the condition of his ship, he decided to sail north along the east coast of New
34 Holland towards Batavia (Java) for repairs and supplies. Cook’s intention was not to
35 invade or claim New Holland but rather to navigate a route back home that would benefit
36 his mission.
37 Cook’s journal entries indicate that he consulted with his officers on the best route to take
38 for their return journey, ultimately deciding to sail west until they reached the East Coast
39 of New Holland and then follow its direction northward. The decision to explore parts of
40 New Holland was based on practical considerations and the need for provisions rather than
41 a deliberate invasion or claim of sovereignty.
42 Therefore, it can be concluded that Captain Cook did not invade “New Holland” as it was
43 already claimed by the Dutch, and his exploration of the east coast of Australia was part of
44 a larger navigational journey rather than a conquest.
45 Top 3 Authoritative Sources Used in Answering this Question:
46 1. National Library of Australia
47 2. Australian National Maritime Museum
48 3. State Library of New South Wales

26-8-2025 Page 74 © 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 75

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 New Holland (Australia)
7 https//en.m.wikipedia.org › wiki › New_Holland_(Australia)
8 New Holland (Australia)
9 New Holland was never settled by the Dutch people, whose colonial forces and buoyant
10 population had a settled preference for the Dutch Cape Colony, Dutch ...
11 Why do the Dutch think that they discovered Australia before ...
12 https//www.quora.com › Why-do-the-Dutch-think-that-they-discovered-Australia-before-
13 the-British
14 Why do the Dutch think that they discovered Australia before ...
15 The Dutch called it “New Holland”, rather strangely because it looked nothing remotely
16 like Holland. They were quite unimpressed with the areas ...
17 'Over Cooked': Is Captain Cook the source of British sovereignty in ...
18 http//nationalunitygovernment.org › content › over-cooked-captain-cook-source-british-
19 sovereignty-australia
20 'Over Cooked': Is Captain Cook the source of British sovereignty in ...
21 Another oddity in the story is that Cook's Journal speaks of it not being widely known
22 whether a strait exists between New Holland and New Guinea, but back in ...
23 The Search for 'Terra Australis'
24 https//www.nationalarchives.gov.uk › education › resources › the-search-for-terra-australis
25 The Search for 'Terra Australis'
26 Why do you think it's important for Cook to be sure that he is the first European to visit
27 before he claims the lands? Can you find out where 'New Holland' is?
28 The Blind Spot on Our Indigenous History
29 https//www.linkedin.com › pulse › blind-spot-our-indigenous-history-leon-gettler
30 The Blind Spot on Our Indigenous History
31 The guide does not say that Cook “invaded” the country, merely that he was the first
32 Englishman to map the coast of New Holland. It points ...
33 END QUOTE Do you accept that Cap Cook did not invade "New Holland" as it was already claimed
34 by the Dutch?
35
36 As we allegedly have a Governor-General having claimed that the Brits invaded "New
37 Holland" then I seek you to provide the details/information she relied upon. After all, I
38 view it is a serious matter for a person to vilify and denounce the United Kingdom about
39 something contrary to existing records! How can such a person be representing the
40 Monarch she so much appears to me to have vilified? A person who is to take an official
41 position must be a "model citizen" and not a person who changes perhaps her views
42 pending what may be on offer.
43
44 As the Governor-General I understand as Chief Executive Officer of the Commonwealth of
45 Australia permits about $39 Billion to be used exclusively for Australians of Aboriginal
46 descent and/or for Australians not being of Aboriginal descend but in a de facto or other
47 relationship with a Australian of Aboriginal decent then I request you to provide
48 details/information as to the particular section in the constitution that authorise such kind
49 of expenditure specifically for Aboriginal Australians, this in particular where the Framers
26-8-2025 Page 75 © 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 76

1 of the Constitution made clear that all children born in the Commonwealth of Australia and
2 anyone naturalized are all equal in their rights?
3 It should be understood that a section in the constitution cannot be used in total opposite
4 applications. Hence, Subsection 51(xxvi) was originally for the purpose of
5 DISCRIMINATION against "inferior", "coloured", "foreign", "races" and Aboriginals
6 were specifically excluded from this section as they were considered equal to any other
7 Australian. Section 127 for not being counted merely was to protect any state with a large
8 population of native Aboriginals to have huge taxation payments.
9
10 Hansard 20-4-1897 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National
11 Australasian Convention)
12 QUOTE
13 Clause 120-In reckoning the numbers of the people of a State or other part of the
14 Commonwealth aboriginal natives shall not be counted.
15 Dr. COCKBURN: As a general principle I think this is quite right. But in this
16 colony, and I suppose in some of the other colonies, there are a number of natives
17 who are on the rolls, and they ought not to be debarred from voting.
18 Mr. DEAKIN: This only determines the number of your representatives, and the
19 aboriginal population is too small to affect that in the least degree.
20 Mr. BARTON: It is only for the purpose of determining the quota.
21 Dr. COCKBURN: Is that perfectly clear? Even then, as a matter of principle, they
22 ought not to be deducted.
23 Mr. O'CONNOR: The amendment you have carried already preserves their votes.
24 Dr. COCKBURN: I think these natives ought to be preserved as component parts
25 in reckoning up the people. I can point out one place where 100 or 200 of these
26 aboriginals vote.
27 Mr. DEAKIN: Well, it will take 26,000 to affect one vote.
28 Mr. WALKER: I would point out to Dr. Cockburn that one point in connection
29 with this matter is, that when we come to divide the expenses of the Federal
30 Government per capita, if he leaves out these aboriginals South Australia will have
31 so much the less to pay, whilst if they are counted South Australia will have so much
32 the more to pay.
33 Clause, as read, agreed to.
34 END QUOTE
35
36 Hansard 27-1-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
37 QUOTE
38 Mr. BARTON.-We are going to suggest that it should read as follows:-
39 the people of any race for whom it is deemed necessary to make any laws not
40 applicable to the general community; but so that this power shall not extend to
41 authorize legislation with respect to the affairs of the aboriginal race in any state.
42 Mr. ISAACS.-My observations were extended much further than that. The term
43 general community" I understand to mean the general community of the whole
44 Commonwealth. If it means the general community of the whole Commonwealth, I
45 do not see the meaning of saying that the Parliament of the Commonwealth shall
46 have the exclusive authority to do that, because any single state would have the right
47 to do it under any circumstances. If it means less than that-if it means the general
48 community of a state-I do not see why it should not be left to the state. We should be
49 placed in a very awkward position indeed if any particular state is forbidden to pass
50 any distinctive legislation in certain well-known instances. For instance, if Victoria
51 should choose to enact that Afghans shall only get hawkers' licences under certain
52 conditions which are not [start page 228] applicable to Europeans she may be
26-8-2025 Page 76 © 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 77

1 debarred by this sub-section from doing so. I do not know how it will affect our
2 factory law in regard to the Chinese which does not operate beyond the confines of
3 Victoria at all.
4 Sir EDWARD BRADDON.-Why single out the Afghans?
5 Mr. ISAACS.-If any other race possess the same characteristic as the Afghans I
6 will put them in the same class. At all events, the expression general community"
7 means the whole community of the Commonwealth. I do not think that this has any
8 application. If it is to have any application at all, it seems to me to be intended to
9 debar the state from passing legislation-necessary legislation, but purely confined to
10 that state. I do not think that that sub-section ought to be there at all if that is the
11 meaning of it.
12 Mr. BARTON (New South Wales).-I think the original intention of this sub-section
13 was to deal with the affairs of such persons of other races-what are generally
14 called inferior races, though I do not know with how much warrant sometimes-who
15 may be in the Commonwealth at the time it is brought into existence, or who may
16 under the laws of the Commonwealth regulating aliens come into it. We have made
17 the dealing with aliens, which includes a certain degree of coloured immigration, a
18 power of the Commonwealth, and we have made the dealing with immigration a
19 power of the Commonwealth, so that all those of the races who come into the
20 community after the establishment of the Commonwealth will not only enter subject
21 to laws made in respect to their immigration, but will remain subject to any laws
22 which the Commonwealth may specially devise for them. There is no reason why the
23 Commonwealth should not have power to devise such laws.
24 Sir GEORGE TURNER.-An exclusive power?
25 Mr. BARTON.-It ought to have an exclusive power to devise such laws.
26 Sir GEORGE TURNER.-If it does not exercise it can the state exercise it?
27 Mr. BARTON.-Once the Commonwealth legislates with reference to the question
28 of aliens and immigration, its legislation displaces the state law.
29 END QUOTE
30
31 (disclosure: I have Australian Aboriginals in my family. However, it doesn't influence my
32 views as to how the constitution applies.)
33
34 Again:
35
36 Mr. BARTON.-Once the Commonwealth legislates with reference to the question of
37 aliens and immigration, its legislation displaces the state law.
38
39 Section 51(xxvi) was designed to "DISCRIMINATE" against a race and as native
40 Aboriginals are not "aliens" then the 1967 con-job referendum clearly robbed them of
41 "citizenship", meaning also, their rights to vote, being a Member of Parliament, etc. This,
42 as one cannot have S51(xxvi) to be designed to "DISCRIMINATE" against certain races
43 while the same subsection is to be used to benefit native Aboriginals and foreign
44 Aboriginals!
45
46 Yet, we have now in violation of the constitution States and Territories providing special
47 legislation regarding native Aboriginals in violation of the rights of other Australians!
48
49
50 As I indicated Service Australia/Centrelink "SUSPENDED" my Age Pension payments on
51 16 April 2025 backdating to 10 April 2025 without a shred of "evidence" that I exceed the
26-8-2025 Page 77 © 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 78

1 so-called thresholds, such as, I understand it claiming I have shares even so I am not aware
2 of any shares being listed in my name. It claims I have an ANNUAL income
3 of $553.49 this even so my Age Pension bank account shows to my understanding a
4 mere $0.00 on interest and any possible alleged income might be refund from "Medicare",
5 etc, and a final balance of $0.15. As a "refund" is merely to compensate such as part of out-
6 of-pocket expenses already paid out regarding "Medicare" then it is absurd to possible
7 claim they are "income".
8
9 As I indicated I no longer have Age Pension payments to pay for food, medical doctors,
10 medication, ordinary household expenses, and already had a station wagon not being
11 renewed with registration, etc. Well, if I were to died due to not having my medication
12 then a coroner would obviously have to investigate why on earth Service
13 Australia/Centrelink acted in such deceptive, terrorism manner and why despite my
14 elaborate writings it was ignored, even by the Governor-General as Chief Executive
15 Officer who ultimately has to make sure that the "constitutional advisers" are indeed
16 competent and do not misuse and abuse their powers as is now going on!
17
18 See also the attachment a flag I designed on request and with consultation with lawyer
19 Byrt, as to represent all Australians, regardless of which country they may have originated
20 from!
21
22 The above is merely so to say the top of the iceberg, and a lot more unconstitutional issues
23 are canvassed by me to great extent at my
24 blog https://www.scribd.com/inspectorrikati.
25
26 As the High Court of Australia has NO JUDICIAL POWERS to amend the legal
27 principles embedded in the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900 (UK) and
28 in Wakim the court made clear that one can any court order/decision in violation of the
29 constitution then forget about Sue v Hill, MABO, Sykes v Cleary, Palmer v WA, etc, and
30 what is needed is a competent Governor-General who at the very least is competent in
31 constitutional issues and ensures that any person wanting to be a Minister can be a
32 competent "constitutional adviser".
33
34 I hold the constitution very valuable and it is a BILL OR RIGHTS, etc, and I view any
35 public official who denies my constitutional rights by this violates the constitution and
36 each time doing so is liable to my common law compensation claim of $1 Billion. I view
37 TREASON against the constitution is a very serious matter.
38 And, let's be clear about it Anthony Albanese and numerous others as I understand it
39 during the 2022 federal political election was no longer a Member of Parliament once the
40 Proclamation had been published in the Gazette, yet, somehow went about charging
41 against Consolidated Revenue Funds for his political campaign violating Section 44. Also,
42 as Members of parliament, other than Ministers, speaker and President of the Senate, are
43 only be provided with an "ALLOWANCE" to compensate them to some degree for being
44 out of pocket when attending to the parliament, then no special superannuation funds can
45 be provided for them that is not available to the general community, as all Federal laws
46 must be UNIFORM for the whole of the Commonwealth.
47
48 So much more to state but again plenty more at my blog
49 at https://www.scribd.com/inspectorrikati
50

