The Hon Mr Tony Smith MP Chair, Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters 5 PO Box 6021 PARLIAMENT HOUSE ACT

2600
em@aph.gov.au

22-4-2014

AND TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN 10 This document is not intended and neither must be deemed to be restricted for publication
Supplement 5 to Submission dated 24-2-2014

Sir, As a former candidate in elections I held that elections were generally held to suit the Australian electoral commission rather than the People and the candidates. One only has to check back how the AEC submitted to increase the number of nominations for INDEPENDENT candidates, the deposit, etc, to notice that this was not to serve the community but to hold elections most suitable to the AEC. Yet, as the WA failed election result showed during the 2013 federal election the AEC itself is not competent enough to conduct appropriate elections. When an organisation after more than 1090 years of federal voting cannot even manage to ensure security of ballot papers then surely there is something wrong within that organisation. Having the Commissioner resigning and his Deputy taking over isnt going to change the modus operandi that lacks proper accountability. When I was a quality control officer in a large company I used to reject lots of product. In the end when I was appointed to manage a factory, and knowing there were many problems, my first issue was to check everything in the factory. I requested the assistance of the workers for this, and they freely provided their comments. One of the problems was, as I discovered checking every facet of production that certain gauges used at the machines were wrongly marked by the tool room. The machine operator would use then faulty gauges, albeit unaware of this and this then escalated the faulty production. That is how you seek to improve a system and not merely ignore the basic problems.

15

20

25

30

When one turn up to vote one is asked to state once name and the person using the computer can in error then mark of the wrong name. The elector despite having voted then is held 35 accountable and fined too often. Others may show up at different polling stations using different names. Then we gave the pre-polling time where it would be impossible to have How-To-Vote card approved by the AEC before the next morning pre-polling is provided for and this means electors are robbed of a fair and proper election. . 40 Considering that there are some weeks between closing of nominations and the date of the poll, then I view pre-0polling should be limited to maximum 2 weeks prior to the poll date. This to give even the INDEPENDENT candidates time to have How-To-0Vote cards printed. The Framers of the Constitution made clear that any elector could stand as a candidate for election. Hence, I view that (such as in mu7nicipal council elections) the candidate merely has 45 to nominate himself/herself and that should be it. I view that to demand a prospective
p1 22-4-2014 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, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

candidate to first gain 50 or more signatures is unconstitutional and causes basically the prospective candidate to engage in 2 elections, first to get sufficient signatures for nomination and then the election itself. . 5 As for the deposit, I view this is unconstitutional as it denied the elector his/her right to be a candidate if they cannot afford to pay the deposit and moreover, as was in 2001, where a candidate was refused to pay the deposit, and so denied to be a candidate, as it was alleged that he had to go to Melbourne to pay the deposit, when the nominations were about to close, and so the prospective candidate never could have made it in time to pay the deposit in 10 Melbourne. Obviously, there will be an issue that to do away with the signatures for nominations and the deposit then there may be an escalation of candidates. So what? If this is to be an exercise of democracy as intended by the Framers of the constitution then so be it. But, you may argue how on earth are we going to have ballot papers printed with numerous candidates, and the horrific (well alleged horrific) consequences for vote counting, etc. Ok, most people know how to mark a Tattslotto ticket, which one mark with a cross and then the operator places it in a computer terminal and this scan the numbers marked. Well, we can apply the same system to ballot papers, just that under each number in small letters the name of the candidate is shown. So now the elector starts crossing of the number of boxes he/she desires to mark of and at the footing the elector then write in squares the numbers that were crossed of in sequence of preference. Say: 2, 14, 4, 37, 1, 8, 9 as to maximum the number of candidates that are able to be elected. As such if there are 2 candidates then the elector only mark off 2 numbers and list the 2 numbers in order of choice. If there are 7 candidates then list the 7 candidates in order of preference, such as 2, 14, 4, 37, 1, 8, 9 If there is only one vacancy for one person then the elector mark of the desired number and list that number in the square at the footing. This means the candidate with the majority of primary votes is deemed to be the successful candidate. The person with the second highest primary vote is then next selected, and so on. If there is more than one candidate with equal number of primary votes then and only then the preferences of those candidates come in to play. As such if one candidate received from the, say 7 secondary votes but the other received 9 secondary votes of the voted in excess of those counted for candidate 1 then the one receiving the 9 secondary votes is declared the next person elected. The person with 7 secondary voted may also be declared elected if there is still a vacant spot before any other counting is considered. Because a person can only vote once it is however important to remove the primary votes of the already declared successful candidate(s) before secondary votes can be counted. With the below example to determine if Candidate 3 or 4 has the second spot the ballot votes for candidate 2 is to be disregarded as those votes are already locked in. For example Senate election say 180,000 electors; Candidate 1 has 10,371 first preferences Candidate 2 has 91.412 first preferences Candidate 3 has 25,251 first preferences Candidate 4 has 25,251 first preferences Candidate 5 has 1,601 first preferences Candidate 6 has 1,780 first preferences All other candidates have less than 1,601 first preferences and by this are automatically unsuccessful albeit their first preference votes are still counted, in case any of the above mentioned candidates were to be found not eligible to take up the seat (for whatever reason) as then the candidate with the next higher first preference vote will be successful and so on.
p2 22-4-2014 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, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

