Author – Ms Initially No, policy writer
Real-work, is work that accomplishes the task necessary. And all tasks that are necessary, should be law-abiding, and that which people agree they want. Work cannot be criminals perpetrating Crimes Against Humanity and the Commonwealth dictating, sabotaging all else, and thefting.
People don’t want to be conscripted into another’s employment office, by electronic weapons, that push a line, or work, or conference call into their humanity, their sense, and harm and injure their human bodies. Sabotage is anti-competition, when weapons are used.
Breaches are very dangerous in Australia, when they involve slavery, torture, arbitrary detention, theft horror offenses, and people whom reported, or attempted to stop the offense. They should not be usurped of purpose out of court order.
Transmitters, that are not permitted, that are unlawful use, or no licence, they should be immediately switched off, and the criminals investigated. There should be awareness, of Industrial Fridge data being used as mask, and espionage fires on humans.
Cartel using old and corrupted courts & sheriff matters. Civil rights activists violated by RANZCP fellows; a cartel café using unlawful licence transmitter talking up ‘a size for your mother’s aunt’; ‘a size for your dog’s bowl’ & firing espionage at journalist.
Conference, data-theft, to do with, understanding the ‘whole area of disability’. That, is Jury. The Jury needs to understand that, understanding if this is data-theft, that proceeding instructions are being data-thefted, and tracking flicked.
The cartel perpetrator, has ‘file’ and is naming that ‘perspicacious’ and various spelling of that, and talking ‘juilette carriage’, that is firing remote ‘piloted’ electronic weapons at journalist.
Carpark cartel violating systems management and attempting to switch radar tracking via GPS and naming that ‘GPs and Jeeps for services people of all sorts licorice packets if necessary’ – needs to be arrested, for compromising warrants.
Courts have the power to make certain a medico, or other cartel, appointed with intent to data-theft the courts as litigation guardian (for a person under disability so require), is removed, and substituted. So there should not be any need to rewrite that, just reinforce that, so that courts are never data-thefted.
Warrants need to be, in position, and actioned. There must not be flicking of tracking onto humans, that do not have warrants for arrest. Tracking is for the thing, that is violating the systems management, with no licence, or licence used incorrectly.
The RANZCP fellow use of the term Registrar, is suspected usurp.
High Court Rules 2004 Chapter 1, 1.06 Interpretation Registrar means the Chief Executive and Principal Registrar, the Senior Registrar or a Deputy Registrar appointed under the High Court of Australia Act 1979.
RANZCP fellows must not usurp purposes of Chapter 2, 24.01.7 of High Court Rules 2004 – in use of word Registrar. RANZCP fellows do not have that authority of the courts to swear in evidence of another, nor take affidavit or judicial notice of that a seal or signature, that the Court, Justices, Registrar and Marshal authorize.
A RANZCP must not give directions, that Registrar of the Courts, and must not give directions without a hearing (Chapter 5, 25.12.1 High Court Rules 2004); nor Application Book, nor List Determination of Hearing; nor Discontinuance of Application, via ‘continuation sheets’, that would be criminal intent, if found to be attempt to use Court ruling via unlawful use of Government Office. A writ of quo warranto, then necessary on RANZCP fellow. If then Government inspectors may find then hidden tax fraud, that RANZCP fellow has been perpetrating, by concealing the fraud, via forced psychiatry, then that necessitates prosecution.
A RANZCP fellow may not usurp Prothonotary, Registrar of Courts, or proper officer of the court.
A RANZCP fellow may not deem abandonment by application or delay. That is a legal matter for the courts, not to be medicalised, or subjected to religious rule, or other jargon. That application of failure to comply with rules, after filing of application, may not be then said to be a person’s teeth set. That and a RANZCP fellow must not issue certificate under (Chapter 4, 41.10.2, High Court Rules 2004) and usurp court purposes. These are Proceedings in the Appellate Jurisdiction of the Court.
Nor may a RANZCP fellow, require parties to application to attend the Registrar, as if medical office were a Court, when it isn’t. The RANZCP fellow use of the term Registrar, is suspected usurp.
