Know Your Rights

Know Your Rights, and Assert Them

The Authority of the People

 

Unlike any other country in the world, it is We the People who have absolute power over our governments in the Commonwealth of Australia

 

It is the Australian Constitution which is the head of all law, power and parliamentary process in Australia and its territories. Any law which is inconsistent with this constitution has no authority.

Covering clause 5:  Operation of the Constitution and laws 

This Act, and all laws made by the Parliament of the Commonwealth under the Constitution shall be binding on the courts, judges, and people of every State and of every part of the Commonwealth, notwithstanding anything in the laws of any State;…

 

The Quick & Garran Annotated Constitution (which has been quoted in the High Court of Australia as the authority on our constitution hundreds of times), makes the following comment; Page 285 and 286:

“This opinion approaches near the truth, is the supreme absolute and uncontrollable authority remains with the people. The opening words of the preamble also proclaim that the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Australia is founded on the will of the people whom it is designed to unite and govern.”

 

The Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900

 

PREAMBLE:

 

Whereas the people of New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia, Queensland, and Tasmania, humbly relying on the blessing of Almighty God, have agreed to unite in one indissoluble Federal Commonwealth under the Crown of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, and under the Constitution hereby established: And whereas it is expedient to provide for the admission into the Commonwealth of other Australasian Colonies and possessions of the Queen:….

 

Note: It is the people of the colonies on the land mass known as Australia that agreed to come together to form the Commonwealth of Australia.

 

The Annotated Constitution make the following comments; Page 283 and 284, in part:

 

Whereas the people of colonies which have adopted the Constitution and have agreed to form one indissoluble Federal Commonwealth under the Crown of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, and under the Constitution hereby established. Several largely-signed petitions had been received praying that there should be some recognition of God in the Constitution.

 

The Convention, however, felt some doubt as to the propriety of introducing at that stage any religious formula into the Constitution, and that idea was defeated by 17 votes to 11. Numerous petitions were received to a similar effect, and a proposal to insert the words “humbly relying on the blessing of Almighty God” was agreed to. In the Bill as introduced in the Imperial Parliament, the names of the five colonies which had accepted the Bill were inserted in the blank left for that purpose. The words “under the Constitution hereby established” was included. “Whereas the people” establish the fact that it was the people that Federated Australia and not any form of Government. “Whereas the people”, these words establish the fact that the people are sovereign over and above any Parliament in Australia.

 

The Quick & Garran Annotated Constitution makes the following comment; Page 285 and 286:

 

“This opinion approaches near the truth, is the supreme absolute and uncontrollable authority remains with the people. The opening words of the preamble also proclaim that the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Australia is founded on the will of the people whom it is designed to unite and govern.”

 

By the will of the people, incorporating; “humbly relying on the blessing of Almighty God” we have given God the overall authority, because we have declared that we are relying on Him. He being the God of our Reformation Christian heritage. This brings in biblical law and principals, that only God, and to those he gives ‘lawful authority’, that is the crown and anyone lawfully acting under the crown, have authority over us men and women of the Commonwealth. Because we rely on God primarily, if the crown fails to act lawfully or acts negligently, then the crown also loses it’s authority and must take instruction from the people via petition to correct the situation. This should be done through the Governor of your state, on state matters, or the Governor General for federal matters. Should the Governors fail in their duty, we have recourse to the monarch directly. If that fails then then the crown has abandoned it’s position, so we rely then solely on God and our own resources.

 

Romans 9:21Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?

 

Psalms 103:19The LORD hath prepared his throne in the heavens; and his kingdom ruleth over all.

 

The well accepted principal is: He who creates, owns.

 

Genesis 1:1 – In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

Psalms 24:1 KJV – The earth is the LORD’S, and the fulness thereof; the world, and they that dwell therein.

And the owner can then delegate powers to whom he wishes.

Genesis 1:26 – And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

Power is vested through the crown which has a long continuous tradition that can be traced back thousands of years.

Romans 13:1 – Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.

 

Isaiah 40:18To whom then will you liken God? Or what likeness will you compare with Him?

Isaiah 40:23That bringeth the princes to nothing; he maketh the judges of the earth as vanity.

 

The Constitution provides for a High Court to determine the validity of laws and all things under the law, which it has done well in the past, at a time when dignity went hand in hand with integrity:

 

Chief Justice Latham’s made the comments in a High Court decision; South Australia v The Commonwealth 1942 (Uniform Tax Case).

