The fees the High Court wants to consider an application are currently set at $2726 for a Corporation and $1,364 for an individual, and that may be a fair price if they would do some work for that money. This is a disgrace and is typical of the poor quality thinking that prevails when some people are given a commission to run a business. For the peace order and good government of Australia the filing fee in the High Court should only be about one tenth of that, $136.40. It should be a freely available service not an expensive privilege to access the High Court.

Yes Whistler, Eddie Mabo did win in the High Court, but he won for the wrong reasons. The High Court held that Almighty God was no longer Sovereign in Australia but some Aboriginal God peculiar to them, and this decision has virtually destroyed every piece of property in Australia. It could have been decided on what they call adverse possession, which is a title that used to be available when people lived on land for a long time as was the case there. These people are thinking they are Almighty God when in fact they are Satanic.

Jury trial was your guarantee of a fair go, and of everyone’s property rights. If the High Court represented the Christian majority of Australians, they would accept every document offered for filing, and use their power to remit them to a whole bundle of courts, that became capable of exercising the judicial power of the Commonwealth in 1903. The “Kable Principle” should see them do this on every occasion, that someone is dissatisfied with the result of a Judge only Court.

In S 2 Judiciary Act 1903 the Parliament of the Commonwealth clearly says that all Judge and Court proceedings are entitled to be picked up and quashed by the High Court, and the matter sent back for retrial, under S 44 Judiciary Act 1903, with directions. The directions should specify jury trial to comply with Christianity, unless the person elects to be tried by a public servant

Peter the Believer,
the Courts of an equal rights Republic
accommodate women and men of all beliefs.
Aborigine women Christians are tried in a women's jurisdiction
Aborigine men Christians are tried in a men's jurisdiction.

I had a call from a very distressed fifty something chap this afternoon, one of many I get, who has been trying to get a trial of some issues he has with both the State and Federal Governments.

I get a few of these from time to time, and they are mostly very distressed people on the verge of homelessness or homeless already, due to corrupt bankruptcy proceedings, proceedings by jealous relatives who want the older generation to sell their home, go into a nursing home on the pension, and give them their perceived share of their parents wealth, or simply older people who have worked hard, been befriended, and placed by their so called friends in protective custody under the Guardianship Tribunal.

It is directly the fault of the High Court that such people are being made victims. If the High Court was actually diligent in its defence of the Constitution, was prepared to accept all attempts to file cases in it, dealt with everything brought to it, by every distressed individual who goes there, and stopped trying to be Almighty God, and allowed the Christian principle of jury trial to be restored, there would be an outbreak of peace and goodwill among all men and women.

This chap’s mother who is Italian and around seventy five, has been placed in a Nursing Home by one of her daughters. She, the mother is not disabled, speaks some but not good English, and desperately wanted to live out her days until she was disabled in her own home, so she could be Nonna ( Grandmother) to her children’s children. She is a Roman Catholic. The Nursing Home is probably Roman Catholic, and no doubt think they are doing the right thing.

The Guardianship Tribunal ordered her home sold, and the proceeds paid to the Nursing home, after legal fees incurred by the application to imprison this elderly woman. I know of another case of Mortgage fraud, where a 75 years old pensioner woman has had a mortgage taken out over her home by her son for $1,000,000. Who’ll be next?

The general decline in morality of all corporate governance in Australia not just the homelessness that can directly be attributed to the High Court is because the High Court is the leader in lawlessness in Australia. When the highest court in the land cannot obey the law, and directly contradicts the statutes made to keep it honest, why should anyone in Australia be honest.

It seems that dishonesty is the norm, and the total departure from decency and morality instead of being confined and maintained by the High Court is led by them. Because the High Court is dishonest all lower courts feel completely free to be dishonest too.

It appears that the High Court does not understand that the State Religion in 1900 was Christianity, and that S 116 was enacted to give Roman Catholic Australians equality, not abolish Almighty God completely. We have the worst possible atheists as the seven criminal sinners who govern the conduct of Australia in its corporate identity. When the Rudd Government made anti cartel laws recently the three women and four men on the High Court should be the first to be convicted. The cartel they head, is the worst offender within the borders of Australia. Instead of competing with State courts, to deliver services to the Australian public, they restrict access to the Federal Supreme Court, and as a consequence abolish accountability throughout the system.

In 28 days after the 24th July 2009, serious cartel behavior will result in a jail term, but since the Director of Public Prosecutions is given cartel powers to exclusively prosecute its unlikely to make any difference, except to the personal fortune of the Director of Public Prosecutions. The continued restrictions on the delivery of justice services by the High Court are likely to continue, and its continued conduct as an exclusive club is also likely to continue.

All that is likely to happen is an increase in bribery and corruption. The incentive to bribe a Judge or Magistrate is greatly increased, and the personal fortune of the Chairman of ASIC is likely to be greatly enhanced

Solicitors and barristers used to all be Christians before 1870, when lawyers were admitted back into the English Parliament and the principles of the Holy Bible as the ultimate Rule Book were understood by everyone. Open disagreement by Roman Catholics meant they were excluded from public life in England, and large numbers of convicts were drawn from the Catholic population.

Gradually the understanding of the system has been eroded, and the High Court as constituted in 2009, is as much a victim as the hapless Australians who would or should be able to rely upon them. The Parliament of the Commonwealth still starts each day with the Lord’s Prayer, from Matthew 8 Verse 9-13 of the Official Bible, the King James Version. Courts were courts of our god, as referred to in Psalm 92 verse 13, and if a man or woman was planted in the House of the Lord, he or she prospered in the courts of our God. In other words it was important to go to church and know the Gospels.

A court, was a place where the promise in Matthew 7 verse 7 was carried out. Ask and you shall receive, knock and you shall enter, seek and you shall find, and it was also a place where no man or woman judged another. The curse of Statism is judgmentalism. The Holy Bible prohibits it absolutely, and when one person condemns another, to prison or in any other way, he or she is a sinner. However while the condemned person is not a Believer in Jesus Christ, he or she is outside the Royal Covenant, and there is no crime in sentencing them. The benefits of Christianity only flowed to the King or Queens Family. That was the body of Christ.

A solicitor or barrister prepared a prayer for presentation to a court, or an ordinary person did it himself, and while Christianity still ruled, it was the duty of a Justice to grant it, unless a jury said it was to be refused. Homelessness will stay with us, until the High Court relents and repents.