My submission is below and details the problems everyone has in whinging about dual nationals being in parliament as criminal frauds but we aren't able to do anything about it because we don't live in their electorate. The law lets voters check the validity of their MPs for 40 days every electoral cycle, about 3 years.
Prime example is Tony Abbott, dual national, pommie and Aussie and signed 9 false declarations for the Australian Electoral Commission, lied to get into parliament and is there as a criminal fraud. 300,000 people on facebook asked he should show he is in parliament legally, 34,000 signed a petition asking he show he has renounced his British citizenship,there's even been petitions lodged in the House of Representatives asking he show he complies with the constitution, all of us have been ignored by him.
There are and were other criminal frauds in parliament, several didn't chance running again and retired undamaged. Gray, Ripol, Baldwin didn't dare, Nikolic got voted out and so did Jensen. Conroy ran after a few weeks in parliament so he wouldn't be caught.
I am sick of the people being ignored and even more sick of the whingers who complain but don't dare try and do something. One person was going to take Tony Abbott to the court of disputed returns but was unfortunately hospitalised before he could get there. So are you going to continue to whinge and moan and do nothing or dare to put your own submission into parliament? The worst that can happen is your complaint will be lodged in the committee's report and posterity will know some of us cared enough to ask,. And you never know, the shit might hit the fan and something gets done about the problems with S44 of the constitution.
So here we go, links to the parliament web site are here
You will need to register and go through the bull, but thats the way the interweb is now.
ROBERTS
I ask the committee to examine the eligibility of
Senator Roberts under S44 of the constitution.
A voter has 40 days every 3 years to ask the High Court to examine
eligibility of candidates and elected members of parliament.
I contacted Mr Roberts asking his previous
citizenship details, when he became Australian and to provide a copy of his
renunciation of prior citizenships. He
blocked me on all social media and refused to answer any emails. I contacted the One Nation office and the
first time they said they did not know who Malcolm Roberts was. The second time they claimed they could not
understand my accent. I am dual British
and Australian citizen with as good a strine accent as anyone I know.
In the only documents available about Mr Roberts he
says he was born in India and came to Australia as a child.
After the election was declared I lodged an FOI
request with the AEC to have a copy of Mr Roberts birth date, place of birth
and date of getting Australian citizenship. FOIs have a response time of 30 days, I had
plenty of time within the 40 day court of disputed returns period to get the
information I required, but because the AEC couldn’t be bothered, I am still
waiting for a response.
Mr Roberts was born in India and got British
citizenship on their Britons born overseas scheme. There is no proof in the UK
Home Office he has renounced his British citizenship.
Because I was unable to ascertain there may be a
problem because of whatever the AEC were up to and because Mr Roberts blocked
me on social media and refused to answer any emails or allow the One Nation
staff to answer my requests I was unable to go to the High Court to lodge a
petition for the court of disputed returns.
Will the committee please ask Mr Roberts to show he
has renounced his British citizenship and gained Australian citizenship
legally. All members must comply with
the constitution and when the only way to ascertain that is blocked by
arrogance of the MP in refusing to respond to communication, and the AEC
refusing to comply with their FOI laws the only option is to ask you to do the
job of checking up on MPs.
Members of parliament including newly elected
members of parliament must under Parliament House rules communicate with all
voters, the rules say “One of a Member’s most important skills is
communicating—receiving, understanding and evaluating information from many
sources, and passing on information and opinions in Parliament and elsewhere—to
the Government and to individuals and groups.
Being well
informed and having up to date information is vital if a Member is to
understand and debate the great range of legislation and other issues dealt
with by the House and provide an effective representational link between his or
her constituents and the Parliament.”
Senator Roberts was in breach of those rules by
blocking me on social media and refusing to answer emails. The One Nation party may also be in breach of
those rules for refusing to answer my questions about Malcolm Roberts.