Nor may a RANZCP usurp Appeals Service (Chapter 4, 42.05.3, High Court Rules 2004); and if RANZCP fellow is found to be fraudulent exploitation of person, by naming that person ‘a patent’ in underline, or other data, to which a patent is attempted push as urgent, via the human rights being violated, of the person that the RANZCP fellow is arbitrarily detaining, torturing, and enslaving (and thefting human data from). A patent appeal should not usurp human rights action. The victim of psychiatrists’ violations must not be usurped in urgent court actions for human rights violated.
For Exhibits tendered; nor in the Preparation and filing of core appeal books, the Justice or Registrar, must not be usurped by medical office, of RANZCP.
There must be no further criminalising of Australian citizens, by medical office, of RANZCP, attempting to usurp purpose of the courts (Chapter 4, 42.13.2 High Court Rules 2004). Understanding from victims of psychiatrists’ violations, is that RANZCP fellows attempt to use something that is akin to this, in write up.
RANZCP fellows must never Order or Direct Discontinuation of Appeal.
A RANZCP fellow should not be usurping the Registrar of the Courts Marshal, and must never attempt to give directions without any hearing.
A RANZCP fellow must not usurp – 42.16 Dismissal for want of prosecution; and Court or Justice Ruling on its own motion after notice given by the Registrar of the Courts Marshal.
RANZCP fellow must not usurp Taxing Officer, Registrar of the Courts Marshal; and the security given by payment into the court.
RANZCP fellows must not usurp Chapter 6, Part 61—Transitional provisions relating to the High Court Amendment (Electronic Filing and Other Matters) Rules 2019, of High Court Rules 2004.
‘We’re only using transitional provisions to make certain the transistors are able to work, so to speak, we don’t really want to make it happen that way but we have to make certain that all the courts, um, I mean the RANZCP fellow do not have to be exposed for their transistors at court or otherwise’ is not something that should be permitted.
‘Hormone replacement aside the assist is there to make certain that we, oh we’re outed got’ – is really where that goes, in reports, pharmaceutical (such as Pfizer), and evidence, that may be obtained for Court Discovery, to Prosecute RANZCP fellows.
RANZCP fellows must not usurp Schedule 1- forms (High Court Rules 2004), that include constitutional matter, intervention, judgement, order, consent, arrest warrant, committal warrant, notice of appearance. Writ of quo warranto on RANZCP fellows that usurp the Court Officials.
Constitutional Rights must be reinforced
The Federal Constitution of Australia Act 1-V-51-xxiiiA, provisions and services of medicine, may be funded by the Commonwealth, ‘but not so as to authorize any form of civil conscription’.
All legislation must comply with The Federal Constitution of Australia Act, means any non-compliant legislation is rendered ab initio (nulled & voided from the beginning), such as any act of Parliament, that forces provisions and services of medicine on civilians, citizens of Australia.
Any prior judgement of courts, made in Plain Error, with reference to transcript, involving pecuniary interests, to pervert and obstruct the 1946 amendment (51-xxiiiA of the Federal Constitution) must be understood to be Plain Error, in context of Australian people being subjected to violations of continuation of invasion status.
The Attorney General was notified on the matter of The Federal Constitution of Australia Act (1-V-51-xxiiiA) in 2020 and 2021. Letters were from Ms Initially No, to the Attorney General. Facts of the matters, including that slavery, torture and arbitrary detention (and thefts of biology of citizens) may not be considered allowable under fundamental law and the Federal Constitution, reinforces that. Concerns of considerable breach of the courts, causing Structural Error, to allow legislation that is non-compliance with holocaust-prevention, that is the intention of the 1946 amendment.
Reference
Australian Legislation
High Court Rules 2004, Statutory Rules No. 304, 2004, made under the Judiciary Act 1903, Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918 and High Court of Australia Act 1979
Chapter 2, 21.08.6 Where the interests of a person under a disability so require, the Court or a Justice may appoint or remove a litigation guardian or substitute another person as litigation guardian.
24.01.7 An affidavit may be sworn before a Justice, a Registrar, a person having authority to administer an oath and to take and receive affidavits for the purposes of the Federal Court of Australia, or the Supreme Court of a State or Territory, or a Justice of the Peace.
High Court Amendment (Electronic Filing and Other Matters) Rules 2019
Comments