Part 52F. Australia’s “irrelevant” Crimes against Humanity. Glimpses of how Genocide works in Australia.

This posting is intended to provide insight into why millions of unsuspecting welfare recipients can be terrorized, exploited, defrauded and randomly murdered by unconstitutionally elected parliaments that have created genocidal laws.

NOTE: The short link for this posting is:  :  https://wp.me/p1n8TZ-1fn

GLIMPSE #1 – The Mindset of Centrelink’s Bureaucrats.

The following statements were made by Kathryn Campbell, the former Secretary (CEO) of the Department of Human Services in a 2015 speech titled DHS service delivery reform a success, all things considered”

[1] “The auditor-general’s report suggests the relevant KPI — an average waiting time of 16 minutes or less — is setting a low bar compared to other DHS telephone lines and other large Australian call centres. A simple average wait time is also not very meaningful, compared to the more complex KPIs used by other call centres.

[MY COMMENT: Waiting one or two hours to get through to Centrelink is extremely meaningful to those waiting but was quite clearly not very meaningful to Secretary Campbell, who never has to wait that long when phoning her staff.]

[2] “I came from an enemy location — the Department of Finance … so I wasn’t seen to be doing any of the ‘takeover’ business. But even today I’m sure if you discussed it with some of our staff, they would say one took over the other.”

[MY COMMENT: “I came from an enemy location…” Secretary Campbell’s mind was clearly focused upon internal bureaucratic politics and not on the life-saving function of her job, i.e. stopping vulnerable Australians from slipping through the welfare safety net and possibly dying as a result.

[3] “We believe that we have continued to deliver positive outcomes for both customers and our staff during this period, and that it was essential to do service delivery reform so that we would continue to be able to do that,”

[MY COMMENT: the civil rights of millions of vulnerable people have been violated and in February 2017, Secretary Campbell was unable to either confirm or deny a death toll that may exceed 100,000.

[4] “We do a lot of work on claims that are never granted, So people will chance their arm, try their luck. … I think there might be some ways that we could probably give them the bad news earlier, that they haven’t met one of those eligibility thresholds, but we are required to process claims that are submitted under the legislation.”

[MY COMMENT: “We do a lot of work on claims that are never granted.” It is very obvious that Secretary Campbell believed that her job was to save money, not the lives of very vulnerable people who, for a variety of reasons, are at risk because they lack adequate means to support themselves, e.g. the Liberal party destroying the national car manufacturing industry and having no immediate jobs to replace the jobs destroyed.

Check out this citizens-rights violating statement: “we could probably give them the bad news earlier.” It is glaringly obvious that Secretary Campbell was totally unaware of the binding High Court decision in ASIC v Hellicar that once a Centrelink decision was challenged by a welfare recipient, that Centrelink had to take the issue to court and get a court determination of the facts before any further action could be taken on the withholding of welfare payments.

ASIC v Hellicar:

http://www8.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/cth/HCA/2012/17.html

At paragraph 141 to 143:

And insofar as the duty was said to stem from a proposition “that the public interest can only be served if the case advanced on behalf of [a] regulatory agency does in fact represent the truth, in the sense that the facts relied upon as primary facts actually occurred”, that premise is false for at least two reasons.

  1. First, the proposition ignores that even a criminal trial “is not, and does not purport to be, an examination and assessment of all the information and evidence that exists, bearing upon the question of guilt or innocence”. Each side in a criminal trial “is free to decide the ground on which it or he will contest the issue, the evidence which it or he will call, and what questions whether in chief or in cross-examination shall be asked; always, of course, subject to the rules of evidence, fairness and admissibility”. Proceedings for declaration of contravention or pecuniary penalty order engage no more stringent requirements.
  2. Second, the proposition that the public interest requires that the facts upon which a regulatory agency relies must be facts that “actually occurred” appears to require the regulatory agency to make some final judgment about what “actually occurred” before it adduces evidence. Deciding the facts of the case is a court’s task, not a task for the regulatory authority.