I trust you will uphold the constitution and have
the now Senator Roberts prove he has renounced his British citizenship and
become Australian legally. If I am right
and Senator Roberts has not renounced his British citizenship I would like to
claim the Common Informers (Parliamentary Disqualifications)Act 1975 penalty
due to me as the common informer.
Some pretty pictures. One is a screen cap of an email from Australian High Commission in Delhi, saying they dont keep birth details of Aussies born in India and that all details of them are kept in ACT BDM.
Another is a screen cap of an email from ACT (Canberra) Births Deaths and Marriages saying they have no record of Roberts born overseas.
Another is the passenger list showing he had UK citizenship.
ABBOTT
I ask the committee to examine the eligibility of
Anthony John Abbott to sit in parliament.
He is a dual national British and Australian citizen and as such is in
breach of s44 of the constitution. The
rules set by your parliament and the AEC stop me from taking Mr Abbott to the
court of disputed returns because I am not a voter in Warringah. This disenfranchises me from the electoral
process significantly.
There are petitions in the House of Representatives
asking Mr Abbott show he complies with the constitution and the answer to that
petition was that the 40 day period every 3 year is enough to find out the
truth. But when the person lodging the
petition in parliament can not lodge a petition in the court of disputed
returns the system is broken.
Your committee can resolve this problem by asking Mr
Abbott to show he has renounced his British citizenship. Parliamentary rules say MPs must communicate,
communication is one of the prime skills of being an MP. Mr Abbott has refused to answer any email or
letter from me about his British citizenship.
He blocks me on social media. His
staff have been instructed to tell me on the phone that Mr Abbott has only ever
been Australian, but a look at the proof shows otherwise.
Mr Abbott was born in London UK to a British father
on 4/11/1957. Under British law he was given automatic British
citizenship. A copy of the birth
certificate is attached to this submission.
Mr Abbott has never applied for Australian
citizenship, his mother did that when he was 23 years old to comply with the Rhodes
Trust citizenship requirements. The
National Archives of Australia have a copy of the file which the committee can
access and most relevant document is attached which shows Mr Abbott was granted
citizenship on 2/7/1981. This gave him
dual British and Australian citizenship.
In October 1981 Mr Abbott entered Oxford University
as a British citizen, not as an Australian.
The UK Home Office and the UK National Archives have
no record of Mr Abbott renouncing his British citizenship.
Because MPs ignore voters and don’t follow their own
rules with regard to communication and because the rules set down by the AEC in
petitioning the court of disputed returns it is very easy for an MP to sit in
parliament illegally.
I trust you will examine the facts and ask Mr Abbott
to show he has renounced his British citizenship, it is a fairly easy matter to
have him show the paper work if he has it.
The Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet said in an FOI 2014 -159
that the renunciation of British citizenship papers do not exist.
The birth certificate,Oxford FOI & proof of Aussie citizenship are at this blog page
SUMMARY
Should you find Mr Abbott does not comply with our
constitution would you please order he pay the Common Informers (Parliamentary
Disqualifications) Act 1975 penalty to me.
My private contact details are not for publication,
I have had 5 death threats online since first asking questions about Mr Abbotts
dual citizenship. All were sent to the
AFP.
I am a voter, I am politically savvy, I am not a
member of any political party. The
parliamentary system seems to be there to protect the politicians rather than to have voters
being able to access their MPs.
My two proposals about S44 outline a big problem for
the system, whilst the ARC is not
allowed to query the constitution it must be up to you, the JSCEM to ascertain
all MPs are in parliament legally. It is
ridiculous that a voter in Queensland can not query the legality of an MP in
Sydney because I didn’t vote in their electorate; even in Qld the slow response
by the AEC endangers the system which only allows a complaint to be made for 40
days every 3 years.