Chief Justice Latham’s comments:

“If either the Commonwealth Parliament or a State Parliament attempts to make a law which is not within its powers, the attempt fails, because the alleged law is unauthorized and is not a law at all”.
“The courts have declared a statute invalid, sometimes lead to misunderstanding. A pretended law made in excess of power is not and never has been a law at all. Anybody in the country is entitled to disregard it”.

 

This was reinforced in the matter of State of NSW v Kable (5 June 2013). In a case known as the Kable Principal where the Hight Court determined that parliaments do not have the power to write laws beyond their authority, and such laws cannot be enforced by the courts.

 

Justice Gummow stated:

“The direction or command to the judge hearing the application to proceed in the absence of any party affected by the order to be made is such an interference with the exercise of the judicial process as to be repugnant to or incompatible with the exercise of the judicial power of the Commonwealth. Then, because the Supreme Court of Queensland is part of an integrated Australian judicial system for the exercise of the judicial power of the Commonwealth, such a provision is constitutionally invalid”.

 

It is a principal in law that as a stream cannot rise above its source, neither can a lower authority make a law to bind the higher authority against the will of that higher authority.

 

In conclusion; It is we, the people who petitioned the crown, who agreed to legislation to unite us into one Commonwealth of Australia through the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900 under the protection of the Crown. This act binds the parliaments and courts of this commonwealth and all authorities under them. It is only we the people who can authorise any changes to that arrangement. We the people have not authorised any changes to that arrangement, so we the people still have that unique authority until such time as we vote to relinquish it. The parliaments and the governments, then formed, with all of the authorities under them, and the courts, must act in the best interests of the people they ultimately serve. Any other presumed power then claimed by these public servants is merely smoke and mirrors.

 

It must be noted that this constitutional arrangement is unique, not afforded to any other nation. So no one can point to other countries in any observation on how things should work here. We have the constitution and the support of High Court justices from a time when integrity in justice and law meant something. let’s use the power of the Constitution. It’s ours for the purpose of keeping them in check, and no slight of hand, manipulation or clever wording can take away our rights.

 

Proverbs 19:21[There are] many devices in a man’s heart; nevertheless the counsel of the LORD, that shall stand.

 

Ecclesiastes 2:26For God giveth to a man that is good in his sight wisdom, and knowledge, and joy: but to the sinner he giveth travail, to gather and to heap up, that he may give to him that is good before God. This also is vanity and vexation of spirit.

 

Our rights enshrined in the constitution are derived from centuries of English law. Beginning with: “An Act to Provide for the Administration of Justice in New South Wales and Van Diemen’s Land”, in 1828. Section 24 of this enactment stated:

“That all Laws and Statutes in force within the Realm of England at the Time of the passing of this Act . . . shall be applied in the Administration of Justice in the Courts of New South Wales and Van Diemen’s Land respectively, so far as the same can be applied within the said Colonies.

 

As the various colonies split off from New South Wales and formed what are now the States of the Commonwealth of Australia, this same principal was enshrined into their laws.

 

In the opinion of the Privy Council, the highest authority court of the British Realm, in Cooper v. Stuart in 1838, one of the issues dealt with in this case was whether the rule against perpetuities applied in New South Wales. In referring to Chief Justice Lord Blackstone’s classical statement Justice Lord Watson said:

“Lord Blackstone in that passage was setting right an opinion attributed to Lord Holt, that all laws in force in England must apply to an infant colony of that kind. If the learned author had written at a later date he would probably have added that, as the population and wealth of the colony increase, many rules and principles of English law, which were unsuitable to its infancy, will gradually be attracted to it, and that the powers of remodelling it, belongs also to the colonial legislature”

 

And so it continued to be that Australian Colonies could write their own laws provided they were not inconstant with the laws of England. The Colonial Laws Validity Act 1865 enshrined that principal into law. This act remained in force until 1986, when the Australia Act purportedly gave the state parliaments the ability to over-write them, but only so far as the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution would allow.

 

English law developed from the Magna Carta (the Great Charter) being a royal charter of king John who agreed to grant eternally, basic rights to the people of the realm, after the 25 Barons, being knights Templars and initiators of the English court system, pressured the king to officially grant these basic rights. This was followed by the 1217 Charter of the Forest. The Forest Charter formalised the right of unbonded men to access and use of the goods of the royal forests (grazing, fuel, food), while implicitly assuming the right to wander freely in the landscape as well as providing a place of refuge for those not of the hierarchical social order, thus further extending the rights of the people.

 

These basic rights, since much refined by the UK Bill of Rights of 1688, still apply today. And are the basis of many of the world’s constitutions including ours, whereby all people have basic rights where our parliaments represent the will of the people, who are equally entitled to fair, unbiased justice and have exclusive and extensive property rights which if infringed, must be reasonably compensated.