26-8-2025 Page 78 © 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 79

1 I look forwards to you providing the relevant details/information referred to above and any
2 additional material you may desire to provide such as that may compliment what I have
3 requested.
4
5 Gerrit
6
7 Constitutionalist & Consultant
8
9 MAY JUSTICE ALWAYS PREVAIL®
10 Mr. G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B., GUARDIAN
11 (OFFICE-OF-THE-GUARDIAN)
12 107 Graham Road, Viewbank, 3084, Victoria, Australia
13 Ph (International) 61394577209
14 .
15 Email; [email protected]
16
17 The content of this email and any attachments are provided WITHOUT PREJUDICE, unless
18 specifically otherwise stated.
19
20 If you find any typing/grammatical errors then I know you read it, all you now need to do
21 is to consider the content appropriately!
22
23 A FOOL IS A PERSON WHO DOESN'T ASK THE QUESTION BECAUSE OF BEING
24 CONCERNED TO BE LABELLED A FOOL.
25
26
27 On Friday 20 June 2025 at 03:02:04 pm AEST, (Shared) FOI & IPS Mailbox <[email protected]> wrote:
28
29
30 Good afternoon,
31
32 Thank you for your enquiry to the Office of the Official Secretary to the Governor-General. We
33 have investigated your query and offer the following information.
34
35 Our Office does not have a transcript of the proceedings. However, the swearing in at
36 Government House was live streamed by ABC News and can be viewed on YouTube;
37 see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0wQ4RgRUII4. For the 2022 video,
38 see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MVMycRdtv24.
39
40 Documents relating to the swearing in and opening of parliament are gazetted on the Australian
41 Federal Register of Legislation (www.legislation.gov.au); some are also published on the
42 Governor-General’s website (see https://www.gg.gov.au/sites/default/files/2022-
43 05/20220523%20Documents%20relating%20to%20the%20swearing-
44 in%20of%20new%20government.pdf for documents relating to the 2022 swearing in,
45 and https://www.gg.gov.au/sites/default/files/2025-
46 05/250522%20Documents%20relating%20to%20the%20Opening%20of%20Parliament.pdf for
47 documents relating to the 2025 swearing in.
48
49 Regarding the comments of the then Official Secretary in 2022, it should be noted that any
50 reference to an “interim” government was not an official declaration of the system in place at the
51 time; it seems most likely he simply misspoke.
52
53 I hope this information is helpful.
54
26-8-2025 Page 79 © 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 80

1 Kind regards,
2
3 Sarah

Contact Officer
Office of the Official Secretary to the Governor-General
W: www.gg.gov.au
Do you know someone who could be considered for an award in the Australian honours
system? Click here to nominate.
4
5 From: (Shared) FOI & IPS Mailbox <[email protected]>
6 Sent: Thursday, 12 June 2025 5:04 PM
7 To: [email protected]
8 Cc: (Shared) FOI & IPS Mailbox <[email protected]>
9 Subject: RE: Gerrit Hendrik Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. - RE: repeat request-transcript of 22 May
10 2025 as well as 12 May 2025 swearing in [SEC=OFFICIAL]
11
12 Good afternoon,
13
14 I refer to your email of 8 June 2025 in which you make a request to the Office of the Official
15 Secretary to the Governor-General.
16
17 Your request has been received, and we are working to investigate your query. We will provide
18 you with a response as soon as possible.
19
20 Kind regards,
21
Contact Officer
Office of the Official Secretary to the Governor-General
W: www.gg.gov.au
Do you know someone who could be considered for an award in the Australian honours
system? Click here to nominate.
22
23 From: [email protected] <[email protected]>
24 Sent: Sunday, 8 June 2025 8:32 PM
25 To: (Shared) FOI & IPS Mailbox <[email protected]>
26 Subject: Gerrit Hendrik Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. - RE: repeat request-transcript of 22 May 2025
27 as well as 12 May 2025 swearing in
28
29 Your Full Name
30 Gerrit Hendrik Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.
31
32 Your E-mail
33 [email protected]
34
35 Phone
36 +61431940202
37
38 Correspondence for
39 Freedom of Information
40
41 Subject
42 repeat request-transcript of 22 May 2025 as well as 12 May 2025 swearing in
43
44 Message
26-8-2025 Page 80 © 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 81

1 As per previous request:

2 As a self-educated constitutionalist I desire to have the transcript of the entire process
3 (including what the Official Secretary stated prior to the swearing in) of those who were
4 sworn in as Ministers both in the 22 May 2022 as well as in the 12 May 2025 procedure. I
5 notice for example, at least as I understood it, that the Official Secretary in 2022 referred to
6 "interim" government. My understanding is that there is no such system as "interim
7 government" as the moment a person is commissioned for a portfolio then this remains
8 applicable unless and until the G-G commission another person, even years later, subject to
9 s64.
10 QUOTE 2 Governor-General
11 A Governor-General appointed by the Queen shall be Her Majesty’s representative in the
12 Commonwealth, and shall have and may exercise in the Commonwealth during the
13 Queen’s pleasure, but subject to this Constitution, such powers and functions of the Queen
14 as Her Majesty may be pleased to assign to him.
15 END QUOTE
16 AGAIN "but subject to this Constitution"!
17 If no appropriate response is provided than I intend to pursue a formal complaint!
18
19 2025.06.2123h41m0s-Flag G. H. Schorel-Hlavka with Lawyer Byrt.png
20 38.3 kB
21 END QUOTE EMAIL 22-6-2025
22
23 QUOTE EMAIL 20-6-2025
24 REPLY AND RESPONSE -Re: Gerrit Hendrik Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. - RE: repeat request-
25 transcript of 22 May 2025 as well as 12 May 2025 swearing in [SEC=OFFICIAL]
26
27 Mr Gerrit H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.
28 From:[email protected]
29 To:(Shared) FOI & IPS Mailbox
30 Cc:Gerrit Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.
31 Fri, 20 June at 7:57 pm
32 Sarah,
33
34 to be very honest your response is probably the best I ever received in response to a
35 request. I thank you very much for doing so.
36
37 I am a self-educated constitutionalist and defeated in AEC v Schorel-Hlavka the
38 Commonwealth DPP and the 9 Attorney Generals in August 2005 that "AVERMENT"
39 cannot be relied upon on constitutional grounds and then on 19 July 2006
40 comprehensively defeated the Commonwealth Dpp and the 9 Attorney Generals on all
41 other constitutional and legal issues I had filed and served upon all of them, without any
42 challenging any of my constitutional issues raised in the NOTICE OF
43 CONSTITUTIONAL MATTERS and/or the 409 pages written submissions named
44 ADDRESS TO THE COURT
45
46 The Governor-General is not only representing the Monarch Commonwealth of
47 Australia Constitution Act 1900 (UK):
48 END QUOTE
49 2 Governor-General
50 A Governor-General appointed by the Queen shall be Her
51 Majesty’s representative in the Commonwealth, and shall have and
52 may exercise in the Commonwealth during the Queen’s pleasure,
53 but subject to this Constitution, such powers and functions of the
26-8-2025 Page 81 © 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 82

1 Queen as Her Majesty may be pleased to assign to him.

2 END QUOTE
3
4 but is constitutionally also the head of the government and Ministers (including the Prime
5 Minister) are "constitutional advisers" to the Governor-General and the High Court of
6 Australia is "part of the constitution"
7
8 HANSARD 4-3-1891 Constitution Convention Debates
9 QUOTE Sir HENRY PARKES:
10 The resolutions conclude:
11 An executive, consisting of a governor-general, and such persons as may from
12 time to time be appointed as his advisers, such persons sitting in Parliament, and
13 whose term of office shall depend upon their possessing the confidence of the
14 house of representatives expressed by the support of the majority.
15 What is meant by that is simply to call into existence a ministry to conduct the
16 affairs of the new nation as similar as it can be to the ministry of England-a body of
17 constitutional advisers who shall stand as nearly as possible in the same relation to
18 the representative of the Crown here [start page 27] a her Majesty's imperial
19 advisers stand is relation to the Crown directly. These, then, are the principles
20 which my resolutions seek to lay down as a foundation, as I have already stated, for
21 the new super structure, my object being to invite other gentlemen to work upon
22 this foundation so as to best advance the ends we have in view.
23 END QUOTE
24
25 HANSARD 17-2-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
26 QUOTE Mr. OCONNOR.-
27 We must remember that in any legislation of the Commonwealth we are dealing
28 with the Constitution. Our own Parliaments do as they think fit almost within any
29 limits. In this case the Constitution will be above Parliament, and Parliament
30 will have to conform to it.
31 END QUOTE
32 .
33 HANSARD 9-2-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
34 QUOTE
35 Mr. HIGGINS.-No, because the Constitution is not passed by the Parliament.
36 END QUOTE
37
38 HANSARD 12-4-1897 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National
39 Australasian Convention)
40 QUOTE Mr. BARTON:
41 It is provided that instead of, as before, the Parliament having power to
42 constitute a judiciary, there shall be a Supreme Court, to be called the High
43 Court of Australia, as a part of the Constitution-that I believe to be an
44 improvement-and other courts which the Parliament may from time to time
45 create or invest with federal jurisdiction.
46 END QUOTE
47
48 The link that the Chief Justice can represent the Governor-General may be appropriate
49 for swearing in Members of Parliament however this may clash with the "separation of
50 powers" as if there is a dispute then the High Court of Australia may be confronted with
51 that it would have to adjudicate upon any decision the chief Justice may have made in
52 his/her position assisting the Governor-General in swearing in and/or other matters.
53
26-8-2025 Page 82 © 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 83

1 It is not to say that having a Chief Justice swearing in may not be appropriate, as being a
2 judge it may be more appropriate than someone who lacks such position, however in
3 regard of other matters then the Chief Justice may be bias in his/her conduct and places
4 his impartiality in question.
5
6 Ordinary a "Prime Minister' is no more but a Minister of the Crown to exercise one or
7 more portfolios listed within Section 51 &52. As the Governor-General is technically the
8 head of the executive (government) a Prime Minister cannot be so. In my view it would
9 be highly inappropriate or the Governor-General to for example apply section 126
10 regarding any Minister!
11 The Governor-General is supposed to be (as the Framers of the Constitution made clear)
12 the Chief Executive Officer and having a Minister representing the Governor-General
13 may clash where this may relate to the supervision of the Minister regarding any alleged
14 wrongdoing.
15
16 Neither in my view is the purported Office of the Prime Minister (often wrongly referred
17 to as Office of the Prime Minister and Cabinet) a constitutional valid portfolio as it really
18 is the Prime Minister serving himself and not the constitution.
19
20 The Framers of the Constitution provided for a 6-year cycle for Senators to serve and 3-
21 years for the House of Representatives. This is to be calculated from the return of the
22 writs. As such 2 cycles of 3-years are as the one 6-year cycle in length. It means also that
23 no Senator/Member of the House of Representatives can be paid unless the person has
24 been sworn in and it doesn't apply from the date an election was held. For this the
25 RETURN OF THE WRITS are held by the Framers of the Constitution to be the date to
26 calculate the 3 year or 6-year period. At times a Senator/Member vacate a seat and then
27 the balance of that remaining seat is applied from when the person took the
28 oath/affirmation.
29
30 For clarity the Governor-General represent the Monarch while within the borders of the
31 Commonwealth of Australia and not beyond it. Hence, a Governor-General has no legal
32 authority beyond the borders of the Commonwealth of Australia. Whenever a Governor-
33 General is outside the Commonwealth of Australia then the Governor-General from
34 his/her own pocket must pay for the "acting Governor-General" this the Framers of the
35 Constitution made very clear.
36 It should be understood that the borders of the Commonwealth of Australia refer to the
37 borders of the "political Union" named Commonwealth of Australia and doesn't mean
38 that the Commonwealth of Australia it is a country at all!
39
40 Hansard 2-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
41 QUOTE
42 Mr. SYMON ( South Australia ).-
43 In the preamble honorable members will find that what we desire to do is to unite in
44 one indissoluble Federal Commonwealth -that is the political Union-"under the
45 Crown of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland , and under the
46 Constitution hereby established." Honorable members will therefore see that the
47 application of the word Commonwealth is to the political Union which is sought to
48 be established. It is not intended there to have any relation whatever to the name of
49 the country or nation which we are going to create under that Union . The second
50 part of the preamble goes on to say that it is expedient to make provision for the
51 admission of other colonies into the Commonwealth. That is, for admission into
26-8-2025 Page 83 © 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 84

1 this political Union, which is not a republic, which is not to be called a

2 dominion, kingdom, or empire, but is to be a Union by the name of
3 "Commonwealth," and I do not propose to interfere with that in the slightest
4 degree.
5 END QUOTE
6
7 As for the issue of deploying Australian armed forces into a war environment, such as
8 Afghanistan, Iraq, Ukraine, Vietnam, etc, I request you to provide details/information
9 when a Governor-General published in the Gazette a DECLARATION OF
10 WAR naming each such country? While Anthony Albanese and Penny Wong as I
11 understood it claimed to approve of the bombing of Iraq but not supporting the US reality
12 is that the support of any warmongering is as much legally liable as a get away driver of a
13 murderous bank holdup. Hence, no Governor-General and can stand by to permit any
14 Minister to defy the Governor-General’s authority and must terminate anyone acting in
15 violation of the Governor-General’s prerogative powers as well as committing
16 TREASON for violating the legal principles embedded in the constitution and like other
17 former Ministers and any collaborator be held legally accountable. A Governor-General
18 who fails to act “but subject to this constitution” I view no longer has the credibility to
19 remain Governor-General!
20
21 Hansard 8-2-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
22 QUOTE
23 Clause 112-The Commonwealth shall protect every state against invasion, and, on the
24 application of the Executive Government of a state, against domestic violence.
25 Mr. GORDON (South Australia).-I beg to move-
26 That the word "invasion" (line 2) be struck out, and the word "attack" substituted.
27 Why should the protection of the Commonwealth be confined only to invasion? We are
28 not likely ever to be invaded, but we are exceedingly likely to be attacked.
29 Mr. BARTON.-Any attack is an invasion in the sense in which the word is used in this
30 clause.
31 Mr. GORDON.-The gunning by a cruiser standing off a city is not an invasion, but it is
32 an attack.
33 Mr. BARTON.-It is an attack which is part of an invasion; if the attack succeeds invasion
34 follows.
35 Mr. GORDON.-I think "attack" is very much better. Of course, if the word "invasion"
36 covers the ground, well and good; but while "attack" covers "invasion," does "invasion"
37 cover "attack"? Originally, the amendment I intended to move used both the words
38 "attack" and "invasion."
39 Mr. REID.-You can repel an invasion 100 miles from the coast.
40 Mr. GORDON.-But how does the honorable member know that an invasion is intended?
41 [start page 692]
42 Mr. REID.-If there was a war between two countries, and a cruiser from the one country
43 was approaching the other, you would know that it was not on a visit of brotherly love.
44 Mr. GORDON.-They may not intend to invade the chances are that they do not intend to
45 invade, but to attack.
46 Mr. BARTON.-Do you think that the Commonwealth, if a hostile fleet appeared for the
47 purpose of attacking, and not invading, would keep the batteries silent and the Australian
48 fleet at anchor?
49 Mr. GORDON.-Something may turn upon this. By this clause the Common-wealth is
50 only bound to protect every state against invasion. If the Commonwealth neglected its
51 duty, and South Australia was invaded, South Australia would have a claim against the

26-8-2025 Page 84 © 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 85

1 Commonwealth. But, it appears to me, that it should have an equal claim against the
2 Commonwealth if it was simply attacked, and not invaded. However, if the leader of the
3 Convention thinks that "invasion" covers "attack," I am willing to leave the matter to the
4 Drafting Committee, but I have some doubt on the point.
5 Mr. BARTON (New South Wales).-I am perfectly satisfied that when the guns are
6 booming there will be no discussion about the meaning of the two words.
7 Mr. GORDON.-Ought the construction of this Act to be left until the guns are booming?
8 I thought the object was to prevent the guns booming at all.
9 Mr. HOLDER (South Australia).-I think there is something in the point raised by my
10 honorable friend (Mr. Gordon). We have previously used separately the terms "naval" and
11 "military." Now, an attack would be naval, while an invasion would be military.
12 The CHAIRMAN.-Does the honorable member (Mr. Gordon) press his amendment?
13 Mr. GORDON.-No. If the leader of the Convention relies on his booming guns I am
14 content.
15 The amendment was withdrawn.
16 END QUOTE
17
18 Clearly, the mere entering foreign waters of a country without prior consent can be deemed
19 a “DECLARATION OF WAR” and likewise so supporting any war mongering of
20 another country means that the Commonwealth of Australia by this in fact declared war
21 against the country it supports military action against, and it becomes TREASON where
22 the no DECLARATION OF WAR was published in the Gazette naming the
23 county/countries concerned. By such unconstitutional conduct those Ministers involved
24 have also violated Section 44 to be or be seen to clad themselves as being party of a
25 foreign country as if they have an alliange with a foreign country against a foreign country
26 that is deemed to the Commonwealth of Australia a “friendly” country where the
27 Governor-General has not previously published in the Gazette a DECLARATION OF
28 WAR naming that country against which Ministers and their collaborators are aiding.
29 Also, in 2022 just after the federal political election I understood Anthony Albanese to
30 have travelled to Ukraine and promised to supply funds, military assistance, etc, this even
31 so he was not a Minister of Defence, Minister of Foreign Affairs, etc.
32 Neither (regardless of what convention may be claimed to exist, as conventions never
33 override legal principles embedded in the constitution) can any belonging or pretended
34 belonging to ANZUS, NATO, etc in any manner override legal principles embedded in the
35 constitution!
36 The ‘Office of the Prime Minister’ is no more but to glorify a person to serve himself
37 without any portfolio relating to Section 51 & 52 of the Constitution.
38 It should be clear that the Governor-General must be and be seen impartial both as a
39 Governor-General as well as a Governor-General in Council and so likewise the Ministers
40 serving as “constitutional advisers” to the Governor-General/Governor-General in
41 Council and as such the Governor-General ought to have terminated any Minister
42 commission where a Minister is spruiking political bias instead of be and be seen as being
43 IMPARTIAL in dealing with any portfolio and refrain as Minister to cary on about his/her
44 political views.
45
46 The Framers of the Constitution made clear that a Governor-General was to be
47 recommended by the "Home Office" (10 Downing Street, London) to the Monarch and
48 the alternative was that the Governor-General could be elected by Australian electors. As
49 such, an Australian (prime) Minister lack constitutional authority to recommend to the
50 Monarch a person to be commissioned to be a Governor-General.
51
26-8-2025 Page 85 © 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 86

1 Hence, I request you to provide me with the relevant documentation/details/information

2 regarding current and previous commissions as such.
3
4 I understand that the Governor-General invited King Charles to be King of Australia,
5 however as the Commonwealth of Australia is not a country and the Governor-General is
6 a servant of the Monarch then the King can only be the King over the Commonwealth of
7 Australia, as it is a "political Union" not a country.
8
9 Consider the European Union is a "political Union" but not a country!
10
11 While the High Court of Australia in Sue v Hill pretended otherwise, I challenged this
12 in AEC v Schorel-Hlavka and again neither the Commonwealth DPP and/or any of the 9
13 Attorney Generals disputed this.
14 As the High Court of Australia is a "part of the constitution" and not above it then the
15 High Court of Australia lacks any constitutional judicial powers to pretend the
16 Commonwealth of Australia is some independent nation!
17
18 Despite HCA judgment in Sue v Hill:
19
20 Hansard 3-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
21 QUOTE
22 Mr. SYMON.-There is no man in Australia who is more profoundly versed in
23 constitutional law than Mr. Isaacs, and he knows that every point and every
24 question has been the subject of more or less debate and discussion, and will be
25 until the end of time.
26 The words "subject," "person," and "citizen" can be made subjects of
27 controversy at all times if occasion requires it. At the same time, it does not
28 affect the principle that there should be a definition of "citizen," either in the
29 form suggested by Dr. Quick or by Mr. Barton. I will be quite content. The
30 principle is what I am contending for: The principle that our labours will be
31 incomplete unless we make the rights of citizens or subjects in one state to extend
32 to the citizens of another state who may go from one state
33 to another. There ought to be no possibility of any state imposing a
34 disqualification on a person in the holding of property, or in the enjoyment of
35 any civil right, simply because be happens to belong to another state. That
36 would not give us the uniformity of citizenship we all desire, and therefore I am
37 willing that the word "citizenship" should be defined as Dr. Quick suggests, with
38 perhaps some modification. I also support the suggestion from the Chair that the
39 two propositions might be considered together. The clause would do something to
40 meet the difficulty, not perhaps finally or conclusively, as Mr. Isaacs, said, but at
41 any rate to a large extent and almost completely.
42 [start page 1788]
43 END QUOTE
44
45 Clearly, as I successfully litigated in AEC v Schorel-Hlavka on 19 July 2006 that
46 “citizenship” is about the place of abode and nothing to do with “nationality”!
47
48 HANSARD 2-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
49 QUOTE
50 Mr. BARTON.-I did not say that. I say that our real status is as
51 subjects, and that we are all alike subjects of the British Crown.
52 END QUOTE
26-8-2025 Page 86 © 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 87

1
2 Hansard 2-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
3 QUOTE
4 Mr. SYMON.-Very likely not. What I want to know is, if there is anybody who
5 will come under the operation of the law, so as to be a citizen of the
6 Commonwealth, who would not also be entitled to be a citizen of the state? There
7 ought to be no opportunity for such discrimination as would allow a section of a
8 state to remain outside the pale of the Commonwealth, except with regard to
9 legislation as to aliens. Dual citizenship exists, but it is not dual citizenship of
10 persons, it is dual citizenship in each person. There may be two men-Jones and
11 Smith-in one state, both of whom are citizens of the state, but one only is a
12 citizen of the Commonwealth. That would not be the dual citizenship meant.
13 What is meant is a dual citizenship in Mr. Trenwith and myself. That is to say,
14 I am a citizen of the state and I am also a citizen of the Commonwealth; that is
15 the dual citizenship. That does not affect the operation of this clause at all. But if
16 we introduce this clause, it is open to the whole of the powerful criticism of Mr.
17 O'Connor and those who say that it is putting on the face of the Constitution an
18 unnecessary provision, and one which we do not expect will be exercised adversely
19 or improperly, and, therefore, it is much better to be left out. Let us, in dealing with
20 this question, be as careful as we possibly, can that we do not qualify
21 the citizenship of this Commonwealth in any way or exclude anybody [start page
22 1764] from it, and let us do that with precision and clearness. As a citizen of a
23 state I claim the right to be a citizen of the Commonwealth. I do not want to
24 place in the hands of the Commonwealth Parliament, however much I may be
25 prepared to trust it, the right of depriving me of citizenship. I put this only as an
26 argument, because no one would anticipate such a thing, but the Commonwealth
27 Parliament might say that nobody possessed of less than £1,000 a year should be
28 a citizen of the Federation. You are putting that power in the hands of Parliament.
29 Mr. HIGGINS.-Why not?
30 Mr. SYMON.-I would not put such a power in the hands of any Parliament. We
31 must rest this Constitution on a foundation that we understand, and we mean
32 that every citizen of a state shall be a citizen of the Commonwealth, and that
33 the Commonwealth shall have no right to withdraw, qualify, or restrict those
34 rights of citizenship, except with regard to one particular set of people who are
35 subject to disabilities, as aliens, and so on.
36 END QUOTE
37
38 About FREEDOM OF SPEECH and the mis/disinformation issues:
39

40 FREEDOM OF SPEECH,
41 etc
42
43 HANSARD 22-4-1897 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National
44 Australasian Convention)
45 QUOTE
46 Mr. BARTON: Let this speech do for the referendum also.
47 Mr. TRENWITH: I say with these evidences of the desire on the part of the
48 people for more freedom, for greater facilities for giving effect to the popular
26-8-2025 Page 87 © 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 88

1 will, we ought to make provision in this Constitution by which the will of the
2 people can become law. If we do that we shall be doing something which will
3 make it more certain that this Constitution will be adopted by the people.
4 END QUOTE
5 .
6 Hansard 1-2-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
7 QUOTE Mr. OCONNER (New South Wales).-
8 Because, as has been said before, it is [start page 357] necessary not only that
9 the administration of justice should be pure and above suspicion, but that it
10 should be beyond the possibility of suspicion;
11 END QUOTE
12
13 HANSARD 27-1-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
14 QUOTE
15 Mr. BARTON.-Our civil rights are not in the hands of any Government, but
16 the rights of the Crown in prosecuting criminals are.
17 END QUOTE
18
19 The following will also make clear that the Framers of the Constitution intended to
20 have CIVIL RIGHTS and LIBERTIES principles embedded in the Constitution;
21
22 HANSARD 17-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
23 QUOTE Mr. CLARK.-
24 for the protection of certain fundamental rights and liberties which
25 every individual citizen is entitled to claim that the federal government
26 shall take under its protection and secure to him.
27 END QUOTE
28 .
29 HANSARD18-2-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
30 QUOTE Mr. ISAACS.-
31 The right of a citizen of this great country, protected by the implied
32 guarantees of its Constitution,
33 END QUOTE
34
35 HANSARD 17-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
36 QUOTE Mr. DEAKIN.-
37 What a charter of liberty is embraced within this Bill-of political
38 liberty and religious liberty-the liberty and the means to achieve all to
39 which men in these days can reasonably aspire. A charter of liberty is
40 enshrined in this Constitution, which is also a charter of peace-of peace,
41 order, and good government for the whole of the peoples whom it will
42 embrace and unite.
43 END QUOTE
44
45 HANSARD 17-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
46 QUOTE
47 Mr. SYMON (South Australia).- We who are assembled in this
48 Convention are about to commit to the people of Australia a new charter
49 of union and liberty; we are about to commit this new Magna Charta
50 for their acceptance and confirmation, and I can conceive of nothing
51 of greater magnitude in the whole history of the peoples of the world
52 than this question upon which we are about to invite the peoples of
53 Australia to vote. The Great Charter was wrung by the barons of England
26-8-2025 Page 88 © 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 89

1 from a reluctant king. This new charter is to be given by the people of

2 Australia to themselves.
3 END QUOTE
4
5 Hansard 17-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
6 QUOTE Mr. BARTON.-
7 Providing, as this Constitution does, for a free people to elect a free
8 Parliament-giving that people through their Parliament the power of
9 the purse-laying at their mercy from day to day the existence of any
10 Ministry which dares by corruption, or drifts through ignorance into,
11 the commission of any act which is unfavorable to the people having
12 this security, it must in its very essence be a free Constitution.
13 Whatever any one may say to the contrary that is secured in the very
14 way in which the freedom of the British Constitution is secured. It is
15 secured by vesting in the people, through their representatives, the
16 power of the purse, and I venture [start page 2477] to say there is no
17 other way of securing absolute freedom to a people than that, unless
18 you make a different kind of Executive than that which we
19 contemplate, and then overload your Constitution with legislative
20 provisions to protect the citizen from interference.
21 Under this Constitution he is saved from every kind of interference.
22 Under this Constitution he has his voice not only in the, daily
23 government of the country, but in the daily determination of the
24 question of whom is the Government to consist. There is the
25 guarantee of freedom in this Constitution. There is the guarantee
26 which none of us have sought to remove, but every one has sought to
27 strengthen. How we or our work can be accused of not providing for
28 the popular liberty is something which I hope the critics will now
29 venture to explain, and I think I have made their work difficult for
30 them. Having provided in that way for a free Constitution, we have
31 provided for an Executive which is charged with the duty of
32 maintaining the provisions of that Constitution; and, therefore, it can
33 only act as the agents of the people. We have provided for a Judiciary,
34 which will determine questions arising under this Constitution, and
35 with all other questions which should be dealt with by a Federal
36 Judiciary and it will also be a High Court of Appeal for all courts in
37 the states that choose to resort to it. In doing these things, have we not
38 provided, first, that our Constitution shall be free: next, that its
39 government shall be by the will of the people, which is the just result of
40 their freedom: thirdly, that the Constitution shall not, nor shall any of
41 its provisions, be twisted or perverted, inasmuch as a court appointed by
42 their own Executive, but acting independently, is to decide what is a
43 perversion of its provisions? We can have every faith in the constitution of
44 that tribunal. It is appointed as the arbiter of the Constitution. It is
45 appointed not to be above the Constitution, for no citizen is above it,
46 but under it; but it is appointed for the purpose of saying that those
26-8-2025 Page 89 © 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 90

1 who are the instruments of the Constitution-the Government and the

2 Parliament of the day-shall not become the masters of those whom, as
3 to the Constitution, they are bound to serve. What I mean is this: That
4 if you, after making a Constitution of this kind, enable any
5 Government or any Parliament to twist or infringe its provisions, then
6 by slow degrees you may have that Constitution-if not altered in
7 terms-so whittled away in operation that the guarantees of freedom
8 which it gives your people will not be maintained; and so, in the
9 highest sense, the court you are creating here, which is to be the final
10 interpreter of that Constitution, will be such a tribunal as will
11 preserve the popular liberty in all these regards, and will prevent,
12 under any pretext of constitutional action, the Commonwealth from
13 dominating the states, or the states from usurping the sphere of the
14 Commonwealth. Having provided for all these things, I think this
15 Convention has done well.
16 END QUOTE
17
18 Hansard 12-3-1891 Constitution convention Debates
19 QUOTE Mr. ADYE DOUGLAS:
20 It is to be hoped that when such a proposal goes before the home Government
21 some objection will be taken to it. I could understand that in dealing with foreign
22 nations we should put duties upon their goods, and I should expect that we
23 ourselves should be treated by them in the same way; but when the mother
24 country takes all our productions without imposing the slightest duty it seems to
25 me not a very generous proposal that we should raise a barrier against the
26 productions of the mother country and treat her as a foreign nation That is very
27 loyal indeed; in fact I am astonished at the loyalty of this Convention. I am not
28 going to inflict upon the Convention my opinions with respect to loyalty; but
29 when I hear that we are to be deprived of the Governor appointed by the Queen,
30 that we are to abolish the power of veto, and that we are not to treat with the
31 mother country upon fair and equal terms as regards fiscal matters, I am inclined
32 to ask what hon. gentlemen think about their loyalty, and to say that their loyalty
33 is a sham, and nothing else. How was I treated the other day? When walking
34 down Circular Quay, I happened to see some goods that were imported, and some
35 man said to me, "That is the effect of free-trade." I said, "I am a free-trader"; to
36 which he replied, "You ought to be shot down, and I would shoot you down if I
37 had the opportunity. I am a protectionist." Is that the sort of conduct we
38 are to receive here because we have freedom of speech and
39 freedom of opinion? Are free-traders to be crushed down because-
40 END QUOTE
41
42 Hansard 5-3-1891 Constitution convention Debates
43 QUOTE Captain RUSSELL:
44 It is a matter for social dealing. It is a matter with which men will
45 deal rather through municipalities than through a great federation in
46 advancing, what I believe it is necessary we should advance, the true
47 liberties and freedom of the people.
48 END QUOTE
49

26-8-2025 Page 90 © 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 91

1 Therefore, Scott Morrison and/or Anthony Albanese colluding with others to

2 deny FREEDOM OF SPEECH I view was TREASON as it was and remains to be a
3 legal principle embedded in the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act
4 1900 (UK).
5
6 Hansard 8-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
7 QUOTE
8 Mr. GLYNN.-I think they would, because it is fixed in the Constitution.
9 There is no special court, but the general courts would undoubtedly protect
10 the states. What Mr. Isaacs seeks to do is to prevent the question of ultra
11 vires arising after a law has been passed.
12 [start page 2004]
13 Mr. ISAACS.-No. If it is ultra vires of the Constitution it would, of course, be
14 invalid.
15 END QUOTE
16
17 Hansard 9-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National
18 Australasian Convention)
19 QUOTE
20 Mr. DEAKIN (Victoria).-The position of my honorable and learned friend
21 (Mr. [start page 2092] Higgins) may be perfectly correct. It may be that without any
22 special provision the practice of the High Court, when declaring an Act ultra
23 vires, would be that such a declaration applied only to the part which
24 trespassed beyond the limits of the Constitution. If that were so, it would be a
25 general principle applicable to the interpretation of the whole of the Constitution.
26 END QUOTE
27 .
28 Hansard 1-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National
29 Australasian Convention)
30 QUOTE
31 Mr. GORDON.-Well, I think not. I am sure that if the honorable
32 member applies his mind to the subject he will see it is not abstruse. If a
33 statute of either the Federal or the states Parliament be taken into court the
34 court is bound to give an interpretation according to the strict hyper-
35 refinements of the law. It may be a good law passed by "the sovereign will
36 of the people," although that latter phrase is a common one which I do not
37 care much about. The court may say-"It is a good law, but as it technically
38 infringes on the Constitution we will have to wipe it out." As I have said,
39 the proposal I support retains some remnant of parliamentary sovereignty,
40 leaving it to the will of Parliament on either side to attack each other's
41 laws.
42 END QUOTE
43
44 HANSARD 10-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National
45 Australasian Convention)
46 QUOTE Mr. BARTON (New South Wales).-
47 Then, again, there is the prerogative right to declare war and peace,
48 an adjunct of which it is that the Queen herself, or her representative,
49 where Her Majesty is not present, holds that prerogative. No one
50 would ever dream of saying that the Queen would declare war or
51 peace without the advice of a responsible Minister.
26-8-2025 Page 91 © 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 92

1 END QUOTE
2
3 HANSARD 6-3-1891 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National
4 Australasian Convention)
5 QUOTE
6 Mr. DEAKIN: We can make an exception in favour of imperial
7 interests. We have no desire to interfere with the imperial prerogative
8 in matters of war and peace!
9 END QUOTE
10
11 Above are merely some of the numerous constitutional issues that are in question!
12
13 Uniform Tax \case, 1942 (65CLR 373 at 408) 23-7-1942
14 QUOTE
15 Common expressions such as: 'The Courts have declared a statute invalid',"
16 says Chief Justice Latham, "sometimes lead to misunderstanding. A pretended law
17 made in excess of power is not and never has been a law at all. Anybody in the
18 country is entitled to disregard it. Naturally, he will feel safer if he has a
19 decision of a court in his favor, but such a decision is not an element, which
20 produces invalidity in any law. The law is not valid until a court pronounces against
21 it - and thereafter invalid. If it is beyond power it is invalid ab initio.
22 END QUOTE
23
24 Re Wakim; Ex parte McNally; Re Wakim; Ex parte Darvall; Re Brown; Ex parte Amann;
25 Spi [1999] HCA 27 (17 June 1999)
26 QUOTE
27 For constitutional purposes, they are a nullity. No doctrine of res judicata or issue
28 estoppel can prevail against the Constitution. Mr Gould is entitled to disregard the
29 orders made in Gould v Brown. No doubt, as Latham CJ said of invalid legislation,
30 "he will feel safer if he has a decision of a court in his favour". That is because those
31 relying on the earlier decision may seek to enforce it against Mr Gould.
32 END QUOTE
33
34 As I representing myself succeeded in constitutional issues and so unchallenged then I
35 view the Governor-General must ensure to act "subject to this constitution" including
36 taking appropriate action against any Minister failing to act within the true meaning and
37 application of the legal principles embedded in the Commonwealth of Australia
38 Constitution Act 1900 (UK), this includes the purported (unconstitutional) State/Territorial
39 "covid-19 scam" MANDATES, the unconstitutional "compulsory" voting in political
40 elections, etc. This, as the Governor-General as the Chief Executive Officer must ensure to
41 abide by "subject to this constitution".
42
43 The mere fact that in my view even judges of the High Court of Australia have conducted
44 themselves in a TREASONOUS manner cannot excuse them as to an appropriate criminal
45 investigation!
46
47 In my view there should be an IMPARTIAL criminal investigation to be held, preferrable
48 also a ROYAL COMMISSION which investigate all aspects of my COMPLAINT(S).
49
50 Matters stated in this part of COMPLAINT are not set out in any order of
51 importance/priority.
52
26-8-2025 Page 92 © 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 93

1 https://maatsmethod.substack.com/p/015-qld-supreme-court-finds-vaccine
2 015 - QLD Supreme Court finds vaccine mandates Unlawful
3 QUOTE My 10-6-2025 postings
4 For decades I understand lawyers/judges claiming that the Commonwealth of
5 Australia has no ‘Bill of Rights’ and this may underline their incompetence in
6 understanding what is constitutionally applicable because the Commonwealth of
7 Australia Constitution Act 1900 (UK) itself has legal principles embedded in it being
8 a ‘Bill of Rights’ and providing legal issues such as FREEDOM OF SPEECH. Also,
9 since 11 November 1910 all State land Taxation (including “council rates” became
10 unconstitutional! Despite that lawyer Anne Twomey appears to claim in a video that
11 States do not have “separation of powers” (see her video about a Tasmania judge)
12 reality is that States/Territories are subject to separation of powers and for example
13 the so called “infringement Court” is unconstitutional. (see: In my view Professor
14 Anne Twomey is wrong to claim that “separation of powers” doesn’t exist
15 regarding the states, as the Letters Patent dictates an “IMPARTIAL
16 administration of justice”!
17 You can download the document from:
18 https://www.scribd.com/document/781993946/20241020-Mr-G-H-Schorel-Hlavka-
19 O-W-B-to-Professor-Anne-Twomey)
20 Are you aware the State of Victoria never had/has a valid State constitution?
21 Did you now that the 2001 purported federal election never was lawful? (I proved
22 that in court!)
23 Did you know that the invasions into Afghanistan and/or Iraq by Australian Troops
24 were unconstitutional?
25 Did you know there is no such thing as a “Labor Government” and/or a “Coalition
26 Government” this as electors never can elect who shall be in Government?
27 Did you know that Ministers are to be “constitutional advisers to the Governor-
28 General and on his/her behalf manage certain portfolios?
29 Did you know that any purported commission by the governor-General as to
30 portfolios only become valid if published in the Gazette. With former pm Scott
31 Morrison the purported additional portfolios (in secret) were and remains without
32 legal basis and were NULL AND VOID!
33 Did you know that any child (regardless of race) within the legal provisions of the
34 constitution are equal and so also any person naturalised?
35 Did you know that as a ‘quid pro quo’ Australians are entitled to FREE education
36 where then they are (if needed) serve in the Australian Defence force, and as such
37 compulsory/conscripted enlistment is constitutionally valid?
38 Did you know that dual citizenship is a legal principle within the constitution, as it is
39 not a “nationality” but means the abode of the person regardless of his/her
40 nationality?
41 Did you know that the Brits never invaded New Holland (now referred to
42 Commonwealth of Australia)? This as the Dutch already in 1658 claimed New
43 Holland for the Dutch Government! As such, the alleged “invasion day” never
44 occurred!
45 Did you know that the about $39 Billion a year for Australian Aboriginals is
46 unconstitutional as it violates Subsection 51(xxvi) of the constitution?
47 Did you know that “land rights” are a fabrication by the High Court of Australia and
48 not a legal principle in the constitution?
49 Did you know that there is no such country called “Commonwealth of Australia, as it
50 is and remains no more but to be a “political union”! Hence, Australians are and
51 remain to be by nationality “Subjects of the British Crown”?
26-8-2025 Page 93 © 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 94

1 Did you know that a Governor-General can only be appointed by the Monarch on
2 advice of the Home Office or in the alternative is elected by Australians?
3 Did you know that Australia’s financial/armed support for Ukraine is
4 unconstitutional and constitute TREASON, FRAUD, etc?
5 Did you know that when the Governor-General leaves the Commonwealth of
6 Australia then he/she must pay the person serving as ‘acting Governor-General’?
7 Did you know that the Governor-General cannot represent the British Crown outside
8 the Commonwealth of Australia?
9 Did you know that the purported prime Minister Anthony Albanese was not sworn in
10 with a portfolio of “cabinet” but only for the “office of the Prime minister” and as
11 such is no more but a Minister like anyone else in the cabinet?
12 Did you know that “Cabinet” cannot make any decisions regarding any portfolio as
13 only the “responsible Minister” commissioned for a particular portfolio can make the
14 final decision? For this also there is no provision for an “assistant Minister” and/or
15 for a “shadow Minister” within constitutional context!
16 Did you know that to follow the doctrine/legal principles embedded in the
17 constitution the financial Bills (Appropriation/Taxation Bills) should be presented to
18 the Parliament about 6 months before they become applied to the next financial year?
19 Did you know that the so called “mini budget” is unconstitutional?
20 Did you know that constitutionally “income tax” can only be applied as to stages of
21 income on a sliding scale and hence no such thing as ‘non-profit’ and/or ‘not-for-
22 profit’ exclusions can be applied?
23 Did you know that Australia’s purported membership with the World Health
24 Organisation (WHO) with the attached conditions is unconstitutional?
25 So much more to state but you may get the gist that our constitutional rights are
26 squandered by those in the legal profession far too often and twisted and perverted
27 for political purposes!
28 You may find extensive set out at my
29 blog https://www.scribd.com/inspectorrikati and I do not charge for
30 downloading my published documents. As such, it is not for me a money-making
31 scheme!
32 END QUOTE My 10-6-2025 postings
33 And
34 QUOTE My 10-6-2025 postings
35 In my view those who presented the case before the Queensland Supreme Court as
36 well as the judge(s) themselves obviously lacked the knowledge and competence to
37 prosecute the case appropriately. After all, the States/Territories (quasi states) lack
38 the legislative/executive and/or the administrative powers to deal with “man-kind”
39 infectious diseases as they are since 1908 within the exclusive legislative powers of
40 the Commonwealth, and therefore all and any MANDATES were unconstitutional.
41 Moreover, the same applies to measles, polio, influenza (now named by the fake
42 name covid-19). The Commonwealth can only petition a Court of competent
43 jurisdiction AFTER hearing both sides that the Court issue orders against a opponent
44 to require a certain vaccination to be administered. As covid-19 vaccine never was a
45 vaccine in the first place but a “gene therapy” DEPOPULATION “bioweapon” then
46 in reality ever chemist/pharmacist, medical doctor, nurse, etc who injected a person
47 with the fake covid-19 vaccine I view committed violations against bio security
48 legislation this because to use a bioweapon one must be provided with special
49 permission for this! You may find extensive set out at my
50 blog https://www.scribd.com/inspectorrikati and I do not charge for downloading my
51 published documents. In August 2005 I (representing myself) defeated in AEC v
26-8-2025 Page 94 © 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 95

1 Schorel-Hlavka the Commonwealth DPP as to “AVERMENT” that the

2 Commonwealth cannot rely upon this and the Court then ordered the Commonwealth
3 to “file and serve” all material it sought to rely upon as “evidence”. On 19 July 2006
4 Iain representing myself) on 19 July 2006 comprehensively defeated both the
5 Commonwealth DPP as well as the 9 Attorney Generals in both appeals, without any
6 of them to challenge my NOTICE OF CONSTITUTIONAL MATTER and/or the
7 409 pages written submissions ADDRESS TO THE COURT. This included that the
8 “compulsory” part of voting is unconstitutional! That Section 116 of the constitution
9 regarding religion also applies to secular objections, etc.
10 END QUOTE My 10-6-2025 postings
11
12 There is a lot more to it all and I have no objection to discuss matters personally to clarify
13 these and other issues.
14
15 Despite that in June 2007 the Commonwealth provided me with an Age Pension on 16
16 April 2025 Centrelink suspended my Age Pension Payments backdating to 10 April 2025,
17 this even so it had no "evidence" to prove I exceeded any thresholds. As a matter of fact, it
18 claimed that my ANNUAL income is $553.49! It has refused to provide me
19 details/information as to what "information" it claims to rely upon and clearly the
20 Governor-General as the Chief Executive Officer (of the government) therefore should
21 immediately take appropriate action regarding the Minister involved in the portfolio. This
22 in particular where already a Royal Commission regarding ROBODEBT was held
23 previously.
24
25 I have made clear that I make a common law compensation claim $1 billion compensation
26 regarding each Age Pension payment that is denied, as I consider it TREASON as to
27 violating my constitutional rights, etc. After all, I no longer have an Age Pension payment
28 to purchase food, fuel, pay medical doctors and medicine, pay for household expenses, no
29 longer could use it to pay for renewal of registration of the station wagon, etc. As I proved
30 previously, I defeated the 9 Attorney Generals on constitutional and other legal grounds,
31 and I can assure you that this is a disaster made by various Federal governments!
32
33 Again, I value your cooperation so far and it should be very clear that there is a drastic
34 need to rectify all and any constitutional wrongdoings that the Governor-General as Chief
35 Executive Officer needs to attend to.
36
37 Constitutionalist & Consultant
38
39 MAY JUSTICE ALWAYS PREVAIL®
40 Mr. G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B., GUARDIAN
41 (OFFICE-OF-THE-GUARDIAN)
42 107 Graham Road, Viewbank, 3084, Victoria, Australia
43 Ph (International) 61394577209
44 .
45 Email; [email protected]
46
47 The content of this email and any attachments are provided WITHOUT PREJUDICE, unless
48 specifically otherwise stated.
49
50 If you find any typing/grammatical errors then I know you read it, all you now need to do
51 is to consider the content appropriately!

26-8-2025 Page 95 © 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 96

1
2 A FOOL IS A PERSON WHO DOESN'T ASK THE QUESTION BECAUSE OF BEING
3 CONCERNED TO BE LABELLED A FOOL.
4
5 On Friday 20 June 2025 at 03:02:04 pm AEST, (Shared) FOI & IPS Mailbox <[email protected]> wrote:
6 END QUOTE EMAIL 20-6-2025
7
8 It seems to me that I understand/comprehend the true meaning and application of the legal
9 principles embedded in the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900 (UK) regarding
10 certain subject matters better than all Ministers, Governors and Governor-General and their
11 servants/advisers and considering I never had any formal education since arriving in Australia in
12 the English language and hence used my self-professed CRUMMY ENGLISH then it may
13 underline that those with university degrees, etc, may be considerably behind the times to even
14 understand/comprehend the constitution despite the Framers of the Constitution stating:
15
16 Hansard 21-9-1897 Constitution Convention Debates
17 QUOTE
18 The Right Hon. C.C. KINGSTON (South Australia)[9.21]: I trust the Drafting
19 Committee will not fail to exercise a liberal discretion in striking out words which
20 they do not understand, and that they will put in words which can be understood by
21 persons commonly acquainted with the English language.
22 END QUOTE
23
24 Hansard 8-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
25 QUOTE Mr. ISAACS.-
26 We want a people's Constitution, not a lawyers' Constitution.
27 END QUOTE
28
29 Hansard 22-2-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
30 QUOTE Mr. SYMON (South Australia).-
31 That this is not like an Act of Parliament which we are passing. It is not in the position
32 which Mr. Barton has described, of choosing or setting up a code of laws to interpret the
33 common law of England. This Constitution we are framing is not yet passed. It has to
34 be handed over not to a Convention similar to this, not to a small select body of
35 legislators, but to the whole body of the people for their acceptance or rejection. It is
36 the whole body of the people whose understanding you have to bring to bear upon it,
37 and it is the whole body of the people, the more or less instructed body of the people,
38 who have to understand clearly everything in the Constitution, which affects them for
39 weal or woe during the whole time of the existence of this Commonwealth. We cannot
40 have on the platform, when this Constitution is commended to the people, lawyers on
41 both sides, drawing subtle distinctions, which may or may not be appreciated by the
42 people.
43 END QUOTE
44
45 And consider the next one also where it appears that an unlettered person somehow understand/
46 comprehend the true meaning and application of the legal principles embedded in the
47 constitution better then all of them:
48
49 Hansard 19-4-1897 Constitution Convention Debates
50 QUOTE Mr. CARRUTHERS:
51 This is a Constitution which the unlettered people of the community ought to be able
52 to understand.
53 END QUOTE
54
26-8-2025 Page 96 © 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 97

1 Again, I seek details/information as to the above issues raised in particularly also about how a
2 “constitutional adviser” in my view incompetent as a “constitutional adviser” then can be
3 allowed by the Governor-General to claim “My government” (Channel 9 Melbourne about 6pm
4 Tuesday 24-6-2025) as I understood Mr Anthony Albanese (and many others before him) did
5 and how this conflict with the constitution is explained? Remember the Framers of the
6 Constitution stating about “each word”? Also, how can Subsection 51(xxvi) to
7 DISCRIMINATE against a “inferior” “coloured” “alien” “race” also be used against
8 Aboriginals when the Framers of the Constitution made clear all persons born in the
9 Commonwealth of Australia were “equal”? If I were Governor-General I would pursue that
10 every person who is a Minister or a want to be Minister as a “constitutional adviser” proves to
11 be competent in constitutional provisions first of all as to be able to manage a portfolio! After all
12 who wants to have some charlatans wrecking the very system created for the people themselves?
13
14 We need to return to the organics and legal principles embed in of our federal
15 constitution!
16
17 This correspondence is not intended and neither must be perceived to state all issues/details.
18 Awaiting your response, G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. (Gerrit)

19 MAY JUSTICE ALWAYS PREVAIL®

20 (Our name is our motto!)
21 END QUOTE 20250624-Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to (Sarah) Official Secretary to the Governor-
22 General
23
24
25 naa.gov https://www.naa.gov.au › blog › declaration-independence
26 Declaration of independence | naa.gov.au
27 7 Dec 2021 ... With no prospect of Australian 'boots on the ground' against any of
28 these countries, this declaration of war was largely symbolic. That does not ...
29
30
31 Parliament of Australia
32 https://www.aph.gov.au › About_Parliament › Senate › Publications_and_resources › Paper
33 s_and_research › Papers_on_Parliament_and_other_resources › Papers_on_Parliament › 63
34 › c01
35 The Role of Government and Parliament in the Decision to Go to War
36 In September 1939, the Australian Government did not consider it had a choice over
37 whether or not to go to war against Germany. Prime Minister Robert Menzies ...
38
39
40 Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Governor-General_of_Australia
41 Governor-General of Australia - Wikipedia
42 ... declaration of war by the United Kingdom in World War II automatically applied
43 to Australia. However, in 1941 opinion had shifted and the Curtin ...
44
45
46 infrastructure.gov.au
47 https://www.infrastructure.gov.au › sites › default › files › documents › acma2023-e1081-g-h-
48 schorel-hlavka.pdf
49 RE: 20230726-Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to Department of ...

26-8-2025 Page 97 © 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 98

1 21 July 2023 ... Even if the Governor-General had published in the Gazette a
2 DECLARATION OF WAR. 50 naming a particular country then still it has absolutely ...
3
4 Let us never accept some public servant or some Big Tech company to deny us our
5 constitutional “political liberty”/“religious liberty” to suit the Governments WOKE
6 agenda, etc, to pursue the DEPOPULATION of Australians!
7 You can download the document from:
8 https://www.scribd.com/document/661266427/20230726-Mr-G-H-Schorel-Hlavka-O-W-
9 B-to-Department-of-Infrastructure-SUBMISSION-Re-MISINFORMATION-BILL-Etc
10
11 QUOTE 20230726-Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to Department of Infrastructure-SUBMISSION Re
12 MISINFORMATION BILL, etc
13 “Travelling Pete” Anthony Albanese without the Parliament approval even having
14 commenced to it this as the writs were not returned in 2022 already then went to Ukraine and
15 in my view unconstitutionally and without lawful authority was providing financial and other
16 support for the Ukraine NAZI Government to continue its genocide upon ethnic Russian
17 Ukrainians (as they then were)! The Governor-General to my understanding had not
18 published any DECLARATION OF WAR against either Ukraine and/or later against the
19 Russian Federation and as such any military and other financial involvement was
20 unconstitutional.
21 Even if the Governor-General had published in the Gazette a DECLARATION OF WAR
22 naming a particular country then still it has absolutely nothing to do with the (prime) Minister
23 as it would be for the Minister of Defence to pursue matters.
24 Because our constitution limits any spending of taxation (Consolidated Revenue Funds) by
25 having the Parliament passing Appropriation Bills before the commencement of the financial
26 year (now commencing on 1 July of each year) and no Parliament being in in session as the
27 writs had not been returned then any alleged funding and/or provising of military equipment,
28 etc, would be without warrant of law.
29
30 It is totally irrelevant if there has been conventions for a (prime) Minister to do whatever as
31 ultimately conventions cannot override the constitution!
32
33 NATIONAL SECURITY is not served by politician’s violatating the constitution!
34
35 ACMA is not the guardian of the constitution to pursue through backdoor manner conduct
36 against Australians which it cannot lawfull do by itself. ACMA can pursue law enforcement
37 authorities to investigate matters and it then can place matters before the Courts.
38
39 QUOTE (PROVIDED BYY A READER)
40 The first principal doctrine in the Communist Party Case maxim was described by Justice Fullagar as “an
41 elementary rule of constitutional law which has been expressed metaphorically” by saying that “a stream
42 cannot rise higher than its source”, citing Shrimpton v The Commonwealth where it was stated by Dixon J
43 that “an exercise of a power, whether legislative or administrative, cannot rise higher than its source”
44 or “the Parliament cannot recite itself into power.” [Cf. Australian Communist Party v Commonwealth
45 [1951] HCA 5; 83 CLR 1 at p. 258; Shrimpton v The Commonwealth [1945] HCA 4; 69 CLR 613 at p. 630.]
46
47 In British Medical Association v The Commonwealth [1949] HCA 44; 79 CLR 201 at [p293] Webb J
48 To require a person to do something which he may
observed: “

49 lawfully decline to do but only at the sacrifice of the

50 whole or a substantial part of the means of his livelihood
51 would, I think, be to subject him to practical compulsion
26-8-2025 Page 98 © 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 99

1 amounting to conscription [unlawful impressment and

2 press-ganging by force]… If Parliament cannot lawfully
3 do this directly by legal means it cannot lawfully do it
4 indirectly by creating a situation, as distinct from merely
5 taking advantage of one, in which the individual is left no
6 real choice [of abstention] but compliance.” Cf. The Commonwealth
7 of Australia Constitution Act, 1900 [63 & 64 Vict.] (Imp.), Sect. 51 – (xxiiiA.) The provision of maternity
8 allowances, widows’ pensions, child endowment, unemployment, pharmaceutical, sickness and hospital
9 benefits, medical and dental services (but not so as to authorize any form of civil conscription), benefits to
10 students and family allowances.
11 END QUOTE (PROVIDED BYY A READER)
12 END QUOTE 20230726-Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to Department of Infrastructure-SUBMISSION Re
13 MISINFORMATION BILL, etc
14
15
16 Resilience Library https://www.rcrc-resilience-southeastasia.org › wp-
17 content › uploads › 2020 › 04 › Defence-Act-1903-Cth.pdf
18 Defence Act 1903
19 (1) In time of war the Governor-General may, by proclamation, call ...
20 a Proclamation declaring that war no longer exists, see Gazette 1952, p.
21
22 QUOTE
23 Note 2
24 Subsection 4(1), definition of Time of War—For Proclamations relating to the 1939-
25 1945 war (existence of danger of war and existence of war), see Gazette 1939, pp. 1845
26 and 1849, or Statutory Rules volume 1939, pp. 781 and 782. For a Proclamation
27 declaring that war no longer exists, see Gazette 1952, p. 2481.
28 END QUOTE
29 And
30 QUOTE
31 61A Persons exempt from service
32 (1) The following persons are exempt from service in the Defence Force in time of war so long
33 as the employment, condition, status, belief, or other reason stated in regulations made for the
34 purposes of paragraph (j), on which the exemption is based continues:
35 (a) persons subject to a prescribed mental or physical disability;
36 (b) members and officers of the Parliament of the Commonwealth or of a State;
37 (c) judges of federal or State courts and police, stipendiary or special magistrates of a
38 Territory or of a State;
39 (d) ministers of religion;
40 (e) members of a religious order who devote the whole of their time to the duties of
41 the order;
42 (f) persons who are students at a college maintained solely for training persons to
43 become members of a religious order;
44 (g) persons who are students at a theological college as defined by the regulations or
45 are theological students as prescribed;
46 (h) persons whose conscientious beliefs do not allow them to participate in war or
47 warlike operations;
48 (i) persons whose conscientious beliefs do not allow them to participate in a particular
49 war or particular warlike operations; and

26-8-2025 Page 99 © 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 100

1 (j) persons who, for a reason stated in the Regulations, are declared by the Regulations to
2 be exempt from service in the Defence Force in time of war.
3 END QUOTE
4 And
5 QUOTE
6 61CZ Refusal to be sworn or to answer questions etc.
7
8 (1) A person is guilty of an offence if the person:
9 (a) is required to produce a document by a summons under paragraph 61CQ(c) served on
10 the person; and
11 (b) refuses or fails to do so. Penalty: Imprisonment for 6 months.
12
13 (2) In paragraph (1)(a), strict liability applies to the physical element of circumstance, that the
14 summons is under paragraph 61CQ(c).
15 Note: For strict liability, see section 6.1 of the Criminal Code.
16
17 (3) A person is guilty of an offence if the person:
18 (a) is appearing before a Conscientious Objection Tribunal to give evidence; and
19 (b) is required under paragraph 61CQ(d) either to take an oath or to make an affirmation;
20 and
21 (c) refuses or fails to comply with the requirement. Penalty: Imprisonment for 6 months.
22
23 (4) In paragraph (3)(b), strict liability applies to the physical element of circumstance, that the
24 requirement is under paragraph 61CQ(d). Note: For strict liability, see section 6.1 of the
25 Criminal Code.
26
27 (5) A person is guilty of an offence if the person:
28 (a) is appearing before a Conscientious Objection Tribunal to give evidence; and
29 (b) is required to answer a question by the presiding member; and
30 (c) refuses or fails to answer the question.
31
32 Part IV Liability to serve in the Defence Force in time of war Division 4 Procedures of
33 Conscientious Objection Tribunals Section 61CZA Penalty: Imprisonment for 6 months.
34
35 (6) Subsections (1), (3) and (5) do not apply if the person has a reasonable excuse. Note: The
36 defendant bears an evidential burden in relation to the matter in subsection (6). See subsection
37 13.3(3) of the Criminal Code.
38
39 (7) A person is guilty of an offence if the person:
40 (a) is appearing before a Conscientious Objection Tribunal to give evidence; and
41 (b) gives evidence that is false or misleading in a material particular; and
42 (c) knows that the evidence is false or misleading in the material particular. Penalty:
43 Imprisonment for 6 months.
44 END QUOTE
45 And
46 QUOTE
47 Part IV Liability to serve in the Defence Force in time of war Division 4 Procedures of
48 Conscientious Objection Tribunals
49
50 Section 61CZA Penalty: Imprisonment for 6 months.
51 (6) Subsections (1), (3) and (5) do not apply if the person has a reasonable excuse.

26-8-2025 Page 100 © 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 101

1 Note: The defendant bears an evidential burden in relation to the matter in subsection
2 (6). See subsection 13.3(3) of the Criminal Code.
3
4 (7) A person is guilty of an offence if the person:
5 (a) is appearing before a Conscientious Objection Tribunal to give evidence; and
6 (b) gives evidence that is false or misleading in a material particular; and
7 (c) knows that the evidence is false or misleading in the material particular. Penalty:
8 Imprisonment for 6 months.
9
10 61CZA Contempt of Tribunal A person must not:
11 (a) obstruct or hinder a Conscientious Objection Tribunal, or a member of such a tribunal,
12 in the performance of the functions of the Tribunal; or
13 (b) disrupt the taking of evidence by a Conscientious Objection Tribunal. Penalty:
14 Imprisonment for 12 months.
15 END QUOTE
16
17 QUOTE ADDRESS TO THE COURT County Court of Victoria, Case numbers T01567737 & Q10897630
18 WELSH v. UNITED STATES, 398 U.S. 333 (1970), 398 U.S. 333, WELSH v. UNITED
19 STATES, CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE
20 NINTH CIRCUIT, No. 76., Argued January 20, 1970, Decided June 15, 1970
21
22 1. The language of 6 (j) cannot be construed (as it was in United States v. Seeger, supra,
23 and as it is in the prevailing opinion) to exempt from military service all individuals who
24 in good faith oppose all war, it being clear from both the legislative history and textual
25 analysis of that provision that Congress used the words "by reason of religious training
26 and belief" to limit religion to its theistic sense and to confine it to formal, organized
27 worship or shared beliefs by a recognizable and cohesive group. Pp. 348-354.
28 2. The question of the constitutionality of 6 (j) cannot be avoided by a construction of
29 that provision that is contrary to its intended meaning. Pp. 354-356.
30 3. Section 6 (j) contravenes the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment by
31 exempting those whose conscientious objection claims are founded on a theistic belief
32 while not exempting those whose claims are based on a secular belief. To comport with
33 that clause an exemption must be "neutral" and include those whose belief emanates from
34 a purely moral, ethical, or philosophical source. Pp. 356-361.
35 4. In view of the broad discretion conferred by the Act's severability clause and the
36 longstanding policy of exempting religious conscientious objectors, the Court, rather than
37 nullifying the exemption entirely, should extend its coverage to those like petitioner who
38 have been unconstitutionally excluded from its coverage. Pp. 361-367.
39
40 And;
41
42 http://www.vaccineinfo.net/exemptions/relexemptlet.shtml
43
44 Hints for Religious Exemptions to Immunization
45 Please read the text below before you download, print, or use the sample religious
46 exemption letter and support materials provided in the following link:
47
48 Sample Religious Exemption Letter and Supporting Documentation
49
50 Refer to the statutes. The laws require that immunization must conflict with the tenets and
51 practices of a recognized or organized religion of which you are an adherent or member.

26-8-2025 Page 101 © 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 102

1 However, the law does not require you to name a religion at all. In fact, disclosing
2 your religion could cause your religious exemption to be challenged.
3
4 And
5 Some schools and daycares attempt to require you to give far more information than
6 required by law. You are not required by law to fill out any form letters from a school or
7 daycare. The law allows you to submit your own letter and the letter only needs to meet
8 the bare requirements of the law. Keep it simple; do not feel you need to describe your
9 religious beliefs here as that also is not required by law.
10 And
11 Many times, when a school or day care questions your exemption, they are merely
12 unfamiliar with the law or trying to coerce you to go against your beliefs by
13 deliberately misrepresenting the law. They are betting on the fact that you don't
14 know your rights.
15
16 What appears to be clear is that a “religious objection” is not qualified to a specific religion and
17 neither can be as this would in fact offend Section 116 of the Constitution. Neither can it be
18 associated with any particular religion as this would also interfere with Section 116 of the
19 Constitution. Likewise, any person objecting under the “religious objection” Subsection 245(14)
20 of the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918 neither can be required to be a religious person as this
21 would also offend Section 116 of the Constitution, as the equivalent in WELSH v. UNITED
22 STATES, 398 U.S. 333 (1970), 398 U.S. 333 made clear that it (the “religious objection” applies
23 as much to non religious persons as religious persons. Therefore, anyone objection for his/her
24 personal reasons to vote clearly is entitled to do so regardless of having any specific religion
25 mentioned.
26 END QUOTE ADDRESS TO THE COURT County Court of Victoria, Case numbers T01567737 & Q10897630
27 And
28 QUOTE ADDRESS TO THE COURT County Court of Victoria, Case numbers T01567737 & Q10897630
29 I take the position that Subsection 245(14) of the Constitution is not and cannot be regarded to
30 limit the right of a objection to be only a (theistic belief ) “religious objection” but includes also
31 any secular belief objection.
32
33 If Subsection 245(14) was limited to being “theistic belief” then it would be unconstitutional.
34
35 QUOTE 4-6-2006 CORRESPONDENCE FAXED 10.36 pm 4-6-2006
36 WITHOUT PREJUDICE
37 Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions 4-6-2006
38
39 C/o Judy McGillivray, lawyer
40 Melbourne Office, 22nd Floor, 2000 Queen Street, Melbourne VIC 3000
41 GPO Box 21 A, Melbourne Vic 3001
42 Tel 03 9605 4333, Fax 03 9670 4295 ref; 02101199, etc
43 T01567737 & Q01897630
44 AND WHOM IT MAY CONCERN
45
46 Re; “religious objection” (Subsection 245(14) of the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918)
47 offend Section 116 if the Constitution if it excludes secular belief based objections.
48
49 Madam,
50 As you are aware I continue to refer to my religious objection albeit do wish to indicate
51 that while using the “religious objection” referred to in subsection 245(14) of the
52 Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918 I do not consider that this subsection 14 limits an objection
26-8-2025 Page 102 © 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 103

1 only to an “theistic belief” based “religious objection” but in fact it also includes any secular
2 belief based “religious objection”, as it must be neutral to whatever a person uses as grounds for
3 an “objection”. This, as Section 116 of the Constitution prohibit the Commonwealth of
4 Australia to limit the scope of subsection 245(14) to only “theistic belief” based “religious
5 objections”. Therefore, any person having a purely moral, ethical, or philosophical source of
6 “religious objection” have a valid objection.
7 Neither do I accept that a person making an “religious objection” requires to state his/her
8 religion, and neither which part of his/her religion provides for a “religious objection” as the
9 mere claim itself is sufficient to constitute what is referred to in subsection 245(14) as being a
10 “religious objection”. Therefore, the wording “religious objection” is to be taken as “objection”
11 without the word “religion” having any special meaning in that regard.
12 If you do not accept this as such, then there is clearly another constitutional issue on foot!
13 I request you to respond as soon as possible and set out your position in this regard.
14
15 Awaiting your response, G. H. SCHOREL-HLAVKA
16 END QUOTE 4-6-2006 CORRESPONDENCE FAXED 10.36 pm 4-6-2006
17
18 QUOTE 7-6-2006 CORRESPONDENCE FAXED 7-6-2006
19 WITHOUT PREJUDICE
20 Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions 7-6-2006
21
22 C/o Judy McGillivray, lawyer
23 Melbourne Office, 22nd Floor, 2000 Queen Street, Melbourne VIC 3000
24 GPO Box 21 A, Melbourne Vic 3001
25 Tel 03 9605 4333, Fax 03 9670 4295 ref; 02101199, etc
26 T01567737 & Q01897630
27 AND WHOM IT MAY CONCERN
28 Re; Charges, etc
29 Madam,
30 With proceedings due next month, I view it would be more appropriate if you were to
31 make some effort as to communicate with myself regarding matters relating to the charges and
32 indeed the legal justification of them. After all, the Commonwealth Director of Public
33 Prosecutions may be litigating against many people allegedly failing to vote, besides myself, and
34 it may be born out by my material that none of such litigation could be constitutionally valid. In
35 my view, the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions must consider ALL RELEVANT
36 MATERIAL as to ensure it is not pursuing vexatious charges.
37 I assume that while you are a lawyer, more then likely you are not a “constitutionalist”, and as
38 such may lack the experiences and competence to understand and comprehend the material I am
39 relying upon, and for this you may do better to perhaps seek to consult a “constitutionalist” who
40 is appropriately trained in these matters. After all, if a “constitutionalist” were to conclude that
41 indeed I am on the right track that the charges have no constitutional validity then you could
42 surely save the Courts time to hear and determine vexatious charges or even to try to attempt to
43 do so.
44 Albeit, I am still working on the DRAFT version of the ADDRESS TO THE COURT, it
45 nevertheless is already comprehensive and would indicate to a “constitutionalist” that the
46 charges are ill conceived and without any constitutional bases to proceed with, and as such I am
47 willing to provide an electronic copy to you of the DRAFT, albeit not completed, version so you
48 may perhaps seek advise of a “constitutionalist”.
49
50 Awaiting your response, G. H. SCHOREL-HLAVKA
51 END QUOTE 7-6-2006 CORRESPONDENCE FAXED 7-6-2006
52 END QUOTE ADDRESS TO THE COURT County Court of Victoria, Case numbers T01567737 & Q10897630
26-8-2025 Page 103 © 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 104

1 And
2 QUOTE ADDRESS TO THE COURT County Court of Victoria, Case numbers T01567737 & Q10897630
3 IN RE WOOD (1988) 167 CLR 145 F.C. 88/018
4 QUOTE
5
6 The return does not meet the exigency of the writ (Drinkwater v. Deakin, at p 638) because Senator Wood
7 was incapable of filling the 12th place. That is not to say that, putting to one side "a mere abuse of the right
8 of nomination or an obvious unreality" (Harford v. Linskey (1899) 1 QB 852, at p 862 and cf. Pritchard v.
9 Mayor, &c. of Bangor (1888) 13 App Cas
10 241), the Electoral Officer who makes a return has authority himself to
11 determine the qualifications of a candidate (who declares and maintains that he is duly qualified:
12 HYPERLINK "http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/c167/s170.html" s.170 (a)(ii) of
13 HYPERLINK "http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/c167/" the Act ) or to refuse to return the
14 name of an otherwise successful candidate whose qualifications are in issue: see HYPERLINK
15 "http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/c167/s172.html" s.172 of HYPERLINK
16 "http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/c167/" the Act and Evans v. Thomas (1962) 2 QB 350.
17 But the performance by the Electoral Officer of his ministerial functions in these respects does not determine
18 the validity of the return or the efficacy of the election of an unqualified person to a vacant place in the
19 Senate.
20 END QUOTE
21
22 Clearly, the declaration by the Commonwealth Electoral Commission itself did not purportedly
23 validate the election and neither any candidate declared elected where there was no valid
24 election.
25
26 Where then Mr John Howard was not elected in 2001, so neither others, then he neither could
27 have been Prime minister for any longer then 3 Months, as Section 64 limits the appointment of
28 a non elected person to no longer then a period of three months.
29
30 Hence, Mr John Howard was neither then Prime Minister to advise the Governor-General for a
31 general election in 2004! Indeed, neither was Mr John Howard in any legal position to be
32 involved in the appointment of the Governor-General Michael Jeffrey and as such that also the
33 appointment also is unconstitutional and invalid (without legal force- ULTRA VIRES).
34
35 THE DEFENDANT SUBMITS, THAT WITHOUT A GOVERNMENT OR A CARE
36 TAKING GOVERNMENT IN OFFICE THE COUNTRY GRINDS TO A HOLD. Where
37 there was no valid government since November 2001 then neither was there any authority for the
38 Australian Electoral Commission to pursue the Defendant as to alleged breaches of law, and the
39 Commonwealth of Public Prosecutions (Prosecutor) neither for this could have legal authority to
40 pursue the Defendant regarding the alleged FAILING TO VOTE in the purported 2001 Federal
41 election and the purported 2004 Federal election.
42 As the Senate elections also were ULTRA VIRES, because the writs had not been issued
43 according to relevant legislative provisions, then when half of the senators retired in 2002 there
44 were no duly elected replacements for them. Further, when the half of the Senate that retained
45 their seat in 2002 retired in 2005 then not a single Senator was left in the Senate as none had
46 been duly elected. All Bills passed since 2001 are for this also NULL AND VOID and without
47 legal force.
48 END QUOTE ADDRESS TO THE COURT County Court of Victoria, Case numbers T01567737 & Q10897630
49 And
50 QUOTE ADDRESS TO THE COURT County Court of Victoria, Case numbers T01567737 & Q10897630
51 The Defendant submits, that to reflect what the true position was of the Commonwealth of
52 Australia he did publish;
53

26-8-2025 Page 104 © 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 105

1 INSPECTOR-RIKATI® and the BANANA REPUBLIC AUSTRALIA

2 Dictatorship & deaths by stealth- Preliminary book edition on CD
3 ISBN 0-9580569-3-5
4 The Defendant submits, that no appointment of any judge to the High Court of Australia since
5 2001 is therefore valid as there was no legitimately elected government. Neither are any other
6 appointment made valid in law.
7 END QUOTE ADDRESS TO THE COURT County Court of Victoria, Case numbers T01567737 & Q10897630
8
9 In my view all and any convictions of soldiers refusing to serve due to “objecting”
10 (Conscientious Objection being it religious or secular) to go to a theater of war should be
11 nullified as it was their constitutional rights to do so and not required to explain what their
12 grounds of objection might have been. All they needed to do was to state they had an “objection”
13 regardless if it was a religious or secular objection. This also means that the provisions regarding
14 the Defence Act 1903 as to religious objections, etc, was and remains to be
15 UNCONSTITUTIONAL!
16
17 Again:
18 Hansard 10-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National
19 Australasian Convention)
20 QUOTE
21 Mr. OCONNOR (New South Wales).-It appears to me, with all respect, that Mr.
22 Deakin has not quite appreciated the meaning of the section. We do not wish to put
23 the Governor-General here in the position of being any less the Queen's
24 representative than the Governors of the various colonies are at the present time.
25 What is the position of the Governor of each of the colonies at present? By virtue of
26 his office the Governor of each of the colonies is Commander-in Chief of the Forces.
27 The letters patent appointing the Governor constitute him Commander-in-Chief of
28 the Forces, and in England it is pointed out the Queen is Commander-in-Chief of the
29 Forces. The only meaning of that is that the prerogative power of commanding the
30 army is vested in the Queen, or in the representative of the Queen.
31 END QUOTE
32
33 For the Above I seek all relevant details/information regarding In which years, dates, etc, against
34 which countries did the Australian Governor-General publish in the Gazette a DECLARATION
35 OF WAR?
36
37 Also, all and any related expenditure regarding each deployment of Australian Armed forced to a
38 theater of war, including cost, lives lost, etc, including all and any Appropriation Act/Special
39 Appropriation Act relevant to any such cost paid out, etc. All and any monies, equipment,
40 weapons, ammunition, cost of soldiers deployed to Ukraine, etc, that was provided to Ukraine!
41
42 QUOTE Re 20250824-Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to Attorney-General Michelle Rowland -
43 COMPLAINT -details information
44 Service Australia/Centrelink in early April 2025 first invalidated my Pension concession
45 card and then the following day suspend my Age pension (I am 78-years-old) and then in a
46 letter dated 25 June 2025 notified me that my Age pension was cancelled and it was then it
47 made known my Pension concession card was invalidated way back from 8 April 2025.
48 It must be noted that Service Australia/Centrelink failed to follow proper legal procedures
49 and invalidation my Pension concession card inflicted considerable financial harm to me,
50 and then suspending later cancelling the Age Pension denied me to use Age Pension
51 payment to purchase food, pay for medical services, pay for medication, pay for fuel and
52 other household bills.
26-8-2025 Page 105 © 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 106

1 Despite my elaborate writing including to the Commonwealth Ombudsman in March 2025

2 as such prior to the invalidating/suspension/cancelation to the Attorney General and
3 numerous copies forwarded to federal and state politicians nothing came from this, even so
4 I ended up being admitted to hospital die to heart problems, including not having
5 medication. This may underline the callousness of politicians and others, in particular
6 where already, in 2024, I requested a “REVIEW” and/or details/information regarding
7 Service Australia/Centrelink conduct to falsify amounts in its 10 August 2024
8 correspondence to me claiming to relate to the death of my (now Late) wife Olga Hlavka-
9 Schorel with claiming fraudulently amounts allegedly relating to 8 August 2024 (the day
10 my wife died), etc.
11
12 Clearly, Service Australia/Centrelink refusal/failure to provide relevant details/information
13 regarding the fraudulent claims it may in its 10 August 2024 and later also about an alleged
14 $553.49 ANNUAL income may underline that as I stated “This may underline the
15 callousness of politicians and others”. After all if everything was above board then why
16 not provide relevant details/information how Service Australia/Centrelink claimed the
17 alleged amounts it used against me? Why indeed is there no management in action to hold
18 those wrongdoers accountable, or is it that this is a deliberate terrorism against me where
19 other previously failed for daring to expose the wrongdoing of Government officials, etc?
20
21 I may state I am not aware that Service Australia/Centrelink exercised a legal option to
22 place matters in dispute before a competent court of jurisdiction to obtain judicial approval
23 to take action(s) against my person and as such this may underline that Service
24 Australia/Centrelink violate the “SEPARATION OF POWERS” by taking the law into
25 its own hands.
26
27 • We have the alleged DNIS housing scheme where they were built in outside
28 area’s not suitable to disabled persons and so many remain empty. Why have a
29 Minister/assistant Minister when they cannot even manage simple things?
30
31 • The Framers of the Constitution didn’t want postal and telecommunication
32 services held in private hands, yet we now have Vodafone, Optus, etc, and all
33 kind of private couriers in violation of what the Framers of the Constitution
34 embedded as legal principles in the constitution.
35
36 I now require you to provide me regarding the above within 14days of the date of this
37 correspondence with all relevant details/information regarding all and any expenditure paid for
38 out of Consolidated Revenue Funds since 2000 regarding the above issues referred to including
39 how each payment was within each particular ANNUAL Appropriation Act and/or Special
40 Appropriation Act including the dates and time of each expenditure incurred as well as the
41 same for when paid, as well as what if any action was undertaken to recover any monies and
42 what was done against any person involved to hold him/her legally accountable. Failing to
43 provide the requested details/information leave me no alternative but to lodge a formal criminal
44 complaint with the AFP (Australian Federal Police), as after all the rule of law must be upheld
45 regardless of the position of the person(s).
46 END QUOTE Re 20250824-Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to Attorney-General Michelle Rowland -
47 COMPLAINT -details information
48
49 In my view you are grossly incompetent to be a federal Attorney General and the mere fact that
50 the Defense Act 1903 includes the unconstitutional provisions, etc, may in my view underline
51 this also.
52
26-8-2025 Page 106 © 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 107

1 This document is not intended and neither must be perceived to address all relevant issues
2 and neither are issues referred to in any order of importance.
3
4 We need to return to the organics and legal principles embed in of our federal constitution!
5
6 This correspondence is not intended and neither must be perceived to state all issues/details.
7 Awaiting your response, G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. (Gerrit)

8 MAY JUSTICE ALWAYS PREVAIL®

9 (Our name is our motto!)

26-8-2025 Page 107 © 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