Some more put to the JSCEM
Section
44 of the Australian Constitution
I first asked about dual citizenship in late 2013. I
was born in England in the same year as the newly elected Prime Minister Mr
Abbott and am a proud dual national, British and Australian. In previous years I had sort of heard
questions asked of Ms Gillard regarding her British citizenship and remembered
she had said she had renounced to comply with the constitution. I googled our constitution and found S44 and
then emailed our new prime minister. He
didn’t bother answering.
I emailed a few more times and asked on Facebook,
still no answer. So I thought of another
thing I had vaguely heard about but didn’t really know about, freedom of
information. I had no idea what I was doing
so I wrote to the FOI clerk at the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet
asking how to lodge an FOI asking for Mr Abbott renunciation papers and was
shocked to get a letter from Ms Peta Credlin telling me that if ever I
officially asked for an FOI regarding Mr Abbott’s renunciation of British
citizenship papers, then she would become the FOI clerk and refuse the request. That was in February 2014.
During 2014 I asked a few other MPs, mostly party
leaders, to ask Mr Abbott about his renunciation papers, I asked a few
newspapers to ask questions and again totally ignored.
I also started to get death threats online from
supporters of Mr Abbott who were shocked I would be trying to get him to obey
our laws. These were all referred to the
AFP via their online forms.
I learnt the Australian Electoral Commission can’t
look at S44 because it isn’t Australian Commonwealth law, the constitution is
British and colonial state law. The AEC
is limited and hogtied to just Commonwealth laws.
I learnt Mr Abbott sleeping with the Australian
Federal Police was very helpful for him.
I believe it was Mr Quaedvleig, the 2IC of the AFP who emailed me
telling me they would never investigate breaches of S44 and most especially the
signing of false declarations for the AEC by Mr Abbott.
I wrote to the Attorney General Mr Brandis, The
Speaker of the House Mrs Bishop and my own local MP Mr Brough and was
gloriously ignored by all.
Coincidentally just after writing to those three and MR Quaedvlieg my
email account was hacked and everything deleted. I am an old computer security geek so only
one or two original files were lost, copies of all important documents were
kept here there and everywhere.
Mr Shorten MP blocked me on facebook for daring to
ask him to ask Mr Abbott about dual citizenship.
Mr Watts MP went to the Fairfax media with a story
about my being a birther, a birther is someone who is usually racist and
doesn’t believe president Obama of the USA was born in the USA.
Senator Cameron’s office said my queries were an
irrelevance and nationality didn’t matter.
Senator McDonald’s office said everyone knew Mr
Abbott was a dual national and it was legal, wasn’t it?
The Guardian newspaper sent a knock knock joke
writer to do another story about birthers.
The Independent Australian ran many stories asking
Mr Abbott to at least talk about his dual nationality.
Several other independent media groups also took up
asking but again everyone is ignored.
Ms Butler wrote to Mr Abbott and was dutifully
ignored, Senator Nash wrote to Senator Brandis about it and again was totally
ignored.
There is a cone of silence about the question of S44
compliance.
I can understand party concerns about two dual
nationals who can not renounce their birth citizenships: Senator Dastyari was
born in Iran and according to Iranian diplomatic staff to renounce his
citizenship he must return to Tehran and meet a special council to plea for the
renunciation of his citizenship. He cant
risk this because he and his parents fled Iran because of protests and
political activities and to return he may face arrest and possible execution. Mr Nikolic could not renounce his Serbian or
Yugoslavian citizenship because their rules say he can only do it if he has
done national service.
But S44 is part of our laws and staying silent about
Mr Abbott and the other MPs who were dual nationals is covering up crimes. I mentioned this in an email to Senator
Brandis and he destroyed my emails before passing to departmental
officers. FOI shows that.
300,000 people on facebook were in various groups
calling for Mr Abbott to show he has renounced his British citizenship.
34,000 signed a petition asking he show he has
renounced and is in parliament legally, that was presented to Mr Shorten MP, Ms
Plibersek MP, Mr Bandt MP and that was as far as it got. All stayed silent on the matter, neither
dared ask in parliament.