No court decision, then no legally valid decision by Secretary Campbell and her 25,000 minions.

GLIMPSE #2 – THE ROLE OF THE MASS MEDIA

The double standards of the mass media, especially News Corporation newspapers are beyond belief:

Treasurer for sale

Joe Hockey sued Fairfax Media for a 3-word tweet, “Treasurer for sale” and won $200,000 in compensation, not for the news item above which the Federal Court agreed was fair and accurate comment but for the 3-word tweet that promoted this news article.

Now, keeping in mind that until a court decides the merit of any decision to withhold a welfare payment, which is a constitutional right, Centrelink cannot make any legally valid decision in the matter, check out these two News Corporation articles:

Bludgers

“No show, no pay” violates t Genocide and Crimes against Humanity provisions in articles 6 and 7 of the International Criminal Court’s Rome Statute, a law that has applied to the Commonwealth of Australia since about July 2002.

News Ltd Dole cheats

In addition to violating the genocide and crimes against humanity provisions in the Rome Statute of the International criminal Court, this news article, like the 1st article, also violates South Australia’s criminal defamation law:

257—Criminal defamation
(1) A person who, without lawful excuse, publishes defamatory matter concerning another living person—
(a) knowing the matter to be false or being recklessly indifferent as to whether the matter is true or false; and
(b) intending to cause serious harm, or being recklessly indifferent as to whether the publication of the defamatory matter will cause serious harm, to a person (whether the person defamed or not),
is guilty of an offence.
Maximum penalty: Imprisonment for 3 years.

Civil action is also possible if enough welfare recipients decide to sue newspapers for defamation and violation of civil rights, a fact made quite clear by the June 2017 Manus Island class action:

Manus 70 million compo

When paid out in June 2017, this was the largest every class action payout. However, with the Civil Rights of millions of people having been violated and Secretary Campbell unable to either confirm or deny a secretly classified, officially “irrelevant'” death toll that, after decades of recklessly ignoring these fatalities, may now be somewhere between 100,000 and 1,000,000, the $70 million may be ‘small change” once welfare recipients follow the Manus Island lead and sue the Commonwealth and mass media supporters of genocide and crimes against humanity.

OOPS! – Scott Morrison said:

‘This parliament should decide what our obligations are under these conventions – not those who seek to direct us otherwise from places outside this country, such as foreign courts or the United Nations*’ 

Scott Morrison: Migration & Maritime Powers Legislation Amendment (Resolving the Asylums Legacy caseload) Bill 2014 – Debate 25-9-2014

Mr. Morrison’s comment cost us taxpayers $90 MILLION in compensation for a decision made by the Papua-New Guinea Supreme Court on the 25th April, 2016. Both the Australian and New Guinea governments had violated the human rights of the Manus Island detainees and had the case gone to court, we taxpayers could have been hit with a much larger bill for Scott Morrison’s bad judgement.

In the meantime, ALTHOUGH DOING SO MAY BE USELESS, my advice to victims of Centrelink’s randomly lethal criminal abuses of power remains the same:

CALL THE COPS!

Policeman

Austrack Comm Stevens

The tracking slip above was for my Express Post letter to the South Australian Police commissioner, Grant Stevens.

Austrack Coroner

The tracking slip above was for my Express Post letter to the South Australian Coroner, Mark Johns.

 

At this time, neither Commissioner Stevens nor Coroner Johns has contacted me for details of deaths that I am aware of. Until sufficient pressure by victims of Centrelink’s ‘skip due process of law’, which can be randomly lethal, are willing to call the cops, no police force in Australia is likely to act until intense pressure to do something is applied. Until that happens, the status quo will apply, i.e. every police force in Australia probably just stonewall and, by doing nothing, help to conceal these State Sanctioned Crimes against Humanity.

Ron Medlicott. Registered teacher and a Christian volunteer lay-advocate

Advertisements
This entry was posted in 2016 Federal Election, abuse of power, burking, Case law, crimes against humanity, election, genocide, murder, News and politics, Political, Uncategorized, Welfare rights, White Collar Crime and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s