10

15

20

25

30

In the above case candidates 3 and 4 have the same number of first preferences and with 6 vacant spot they are both elected however for purpose of determining the proper sequel the second preference votes are counted. If however the same were to be where the 6th and 7th candidate are having the same number of first preferences then the second preference determines which candidate shall be the successful candidate. This kind of system will enable to determine basically immediately which candidates were successful. Scanning the marked ballot papers will allow electronic to check the manual vote counting, if coming to the same results. Electors are spared to fill in 40 or perhaps 70 numbers or mark them chronological, with many incorrectly counting, because they only need to concern themselves with the number of vacancies at the least. o more square above the line and so get rid of the discrimination against Independent candidates. No more voting for a party but only for the candidate. In this manner the electors elect the candidates and not get some person to be successful with perhaps the second least primary votes but getting the preferences from others to pass those with a lot more primary votes. . If the same system was used for the House of Representatives then the candidate with the most primary votes is deemed elected. No wheeling and dealing between the candidates. And if 2 or more candidates have the same number of primary votes then the secondary preference determines who is successful. How are electors deceived? To give an example: In a certain election I opposed as an INDEPENDENT candidate a freeway down the road of my residence. One candidate of a major political party was in favour of the freeway, and received the second highest primary votes. However the majority of electors voted for the 2 other major parties who made clear to oppose the freeway of which one received the highest first preferences. However the party with the least first preferences then combined their secondary preferences to the candidate with the second highest primary votes and he then became by this the successful candidate. As such, people who had voted against the freeway now found their votes going in favour of the freeway. This clearly robbed the electors of their intentions.

35 The system I propose would prevent this misuse of electors intentions. The Candidates; With electronic systems available, the AEC to provide a computer screen where electors can read an A4 statement (with photo of the candidate) setting out the candidates intentions. 40 As such, no need for How-To-Vote cards as the AEC provides this in the polling booth of each candidate. No more hassling of electors outside polling stations. While candidates can still produce How-To-Vote Cards it no longer will be needed to inform the candidate, wherever voting in any part of the world, as the AEC will have the computer 45 screen available in the ballot box. As such the elector press a certain number of the candidate (corresponding with the ballot paper) and the candidate statement comes on display. Currently people voting overseas would generally not have a clue what each candidate stands for. And, the same display of candidates should also be made available on the internet by the AEC 50 perhaps by an elector logging in (as an example) www.aec.gov.au/candidate/federal. The
p3 22-4-2014 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, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

word federal can be replaced with any relevant election the AEC may conduct not being a federal election. Many a person over lifetime, and not just women albeit they generally do, by marriage, 5 change their surname. It would be appropriate to introduce a photo identification card for any elector to use when turning up at a polling station to vote. The election officer at the polling station then can check the photo of the person presenting it and then scan the barcode to ensure the correct name is marked off. The Commonwealth of Australia by s116 cannot make exclusion of any religious purposes, 10 and on 19 July 2006 I comprehensively defeated the AEC on this in the County Court of Victoria, relying also on the Welsh principle (see below). Meaning that to give exemption on religious belief to vote then non-religious persons likewise are entitled not to vote. As such not wanting to vote is sufficient to object to voting. 15 Compulsory voting should be abolished as the Framers of the Constitution made clear that if a elector desire to vote then they can do so. Desire means if a person elect to do so. The right to vote is like if a person has the right to walk on the footpath or the right to drive a motor vehicle. It means if you do drive a vehicle you are bound to comply with the rules governing this driving but if you do not elect to drive 20 then you are not bound by the rules. As such, if you elect to vote you are bound to vote as is stipulated as a system (but in secret) but if you elect not to vote then that is the end of it. Because electoral rolls are often used for ulterior purposes, not at all regarding elections, such as Debt Collecting Agencies, sending out to say Joe Blow a notice of debt. And where there are 10 Joe Blows recorded then each get the same notice. If than 50% of them pay rather than to lose time of work to fight the case, the Debt Collection Agency makes a lot of fraudulent monies using the electoral rolls for purposes never intended. I had complaints (when a candidate) of electors upset their details were listed when they were to be confidential. If electoral rolls are showing the name of a person with the barcode next to it (see above) then anyone looking at the electoral rolls would need to obtain from the AEC a special permission to obtain details not listed otherwise. It also means that once the barcode was scanned at the polling station no other person can use it again, preventing ghost voting. There was this incident that eventuated (some years ago) where I accompanied my wife to a polling station, and my wife had her name marked of but I didnt because I didnt desire to vote. However, at the table the woman then handed me ballot papers for both my wife and myself. I therefore could have voted without having my name marked off and then later could have voted elsewhere. Because I was there for no other reason but to assist my wife in filling out the ballot paper, due to her eye sight problems, I declined to accept ballot papers. However, this incident underlined that I could have voted twice because there was no proper organisation with the AEC. In this case one person was marking of the names and another person handing over ballot papers. I view it should be one person marking of the name and issuing the ballot paper so it is more controlled. I view that the supervision of the AEC how it conducts elections should be conducted by a superior body that is not bias.

25

30

35

40

45

In my view, and considering the constitutional embedded principles of the Framers of the constitution, identity card with a photo should be issued by the relevant States and the commonwealth adopt their system for its own data base. Section 41 of the constitution bases 50 the right to exercise franchise in federal elections based upon state franchise. And while the states can lower voting age below adult that may apply in the commonwealth, it would be
p4 22-4-2014 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, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

easy to use the barcode system to ensure that any person provided with franchise in a state but below the Commonwealth age of adult then are automatically excluded from voting in federal elections. . 5 For example the date of birth 5-3-1999 would mean that even if the state were to allow the so called baby franchise to vote for Commonwealth purposes the person wouldnt be eligible to vote (if the adult age was 18 years old) until 5-3-2017. If there are 2001 persons already registered born on this date then the barcode number of the next person (example above) would be 19990305 202 (broken down 1999-03-05-202) 10 As such, the barcode would be recognisable by a computer program that the elector is not entitled to vote prior to 5-3-2017. If therefore an election was held on 5-3-2017 then the person would be entitled to vote. I may state that The Netherlands used this kind of system to list members of the armed forces with a number 19990305 202, pending on the date of birth followed by a number. At least 15 when I served in the Royal Dutch Armed forces nearly 50 years ago. The barcode then could be used for the AEC to record against it on its own files the address and other relevant details strictly relating to election issues as a elector and no more. 20 Because of s116 it means that photo exclusion of people on basis of religious or claimed religious grounds cannot be made. The photo must identify the person and as once was made clear when a woman was being sued by police for illegal activities, that because she had a total head-cover it was not known if she was the alleged criminal or not. 25 As we do reside in a Western culture society those who join must accept that if they desire to vote they must reveal their face to election officials. There is nothing wrong with a female, if objecting to reveal her face in public, to then enter into a booth where a female election official can verify the womans face versus her election identification card she presents. 30 Voting cannot be compulsory and so women who do not want to show their face to a female election officer then simply do not vote. It is their choice to participate with the general community or not. But if they desire to do so then they must comply with the rules. .
WELSH v. UNITED STATES, 398 U.S. 333 (1970), 398 U.S. 333, WELSH v. UNITED STATES,

35 CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, No. 76.,
Argued January 20, 1970, Decided June 15, 1970 QUOTE 1. The language of 6 (j) cannot be construed (as it was in United States v. Seeger, supra, and as it is in the prevailing opinion) to exempt from military service all individuals who in good faith oppose all war, it being clear from both the legislative history and textual analysis of that provision that Congress used the words "by reason of religious training and belief" to limit religion to its theistic sense and to confine it to formal, organized worship or shared beliefs by a recognizable and cohesive group. Pp. 348-354. 2. The question of the constitutionality of 6 (j) cannot be avoided by a construction of that provision that is contrary to its intended meaning. Pp. 354-356. 3. Section 6 (j) contravenes the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment by exempting those whose conscientious objection claims are founded on a theistic belief while not exempting those whose claims are based on a secular belief. To comport with that clause an exemption must be "neutral" and include those whose belief emanates from a purely moral, ethical, or philosophical source. Pp. 356-361. 4. In view of the broad discretion conferred by the Act's severability clause and the longstanding policy of exempting religious conscientious objectors, the Court, rather than nullifying the exemption entirely, should extend its coverage to those like petitioner who have been unconstitutionally excluded from its coverage. Pp. 361-367. END QUOTE

40

45

50

p5 22-4-2014 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, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

While it may be argued that the States are not bound by s116 and so could issue identification cards to electors without showing the full face of a woman, nevertheless the Commonwealth of Australia couldnt accept this for its own electoral issues. As such, the States would be required to provide facial photo identification cards. 5 . What this barcode system also would resolve is that the address of the elector is not relevant as for the purpose of determining if the person is entitled to vote, provided they are not residing as citizens in another country. The can be in transit but the moment they are residing in another country as citizen then s44 of the constitution exclude them from voting in 10 federal elections. Dual nationality (not to be confused with the constitutional meaning of citizenship also by s44 prevents a person to vote in federal elections. .
Hansard 2-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National Australasian

15 Convention)
QUOTE Mr. SYMON.-Very likely not. What I want to know is, if there is anybody who will come under the operation of the law, so as to be a citizen of the Commonwealth, who would not also be entitled to be a citizen of the state? There ought to be no opportunity for such discrimination as would allow a section of a state to remain outside the pale of the Commonwealth, except with regard to legislation as to aliens. Dual citizenship exists, but it is not dual citizenship of persons, it is dual citizenship in each person. There may be two men-Jones and Smith-in one state, both of whom are citizens of the state, but one only is a citizen of the Commonwealth. That would not be the dual citizenship meant. What is meant is a dual citizenship in Mr. Trenwith and myself. That is to say, I am a citizen of the state and I am also a citizen of the Commonwealth; that is the dual citizenship. That does not affect the operation of this clause at all. But if we introduce this clause, it is open to the whole of the powerful criticism of Mr. O'Connor and those who say that it is putting on the face of the Constitution an unnecessary provision, and one which we do not expect will be exercised adversely or improperly, and, therefore, it is much better to be left out. Let us, in dealing with this question, be as careful as we possibly, can that we do not qualify the citizenship of this Commonwealth in any way or exclude anybody [start page 1764] from it, and let us do that with precision and clearness. As a citizen of a state I claim the right to be a citizen of the Commonwealth. I do not want to place in the hands of the Commonwealth Parliament, however much I may be prepared to trust it, the right of depriving me of citizenship. I put this only as an argument, because no one would anticipate such a thing, but the Commonwealth Parliament might say that nobody possessed of less than 1,000 a year should be a citizen of the Federation. You are putting that power in the hands of Parliament. Mr. HIGGINS.-Why not? Mr. SYMON.-I would not put such a power in the hands of any Parliament. We must rest this Constitution on a foundation that we understand, and we mean that every citizen of a state shall be a citizen of the Commonwealth, and that the Commonwealth shall have no right to withdraw, qualify, or restrict those rights of citizenship, except with regard to one particular set of people who are subject to disabilities, as aliens, and so on. END QUOTE

20

25

30

35

40

As a CONSTITUTIONALIST I hold that no matter what the High Court of Australia may have ruled in Sue v Hill the High Court of Australia has no constitutional powers to amend or 45 otherwise interfere with the true meaning and application of the constitution. .
Hansard 17-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE Mr. BARTON.-

p6 22-4-2014 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, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

10

15

20

25

30

35

Providing, as this Constitution does, for a free people to elect a free Parliament-giving that people through their Parliament the power of the purse-laying at their mercy from day to day the existence of any Ministry which dares by corruption, or drifts through ignorance into, the commission of any act which is unfavorable to the people having this security, it must in its very essence be a free Constitution. Whatever any one may say to the contrary that is secured in the very way in which the freedom of the British Constitution is secured. It is secured by vesting in the people, through their representatives, the power of the purse, and I venture [start page 2477] to say there is no other way of securing absolute freedom to a people than that, unless you make a different kind of Executive than that which we contemplate, and then overload your Constitution with legislative provisions to protect the citizen from interference. Under this Constitution he is saved from every kind of interference. Under this Constitution he has his voice not only in the, daily government of the country, but in the daily determination of the question of whom is the Government to consist. There is the guarantee of freedom in this Constitution. There is the guarantee which none of us have sought to remove, but every one has sought to strengthen. How we or our work can be accused of not providing for the popular liberty is something which I hope the critics will now venture to explain, and I think I have made their work difficult for them. Having provided in that way for a free Constitution, we have provided for an Executive which is charged with the duty of maintaining the provisions of that Constitution; and, therefore, it can only act as the agents of the people. We have provided for a Judiciary, which will determine questions arising under this Constitution, and with all other questions which should be dealt with by a Federal Judiciary and it will also be a High Court of Appeal for all courts in the states that choose to resort to it. In doing these things, have we not provided, first, that our Constitution shall be free: next, that its government shall be by the will of the people, which is the just result of their freedom: thirdly, that the Constitution shall not, nor shall any of its provisions, be twisted or perverted , inasmuch as a court appointed by their own Executive, but acting independently, is to decide what is a perversion of its provisions? We can have every faith in the constitution of that tribunal. It is appointed as the arbiter of the Constitution. It is appointed not to be above the Constitution, for no citizen is above it, but under it; but it is appointed for the purpose of saying that those who are the instruments of the Constitution-the Government and the Parliament of the day-shall not become the masters of those whom, as to the Constitution, they are bound to serve. What I mean is this: That if you, after making a Constitution of this kind, enable any Government or any Parliament to twist or infringe its provisions, then by slow degrees you may have that Constitution-if not altered in terms-so whittled away in operation that the guarantees of freedom which it gives your people will not be maintained; and so, in the highest sense, the court you are creating here, which is to be the final interpreter of that Constitution, will be such a tribunal as will preserve the popular liberty in all these regards, and will prevent, under any pretext of constitutional action, the Commonwealth from dominating the states, or the states from usurping the sphere of the Commonwealth. Having provided for all these things, I think this Convention has done well. END QUOTE

No more that a person residing overseas and not residing in any State/Territory can somehow 40 vote in federal elections. As a Professional Advocate (now retired) and an advisor on constitutional issues to a law firm (now retired) I became aware that a person residing in Europe regained Australian nationality and was entitled to vote even so residing as a national in a European country and not having any Australian residential address. This to me is a fraud committed upon electors. 45 The AEC never should be able to enrol anyone but have its data base of electors based upon State/Territory data base and as set out above the barcode system could exclude any person not being of the commonwealth adult age. By this manner the States could provide for automatic enrolments of citizens to its State 50 electoral rolls provided there is no compulsory to vote.
HANSARD 17-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates Australasian Convention) QUOTE Mr. DEAKIN.What a charter of liberty is embraced within this Bill-of political liberty and religious liberty-the liberty and the means to achieve all to which men in these days can reasonably aspire . A charter of p7 22-4-2014 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, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati (Official Record of the Debates of the National