Darryn Hinch, now Senator Hinch asked several times
in his Sky News program about Mr Abbott’s compliance with the constitution.
The system is broken because all MPs seem to be in
agreement to cover-up for all breaches of S44.
There is a petition in the House of Representatives
1108-1606 asking Mr Abbott to show his renunciation of British citizenship
papers, the response by Senator Cormann says “responsibility for compliance
with S44 rests with each candidate who nominates for election” it then goes on
to say making a false declaration is illegal and that the High court can hear
breaches of S44 for 40 days every election cycle.
There is also a petition in the House of
Representatives asking for an audit of compliance with S44 of the constitution,
but it is lodged with Senator Cormann not the Attorney General and marked not
to be reviewed. It was hidden by Dr.
Jensen who was probably a dual national himself.
Shortly before the 2016 election a social media
campaign started asking residents in electorates that have foreign born MPs to
prepare to go to the Court of Disputed Returns to have their elected
representatives show they comply with our laws.
Mr Gray, Mr Ripol and Mr Baldwin all pulled out of nominating for the
election, old age, retirement or fear of being caught? They were asked to show they comply with our
laws and all refused. Dr. Jensen was
disendorsed, was his dual citizenship a part of that reason? And Mr Nikolic got voted out.
The whole Section 44 thing is a shambles and mostly
a political cover up. Mr Abbott is in
parliament illegally and all MPs seem intent on protecting him from the
law. How can our society operate
properly if those at the top are immune from prosecution?
WHAT TO DO
The AEC must be allowed to monitor, check and
prosecute breaches of S44 of the constitution.
This can be done by a ministerial directive or a change in the electoral
act.
The Court of Disputed Returns must be allowed to
operate full time, that is every day of ever parliament, MPs can’t be allowed
to hide for 40 days and then glory in knowing they can’t be caught. This would be in conjunction with the AEC
being allowed to monitor, check and prosecute breaches of S44.
Special cases such as Senator Dastyari and Mr
Nikolic must go to the High Court for adjudication, it can not be up to a cabal
of politicians to ignore the law to protect a few.
OTHER S44 PROBLEMS
********* I
WILL NOT NAME THE SYDNEY BARRISTER WHO ADVISED ME ABOUT OFFSHORE ACCOUNTS, HE
IS A MEMBER OF THE LIBERAL PARTY AND OBVIOUSLY WANTS TO PROTECT HIS OWN. JUST LIKE EVERYONE ELSE TIED UP WITH S44. BUT
TO NOT DISCLOSE A CRIME OF BREACHING THE CONSTITUTION MAY ENDANGER HIS OWN
PROFESSIONAL INEGRITY AND PUT HIM IN CONFLICT WITH HIS LEGAL PROFESSION AND
THEIR ETHICS COMMITTEES
Mr Turnbull gloated in parliament in April 2016 that
he is rich enough to afford Cayman Islands accounts. The problem here is that the accounts are
there to get zero taxation and the only way to get zero taxation in the Caymans
Islands is to be a citizen or to buy the rights of a citizen as companies do.
There is nothing illegal about using zero tax
offshore accounts for most Australians, just as with dual nationality every
Australian has the right to do just that. Until you enter parliament.
The same few lines of our constitution that screw up Tony Abbott and probably half a dozen others for having dual nationalities also has problems for offshore account holders.
Mr Turnbull admits and gloats about having some, probably Mr Palmer has some too.
Section 44 of the constitution says an MP must be disqualified if they are entitled to the rights or privileges of a subject or a citizen of a foreign power.
Zero tax in the Caymans is a right and a privilege of citizens of the Caymans. The rich buy that right to zero tax.
The same few lines of our constitution that screw up Tony Abbott and probably half a dozen others for having dual nationalities also has problems for offshore account holders.
Mr Turnbull admits and gloats about having some, probably Mr Palmer has some too.
Section 44 of the constitution says an MP must be disqualified if they are entitled to the rights or privileges of a subject or a citizen of a foreign power.
