Home Page (http://amvif.com/government)

Review Home Page

Submission Introduction

DVA Request For submissions

VEA s 4A

Non Publication Computer Code

Non Application High Court Precedents

Writeway Reports ultra vires

Minister Has Authority to Make Decisions

Claims Redetermined After Ultra Vires

Referral Diagnosis Precedent to High Court

Consent Declaration

Researcher Instructions

 

 

 

Submission Introduction

DVA Request For submissions

 

Submission Topics

Prosecution Method

1

Non Application VEA s 4A

Criminal

 

2

Non Publication Computer Code

 

Ultra Vires

3

Non Application High Court Precedents

 

Ultra Vires

4

Writeway Reports ultra vires

 

Ultra Vires

5

Minister Has Authority to Make Decisions

   

6

Claims Redetermined after "Ultra Vires"

 

Ultra Vires

7

Referral Diagnosis Precedent to High Court

   

8

Consent Declaration

Criminal

Ultra Vires

9

Researcher Instructions

Criminal

Ultra Vires

 

Search Engine for this web site:
http://amvif.com

This will find information on any of my web sites.

If, for instance, you want the report on the High Court case of Byrnes simply type "Byrnes" in the search engine.

 

 

TERRY

FOGARTY

 

TELEPHONE: (07) 3266 6636  

Mobile: 0419 668 197

Email:  terry.fogarty5@gmail.com

Web: http://amvif.com/

16 MANN AVENUE

NORTHGATE QLD 4013

AUSTRALIA

 

 

Monday 29 June, 2009

 

Veterans have fought, have died, have been wounded, and have suffered disabilities in protecting “Democracy”.

 

They therefore have a very strong right to have democracy work for them.

 

An essential component of democracy is the doctrine of the separation of powers – the executive arm of government and the judiciary are independent of one another and separate from one another.

 

In Repatriation matters this is circumvented by the bureaucracy who control what matters proceed to the judiciary. The Australian Federal Police decline to investigate using their regulations as justification. So it is difficult for issues affecting veterans to be ruled on by an appropriate court.

 

When they have made it through to the High Court (the top of the legal hierarchy) the result has been five to nil in favour of the veterans against the Repatriation Commission.

 

Sometimes the Repatriation Commission does not accept the umpire’s verdict and seeks to have the law changed. They did so with O’Brien but were thwarted in their efforts to do the same after Bushell by the Democrats voting with the conservatives who were then in opposition.

 

The Repatriation Commission has got around this by not applying the precedents correctly (or at all).

 

The accompanying submissions satisfy the "anomalies" criteria specified in the DVA request for submissions in relation to the Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986, as amended.

 

This web site has copies of extensive correspondence in relation to these matters. I have twice written to all 225 members of the Federal Parliament.

 

Justice will only be served by having the matters referred to in this submission determined in appropriate courts. It's been my intention for some time to do a cold canvas of law firms in an endeavour to get these matters into the courts. I was delayed caring for my dying mother but now that Mum has died my available time has increased greatly.

 

The bureaucracy already has the power in relation to the "ultra vires" remedies. If it is necessary to pursue the criminal breaches then the "governance provisions" in the Criminal Code will encompass many in the chain of command - right up to the commissioners. Politicians appear to be exempt because of Parliamentary Privilege.

 

Jailing bureaucrats isn't harsh when we consider that Australia is prepared to sacrifice the lives of each of its defence force personnel in times of conflict.

 

The monetary value of these illegalities is considerable. For a single rate TPI (Special Rate plus Service Pension) aged 55 (estimated life expectancy 75) it is approximately $800,000 - hardly petty crime.

 

Terry Fogarty