 

These historic rights, which have been reenforced by monarchs and courts many times, and by principal of law, having remained in force for in excess of 100 years or 3 reigning monarchs, then become “entrenched” meaning they cannot be repealed. This has been confirmed by replies to freedom of information requests sent to the federal Attorney General. An old adage being: A right once given cannot be taken away” is especially then so. Further, international treaties and covenants on rights of the people, once signed are also non revokable principals that governments and courts are bound to uphold.

 

In Elizabethan times, the idea of a corporation developed. The purpose being to join the resources of several people together to undertake a business development that would be too large for any one individual to do on his own. Only the crown could authorise such an undertaking in those times. The East India Company was established at that time by royal charter which was given exclusive rights to trade with India. The crown required convincing that subjects’ who’s allegiance must always remain to the monarch, may be allowed to be transferred to the company that all shareholders may work for the betterment of the company rather than the kingdom. But since the Dutch seemed to be doing well out of it, England was convinced that it should not be left behind.

 

The East India company flaunted it’s exclusive rights and unfettered powers to exploit every corner of the Indian subcontinent and beyond. A company having no conscience or morals, and any shareholder not in agreeance easily out voted, raised its own armies and navies to conquer India in its own name running the whole country under its own flag. It then set its sights on China, forcing the emperor, by military might, to allow the sale of opium to its people through Hong Kong and Shanghai ports. The resulting rampant addiction had the desired effect of weakening China to the point of collapse. The corporation had become a monster. It has since disguised itself into many facets of corporations and banks. The China operation, for instance, became the Hong Kong Shanghai Bank (HSBC), and started, or took over many other banks which collectively now own the Bank of England, US Federal Reserve, Reserve Bank of Australia and almost every other bank world wide including all of Australia’s, every corporation of note worldwide including media companies, the courts in the state of Victoria through total ownership of Court Services Victoria, and far more than anyone can possibly grasp. It has become a huge octopus devouring and capturing everything it can with it’s huge tentacles while at the same time changing colour to blend in and disguise its activities. It is estimated that collectively the family of big controlling banks now own or control more than 50% of all the worlds corporations of any note.

 

It is a principal of law that a corporation must be subservient to people and the parliaments which we installed to govern them. However, over time, little by little, this corporation conglomerate has gained control of political parties through influence, deals, secret (called benevolent) societies, acting as Think Tanks, and subdued extortion. Through these actions, governments at all levels have become corporatized so as to be brought down to a level which the larger corporation can control. Having control of the political parties, disguised laws have been passed to corporatize we the people so that we also can be under corporate control. This has been done by crating an identical corporate entity which we presume to be us. One big problem here. This can only be done with our agreement because we the people have the ultimate authority. Therefore, since there is no agreement as far as we are aware, the whole presumed system of presumed authority falls apart. There is no basis in law for it to stand. No law of the land can stand. Again, we return those High Court cases:

 

Chief Justice Latham’s made the comments in a High Court decision; South Australia v The Commonwealth 1942 (Uniform Tax Case).

Chief Justice Latham’s comments:

“If either the Commonwealth Parliament or a State Parliament attempts to make a law which is not within its powers, the attempt fails, because the alleged law is unauthorized and is not a law at all”.
“The courts have declared a statute invalid, sometimes lead to misunderstanding. A pretended law made in excess of power is not and never has been a law at all. Anybody in the country is entitled to disregard it”.

 

And in the matter of State of NSW v Kable known as the Kable Principal, the Hight Court determined that parliaments do not have the power to write laws beyond their authority, and such laws cannot be enforced by the courts.

 

A stream cannot rise above its source. parliaments, governments and corporations are all ultimately under the will of the people

 

Political parties are attempting to force corporatized governments on us without any authority to do so, in an attempt to place the corporation, a device created to serve the will of man, into the position of master of man. There is, and never has been any authority to do so. Departments of Government and municipal councils are today mostly body corporates (corporations), called “authorities”, but they have no authority. It is all bluff, which is enforced in the lower courts, but does not pass the scrutiny test when properly confronted in the higher courts or through the legal paperwork process.

 

Therefore, we the people have the rights and ultimate power over parliament and all associated with “government” and it’s “Public Servants”, to instruct what we require of them. We have had this power for 800 years. There is no logical or lawful reason why this would now have been removed from us. It has not. We still have it. Being responsible actual masters, we ort to treat our servants with respect but demand good service. Sometimes they need to be gently reminded of their true position, but they do know. Always be firm but fair.