Zero tax in the Caymans is a right and a privilege of citizens of the Caymans. The rich buy that right to zero tax.
I have asked Mr Keenan MP as Justice Minister to
look into this but he blocks me on social media and refuses to answer my
emails.
There you have it, the past two Prime Ministers are
in parliament illegally and protected by 99% of all members. Why is it the laws
of this country do not apply to politicians? Why are they protected from
prosecution?
When reviewing the submissions a few of you
politicians have a chance to clean up the place, remove some criminal frauds
and set new guidelines and processes to ensure everyone follows our laws. If you find Mr Abbott and Mr Turnbull are in
parliament illegally I would ask you provide me with the Common Informers (Parliamentary
Disqualifications) Act penalty.
CRIMINALITY PROBLEMS
Finding that an MP is in parliament illegally would
be extremely bad for them and for our laws.
My understanding is that an MP would face the Common Informers penalty
as well as face having to repay their salaries, their expenses, office costs
and lose their pension.
With the two I mention here both being Prime
Ministers any laws they have given to the Governor General would become null
and void. Perhaps even any law they have
voted on during their stay in parliament would become null and void.
If I may I would suggest a special law be enacted to
ratify everything they have done in parliament, waive the repayment of
salaries, expenses and costs.
The major penalty for them would be banishment from parliament
and cancel any pension rights and gold card rights a legal MP or PM might
expect. I would also ask that they not
be allowed to stand for election again.
Please do not publish my address details which you
hold elsewhere
PROBLEMS FOR THE PEOPLE
A person who suspects or indeed knows that an MP is
in breach of S44 of the constitution may or may not be able to act on that
because the rules specify that a person must have voted in the election in
which the MP or candidate stood. The AEC
and High Court rule this must be in the electorate not the general
election. I think this rule should be
altered so that people all over Australia can decided to take an MP to court
for breaching the constitution rather than just those in their electorate.
I have been contacted by many people since I first
dared ask about Mr Abbott’s citizenship and his breach of the constitution and
those people were frustrated because they could not ask about the MP or senator
they were concerned about. The judicial
system and indeed the constitution is being denied to the people. One person living in Canberra was concerned
about Senator Dastyari and wanted to ask in the High Court, but because they
had voted in Canberra they were precluded from asking in the judicial system.
Please consider allowing people from all over
Australia to be allowed to participate in the judicial system, and to take
advantage of our constitution.
Tony Magrathea
This submission may have been sent, the APH computer
system seems fragile at times and I did not get notification of this having
been sent., There are a few added
paragraphs to the original I tried to send.
And Senator Bob Day
On 17 October 2016 Senator Bob day announced he was
resigning from parliament because his private companies had become insolvent.
Was Senator Day insolvent when he signed the
declaration on the nomination form or did the insolvency only happen in the few
weeks since the election?
Section 44 of the constitution says a person who is
an undischarged bankrupt or insolvent is disqualified from being a member of
parliament.
As the Australian Electoral Commission can not ask
for proof of compliance with the constitution Senator Day may have been
insolvent when he signed the nomination form.
Will you ascertain if Senator Day was or was not
insolvent when he signed the nomination form?
Will you ascertain when Senator Day became
insolvent?
Will you ask that charges of fraud be laid should it
be shown he signed a false declaration for the Australian Electoral Commission?
Will you award myself with the Common Informers
(Parliamentary Disqualifications) Act 1975 penalty should you find he was
disqualified while in parliament.
This again shows the problems with not allowing
people outside a candidate’s electorate from taking matters to the Court of
Disputed Returns. Will the JSCEM
consider changing rules to allow voters from anywhere in Australia to take
candidates from an electorate to the Court of Disputed Returns?
Will the JSCEM consider allowing the AEC to be
allowed to examine and prosecute compliance with S44 of the constitution?
Yours
Tony Magrathea