55

liberty is enshrined in this Constitution, which is also a charter of peace-of peace, order, and good government for the whole of the peoples whom it will embrace and unite. END QUOTE HANSARD 17-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates

5 QUOTE
Mr. SYMON (South Australia).- We who are assembled in this Convention are about to commit to the people of Australia a new charter of union and liberty; we are about to commit this new Magna Charta for their acceptance and confirmation, and I can conceive of nothing of greater magnitude in the whole history of the peoples of the world than this question upon which we are about to invite the peoples of Australia to vote. The Great Charter was wrung by the barons of England from a reluctant king. This new charter is to be given by the people of Australia to themselves. END QUOTE

10

Therefore, the states created within s106 of the constitution are bound by these legal principles. 15 political liberty is not pending upon what Parliament may allow for but is unrestricted. Only when an elector desires to vote can the elector be deemed to follow certain rules. What politicians need to consider is if they desire to be representatives for their constituents or they desire to flaunt the true meaning and application for the sake of their own benefits 20 and/or that of a political party they might belong to.
Hansard 1-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE Mr. HIGGINS.-Suppose the sentry is asleep, or is in the swim with the other power? Mr. GORDON.-There will be more than one sentry. In the case of a federal law, every member of a state Parliament will be a sentry, and, every constituent of a state Parliament will be a sentry. As regards a law passed by a state, every man in the Federal Parliament will be a sentry, and the whole constituency behind the Federal Parliament will be a sentry. END QUOTE

25

30

Politicians of today are obsessed with their own personal benefits (financial or otherwise) must keep in mind that in time to come others will likewise conduct themselves following their examples just that then it may be harmful to their family, friends or their descendants. 35 We also have to be concerned that in particular with young females, if their address is being published in electoral rolls. A female might be harassed and then the perpetrator merely needs to check the electoral roll to locate her address. The parent can have secret addresses and then the State publish their enrolled children and their addresses, being the same as the parent, and 40 so destroy the secrecy. In fact electoral rolls can be used to inflict danger to many. For example if a woman is hiding in a refugee centre and her address is concealed from publication but shown the area in which she is a elector then the former partner may use this to narrow his search. If she has any children with her that are 16 or 17 then their addresses may be revealed by the education facility to the electoral commission and so the father can 45 use this to locate their mother. Likewise, with other issues where a person wants to remain undetected for non -criminal issues then again electoral rolls are often used to locate a person. I do not accept that members of parliament should be able to obtain freely copies of addresses of electors, as this allow it to be used for ulterior purposes. Likewise I do not accept that
p8 22-4-2014 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, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

candidates should be given copies of electoral rolls as again it least electors vulnerable for misuse of the details. Having been a candidate in numerous elections over a 16 year period I never used electoral rolls for mail outs. Neither do I accept that political parties should be given that opportunity. I 5 view there is absolutely no need for this. . My wife and I have received numerous pieces of correspondences from Members of Parliament and my wife often was upset about the deceptive claims in such material. As my wife made clear, this person couldnt bother to attend to me and give me all this crap. 10 While I may never have made it to be elected I never saw it as a failure. After all even many years later I discovered people still had my How-To-Vote cards, and expressed to have been very impressed with it. As a CANDIDATE, I used to promote the constitution and often ended up on doorknocking 15 to have lengthy conversations with people amazed there was a constitution and what it stood for. I succeeded in awaking people about the constitution and to me that was very important, in particular for those who entered Australia from other countries. 20 While compulsory voting is really a money making machinery for political parties so they can spend ahead on election material while most INDEPENDENT candidate are deprived of this ability, in the end it undermines the equality of elections and rob electors of FAIR and PROPER elections. In my view any politicians who support this kind of inappropriate election procedure by this undermines the true meaning and application of the constitution. 25 . There is also a major problem with that one cannot challenge a general election. In my view this is utter and sheer nonsense. While parliament had the legislative powers to create a Court of disputed Returns to act for and on behalf of the Parliament to determine if a person is validly elected, the parliament however has no constitutional powers to deny any person to 30 s=challenge the validity of a general election this as if (as was in 2001) the writs were issued on 8 October 2001 whereas under FOI it was revealed the proclamation of the prorogue of the parliament and the dissolution of the parliament had by error not been released by the Government Printer until 9 October 2001 then there was no valid general election. Parliament cannot interfere with the original jurisdiction of the High Court of Australia to 35 deal with such a breach, but yet the way the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918 is worded the Courts in error apply this as to deny to challenge a general election upon validity o f the writs, etc. For example, let there be a government that in violation of the CEA1918 on 24 December call an election for the writs to be issued that day and nominations close on 27 December. The government doesnt release those details to anyone but has its secretary of its 40 political party nominating in every seat candidates. By the time other political parties discover this it is too late as the nominations are closed. So, electors can only vote for the candidates of one party, and that is that is in government. No proclamation was published and so took everyone of guard, but as the CEA1918 prevents anyone to challenge the general election then unless others challenge each seat there is no challenge possible. The problem with this is 45 that you cannot challenge the validity of the election unless the election has already been held. By then the Parliament will exist of 100% of members of the one party and then they can retrospectively amend the CEA1918 as to prevent any court to rule the election invalid. Again, as a constitutionalist I view this is utter and sheer nonsense to prevent a general election to be challenged upon constitutional issues because the parliament has no judicial 50 powers and can only provide for a Court of disputed returns dealing with its internal powers as to a successful candidate being elected or not. However, what I experienced on 30 October
p9 22-4-2014 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, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

10

15

20

25

30

35

2001, when I sought (and so appropriately) to file a s75(v) of the constitution to challenge the validity of the writs, etc, the Deputy Registrar of the High Court of Australia then made known that by the CEA1918 I had to do so to the Federal Court of Australia and could only contest one seat, after the election, etc. Clearly this was a total misconception as the Parliament cannot deny the High Court of Australia to exercise its original jurisdiction as to determine if writs were validly issues. This is a (legal) judicial matter. Writs failed to provide for 10 clear days also was a legal issue. If the writs are invalid then there can be no issue of there being an election. As was clear in the woods case, where the then Senator Woods was not entitled to stand as a candidate then the Electoral Commission having declared him to be the successful candidate and subsequently having been sworn in by the then Governor-General couldnt circumvent constitutional eligibilities. As such it was all irrelevant. It is appalling that the Australian Electoral Commission still cannot count appropriately that days are counted from midnight to midnight. In the Colosimo case, in which I represented Mr Colosimo as a Professional Advocate, I explained in a CONTEMPT OF COURT case against Mr Colosimo that the order stipulated that he had to remove a certain building within 90 days. As I pointed out the report was written after 89days and 12 hours and so failed to comply with the 90 days minimum and therefore there was no admissible evidence. Her Honour Harbison, on my submission,. Stayed the proceedings permanently,. Her Honour refused the application of the other party to be allowed to withdraw the contempt application, as I submitted that once a party filed this contempt application it could no longer be withdrawn Her Honour in her reason of judgment held this to be correct. It was obvious to me that if the application had been allowed to be withdrawn they could have obtained a new report and restarted the litigation but by it being permanently stayed it prevented the other party to recommence the proceedings. And while it was a mere few hours from the 90 days nevertheless it proved to be very critical to show there was no evidence. . Likewise, as I detected in numerous writs the AEC about constantly fails to provide for 10 clear days. As such no valid elections and the parliament cannot use the Court of Disputed Returns to circumvent the rule of law. Yet, some 14 years since I first raised the issue nothing was done to hold the AEC accountable for its fraud perpetrated upon the Prime Minister, the Governor-General and Governors and most of all the electors. Any politician who refuses to support my ongoing pursuance to have these matters appropriately addresses to me isnt worth to be sitting in the Parliament as a representative/agent of his/her constituents. This submission is not intended and neither must be perceived to refer to matter in any order of priority or to all details/issues. I look forwards to your details response, if any courtesy will eventuate as such. Awaiting your response, G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. (Friends call me Gerrit)

40

45

MAY JUSTICE ALWAYS PREVAIL

(

Our name is our motto!)

p10 22-4-2014 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, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati