Dear President of the Australian Human Rights Commission,
Human Rights Defenders,
Rule of Law Defenders,
Members of Parliament,
Senator David Leyonhjelm,
Senator Nick McKim
MP Andrew Wilkie,
Arbitrary and capricious interpretation of the law amounts to unlawful discrimination: Australian Human Rights Commission in unlawful Discrimination Complaint
“Teach man to fish and you will feed him for his whole Life”: Australian Human Rights Commission on Trial on Trial pursuant to RDA 9(1A) & 18C. Bringing the Constitution into the Asylum seeker debate and the RDA.
To the President of the Australian Human Rights Commission,
Arbitrary and capricious interpretation of the law amounts to unlawful discrimination
1. In addition to Mr Bill Leak and the Australian Newspaper, we wish to add the President of the Australian Human Rights Commission and Ms Rebecca Gieng to the complaint for unlawful discrimination and racial vilication.
2. We deliberately mentioned first the Racial Discrimination Act section 9(1A) Indirect Discrimination; the Australian human rights commission ignored it.
3. We mentioned that Peter Dutton and others vilified asylum seekers and refugees by calling them “illegals” including Vietnamese Asylum Seekers and Refugees, which would put us an “aggrieved” person, and the Australian human rights commission ignored it.
4. It appears that the Australian Human Rights commission is engaging in unlawful discrimination, and racial vilification, aiding and abetting unlawful discrimination, by setting up a condition or hurdle or hoop for us to go through, which has worse effect on some people than others, putting at a particular disadvantage.
5. Arbitrary and capricious interpretation of the law, RDA, Australian Human Rights Commission Act, inter alia, is most unreasonable and done at the whims of inept lawyers and personel of the commission
6. At NO time have we claimed this: “You claim this cartoon to be offensive to Aboriginal people”; it is up the Aboriginal people to speak up for themselves, should they seek our help, we will provide it. We feel that this is reasonably offensive, insulting, humiliating or intimidating.
7. We are the ‘person aggrieved’ because, Indirect discrimination affects us all; human rights for one is human rights for all is NOT just a slogan.
8. We are the ‘person aggrieved’ because Vietnamese Asylum Seekers and refugees are being forcibly returned to a country where they are liable to be subjected to persecution, in secret and out on the high seas, at the behest of corporate administrators, instead of competent, independent, impartial judicial officers.
9. We are also authorised by Ms Ianthe Lycos to correspond with the commission on her behalf, due to her lack of available access to proper emailing facilities on short notice. We believe that Ms Lycos is also an ‘person aggrieved’ being the widow and mother of Aboriginal persons, but she might also like a determination as to whether a person of the same race can be affected by “is reasonably likely, in all the circumstances, to offend, insult, humiliate or intimidate that person or group;”, by those who would appear to speak for a whole race WITHOUT consent.
10. Ms Lycos will argue that she would be indirectly affected via her gender, by public acts of Mr Bill Leak and others that deprive basic human rights.
11. We would like to take this opportunity to provide the Commission with some information regarding the Australian Constitution and the sections that are relevant in this complaint:
12. Notwithstanding the “power to make laws for the peace, order, and good government of the Commonwealth with respect to”
COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA CONSTITUTION ACT – SECT 51:
(xxv) the recognition throughout the Commonwealth of the laws, the public Acts and records, and the judicial proceedings of the States;
We refer to the
(i)The Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006 (the Charter) (VICTORIA)
(ii) Equal Opportunity Act 2010 (VICTORIA)
13. (xxxi) the acquisition of property on just terms from any State or person for any purpose in respect of which the Parliament has power to make laws;
We are looking for competence, independence and impartiality.
15. We would advise Senator David Leyonhjelm, that if he wishes to challenge or seek determination from the competent, independent, and impartial courts, he should use 46PO and 46PH of the Australian Human Rights Commission Act 1986 (Cth); from what we understand other efforts from myself and an Aborginal man, Fred Wilson, to seek a court declaration have been corrupted and not properly terminated, by the President (John von Doussa), Dominic Virchillo, Rocky Clifford and Jodie Ball.
16. Should you need further assistance feel free to contact us, however we wish to expidite this complaint in order to prevent deaths that are preventable due to unlawful discrimination and race hate: Mr Gong Ling Tang at the hands of the Victoria police at Dandenong, Ms Dhu for unpaid fines in Western Australia and the Asylum Seekers, including Hamid Khazaei.
17. The Rule Of Law As A Law Of Rules: “those subject to the law must have the means of knowing what it prescribes”, It would seem that the Federal Attorney General, George Brandis, have made the law uncertain, with his power struggle with his Solicitor General. We wish to clarify legal points with the Australian Human Rights Commission. Given that Firm rules also have the advantage of inhibiting courts, reducing their discretion and the risk that they will indulge their own political views, we wish that the President of the Australian Human Rights Commission reply to us directly, rather than have corporate administrators and or non-legal personnel making arbitrary and capricious interpretation of the law.
Tuesday, December 06, 2016
On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 3:40 PM, Info Service
Dear Mr Pham
I refer to your email to the Australian Human Rights Commission (the Commission) about Mr Bill Leak and the Australian.
You raised concerns about a cartoon drawn by Mr Leak and published in the Australian. You claim this cartoon to be offensive to Aboriginal people, as well as asylum seekers and refugees. You advise you are an Australian Citizen with Vietnamese background.
I would like to take this opportunity to provide you with some information about the Commission’s complaint process and the racial hatred provisions in the Racial Discrimination Act 1975 (Cth) (RDA).
The Commission’s complaint function
The Commission can deal with complaints about:
discrimination because of a person’s race, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, intersex status, pregnancy, marital or relationship status, age or disability, as well as sexual harassment, in specific areas of public life, such as, employment, education and the provision of goods and services;
racial hatred that takes place in public;
discrimination in employment because of a person’s criminal record, trade union activity, religion, political opinion or social origin; or
breaches of human rights by the Commonwealth of Australia.
The racial hatred provisions in section 18C of the RDA say that it is against the law to do an act in public which:
· is reasonably likely, in all the circumstances, to offend, insult, humiliate or intimidate that person or group; and
· is done because of the race, colour, or national or ethnic origin of that person or group of people
It is important to note that the RDA does not make racial hatred a criminal offence.
Initial consideration of your correspondence
The law says that complaints about discrimination, including racial hatred, must be made by or on behalf of a ‘person aggrieved’. The Federal Court of Australia has found that to be ‘aggrieved’ the person making the complaint must show that they have a grievance that is beyond that which is suffered by an ordinary member of the community. It is not sufficient that a person has only an intellectual or emotional concern about the issue.
I note that you say you are an Australian Citizen with Vietnamese background. On this basis, it is not clear that you would meet the requirement of being a ‘person aggrieved’ as explained above. It is also not clear that you are seeking to make this claim on behalf of an individual or group of individuals who could be considered to be ‘aggrieved’. The cartoon does not make any reference to asylum seekers or refugees or people with a Vietnamese background.
If you wish to pursue the matter, it would be helpful if you could provide some more information in relation to this point.
Other organisations that may be able to assist you
As your concerns relate to the content of a newspaper article, you may wish to contact the Australian Press Council, which can consider complaints about printed media. Its website is www.presscouncil.org.au.
You may wish to get some legal advice or assistance from Legal Aid of VIC (www.legalaid.vic.gov.au) or your nearest community legal centre (www.communitylaw.org.au) with respect to your options.
Possible next steps
If after reading this email, you want to pursue this matter with the Commission, please confirm this by contacting me within 14 days.
If you wish to proceed, please also provide the additional information noted above – that is: Information which explains how you or the person you are lodging the complaint on behalf of, is a ‘person aggrieved’
Should you have any further queries or wish to provide clarification, please respond by return email or call the National Information Service on 1300 656 419.
National Information Service
Australian Human Rights Commission
Level 3, 175 Pitt Street, Sydney NSW 2000
GPO Box 5218, Sydney NSW 2001
T 1300 656 419 F +61 2 9284 9611
E firstname.lastname@example.org W www.humanrights.gov.au
Human rights: everyone, everywhere, everyday
Note: The National Information Service’s opening hours are Monday to Friday, between 10am to 4pm AEDT.
END OF YEAR CLOSURE: The Australian Human Right Commission will be closed between Monday 26 December 2016 and 2 January 2017.
WARNING: The information contained in this email may be confidential.
If you are not the intended recipient, any use or copying of any part
of this information is unauthorised. If you have received this email in
error, we apologise for any inconvenience and request that you notify
the sender immediately and delete all copies of this email, together
with any attachments.