A Letter to Albo from We the People

We have written this letter to Albo, and now we are making it available for everyone to send. Just copy/paste the letter into the form on his website Contact page and send it to Albo at Contact the PM | Prime Minister of Australia

The High Court, in this case, is the Parliament.

Whereas the court calling itself the High Court is a travesty and no longer serves the People of the Commonwealth of Australia.

We are asking all Australians to send this letter to PM Albanese. It is his job, as Chief Justice of the Parliament to make sure the laws of our nation are adhered to by all members of the Commonwealth. He has not done so, and it’s time he is reminded of his duty to us. Send the following letter without any changes or use it as a guide for you to write to the PM in your own words.

Letter to the Prime Minister

Dear Prime Minister Albanese,

I include the first part of the Writ of Summons presently promulgated under the High Court Rules 2004

Form 20 – Writ of summons Note: see rule 27.01.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BRISBANE REGISTRY

BETWEEN:

AB Plaintiff

and

CD Defendant

WRIT OF SUMMONS

KING CHARLES THE THIRD, by the Grace of God, King of Australia and his other Realms and Territories, Head of the Commonwealth:

It does not comply with the High Court Procedure Act 1903.

The Original Writ of Summons, issued out of any Supreme Court and before 2004 out of the High Court as the Federal Supreme Court had these words under the citation of the Sovereign.

WE command you that within 14 days after the service of this writ on you inclusive of the day of such service, you do cause an appearance to be entered for you in Our High Court of Australia, in an action at the suit of A.B.; and take notice that in default of your so doing the plaintiff may proceed therein, and judgment may be given in your absence.

This is further proof the High Court is now a Star Chamber Court and not the Federal Supreme Court We (the people) are entitled to.

The poorly educated and wickedly negligent High Court that is serving its Roman Catholic Church masters and fellow Legal practitioners and World Economic Forum, to the detriment of the “courts judges and people” it is meant to serve, responded to the allegation against them in the Senate by Senator Rodney Norman Culleton that they were not complying with s 33 High Court of Australia Act 1979 which required them to issue all process in the name of the Queen by amending the Rules. In absolute insubordination they had omitted the Queen from all process issued by them for 12 years. S 33 says:

sack-lawyers-parliament

HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA ACT 1979 – SECT 33
Writs etc.

All writs, commissions and process issued from the High Court shall be:

(a) in the name of the Queen;

This is the Writ that was issued prior to 2004.

No. 1.-General Form of Writ of Summons.

In the High Court of Australia.

Between A.B. [an infant, by G.H., his next friend], Plaintiff.

and C.D. and E.F., Defendants.

EDWARD THE SEVENTH by the Grace of God, of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland and of the British Dominions beyond the Seas, King, Defender of the Faith:

To C.D. of and E.F. of Address.

WE command you that within 14 days after the service of this writ on you inclusive of the day of such service, you do cause an appearance to be entered for you in Our High Court of Australia, in an action at the suit of A.B.; and take notice that in default of your so doing the plaintiff may proceed therein, and judgment may be given in your absence.

Witness: Y.Z., Chief Justice of Our said High Court, at (the Seat of the Court) this the day of (month and year) in the year of Our Lord One thousand nine hundred and (three or whenever).

The critical difference is the use on the original Writ of Summons of the words WE and Our struck in bold by me above. The WE represents the eternal family of Almighty God of which the Sovereign is head as representative of Our Father which art in heaven, and the Our represents us the people of the Commonwealth whose assets and freedoms are held in trust by the King on behalf of Almighty God. Our Constitution is a Deed of Trust for the protection of us all.

The Royal WE, is the evidence that the Crown of England and the Commonwealth is a Corporation sole constituted under the Anglican Church of England holding the possessions of Almighty God in trust, as a corporate trustee, for His family, us, aboriginal and other Australians alike, and not a person as we know it. We and Our are plural words not singular, and language matters. If you get one of your researchers to check in Halsbury’s Laws of England in the third edition you will find the evidence there. The Fourth edition is when England entered the European Union and it is not the law applies here now and betrayed the trust established by the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900 and laws in force in 1900.

The High Court is still illegitimate and peopled by bastards. These bastards of both sexes act as if they own the joint and are there because their fellow travellers in the Parliament of the Commonwealth are subverting the Parliament of the Commonwealth to prevent them from answering to us the people. S 72 (ii) Constitution casts a duty on the Parliament of the Commonwealth to maintain the integrity of the Kings, and Our courts. A republic is not a true democracy. They have all failed sooner or later, some spectacularly. The evidence that the United States of America (Inc) is a failed republic is in their currently evolving Sovereign Debt default. The English Republic failed in 11 years. After the Restoration in 1660 the Roman Catholic Church tried to get the King to impose its will on the English people. In 1688 the then King, James II ran off to France because his army would no longer fight for the Crown under a Papist King, and the Statute 1 Will and Mary (Coronation Oath) 1688 (C 6) was passed to ensure that the rights of all were again honoured under the protection of Almighty God. The crisis in military staffing may well be the same thing happening here and in the United Kingdom as well.

The maxim go woke, go broke may well apply in this case.

Kind regards
Peter Alexander Gargan

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *