That CD you are talking about was played at a Public Meeting in Melbourne recently, and the fifty people present broke into applause. If you want a copy, modern technology lets you download it from the Net. The link is here. http://www.larryhannigan.com/Constitution.htm

At the recent by election in Altona that resulted in a 12% swing against State Labor, 20,000 copies were distributed. It is a powerful document and could well decide the outcome of the next State and Federal election.

People all over Victoria are using their technology to copy and distribute this CD as any computer can. People are going to meetings to learn about their Constitution and their legal rights, and all sorts of people who are sadly put upon by their Banks and lending institutions draw hope from its contents.

People who are financially secure but under attack by oppressive State Laws, and jack booted State Police, are falling back on that document. The three hundred thousand Australians in Victoria at risk of losing their licences to drive are realizing that driving is a Commonwealth right, and cannot be denied by State Legislation. There is an outbreak of hope.

Paul Keating’s Government amended the Trade Practices Act 1974 to define all State Governments as a business, and extended its prohibitions to them. However while the Business of the High Court is currently artificially controlled by the Cartel and the Federal Court of Australia is no better, it is going to fall back on the criminal jurisdiction of a Magistrates Court in Victoria, to enforce S 43 and break the back of State thievery, from ordinary people.

There is a song at Hillsong, My chains are gone, I’ve been set free, the Lord my God has rescued me, and the Trade Practices Act 1974 is the bolt cutters, enacted by Keating, in a Parliament where they start each day, with the Lord’s prayer. It is at Matthew 6:9-13. A Judge, as representing Almighty God should never refuse a prayer, by reference to Matthew 7: 7-12 unless authorized to do so by a jury. Only judges should rule

Raw Mustard
Probably the only way that change can occur is to form a new Party representive of democratic principles. It probably wouldn't get up though unless there was a fair balance between the rights of property and other human rights.

The only way change can be made is to get involved in the political system.

constit is firstly not a "bill of rights", nor is it a "how to" guide. It is simply a high level set of rules essentially to oversee all other legislation and espec rules of court [see Harrington and Lowe] to stop dictator style judges ["or a majority of them"] from making rules that go beyong simple procedure.

but IMHO the Acts Interpretation Act [1901] which I believe was penned on the same good ship Lucinda as constit is just as important, because IF USED, it provides a most powerful check on the legislators, or in Howard's case, those who bully the Legislators.

One of the basic "rights" is right to "your day in court" and we have the Brandy case to show how simple it is for the High Court to explain to us how the const GIVES us that right.

but in the main lawyers will never argue either constit or AIAct [as it aint good for business].

the biggest abuse in recent time [apart from Smirks Future Fund which offends the constit] is the child support agency, judged in Luton and Lessels to be OK Brandy wise legislation wise albeit NOT in practice.

but howard hired the top lawyer Professor Parkinson to do a Fred and Ginger around all that to give the illusion that the day in court was removed from csa decisions.

but it would be simple to use the AIAct to "throw overboard" all those nasty tricks of howard/parky in HCA

But WHO would do such a brave thing? not lawyers thats for sure as most actually moonlight AT the csa

but nobody has ever denied the law is an ass

Thank you, Divorce Doctor, for excellent post. I wish you could given more comments and especially on the "your day in the court' right issue

Ours the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution, Portrays to be the most important document in the land, it is the very fabric of Our Free Australian Society, that is if we let it, which most don't.
We the people of Australia can take control back from those who blatently disregard our Constitutional Rights, if we stand together as one, instead of having a defeatest attitude as individuals.
Our Parliarments, Courts, Governments, Local Councils etc. do not fear the Australian Constitution because they have done all within their power to keep it from us and they also know most people think with the attitude I am only a single person and could not defeat beauracratic organisations. Well we can if we unight, We can claim our legal and moral rights back. I have started an avenue to try and reclaim mine in a letter i've prepared to the sheriff of victoria, Melbourne magistrates court, civic compliance victoria, Victoria police traffic camera office and both citylink and eastlink toll roads authorities. Advising that unless i'm brought before a court to be judged by 12 of my peers any infringement notices are both invalid and illegal as documented in our Constitution, also Court Order Costs are invallid and illegal without my consent or the consent of a jury as stipulated by the CRIMINAL CODE ACT 995 SECTION 268.10 which states an order by a single judge is NOT A JUDICIARY ORDER, it is illegal because it is a violation of COMMON LAW
I will attempt to post further notes to keep anyone interested up to date on my progress. No I am not a lawyer or work in any legal system, in fact I know very little about our laws, but am beginning to understand my Comman Law Rights as written in Our Constitution

What do you think about suspension of driver’s license and registration of a vehicle in NSW because of non-payment of parking fees fine/ debt. Is it constitutional? Notice of Suspense of driver’s license and registration of vehicle will be issued without any order of the magistrate or court or any other single demerit point?