New post on cairnsnews.org
High Court expulsion of Senator Culleton wrong at law – UK Supreme Court
by Editor, cairnsnews
Exclusive report by Jim O’Toole
Culleton advised by UK Supreme Court his senate expulsion was wrong at law leaving the way open for other expelled senators to reclaim their seats
The Supreme Court of the United Kingdom has advised Western Australia Senator-in-exile Rod Culleton the High Court of Australia has erred by removing him from the senate.
‘Bank Basher’ WA senator in exile Rod Culleton heading back to the senate
In January Culleton filed an appeal, contrary to legal advice, against his senate expulsion in the Supreme Court(Privy Council) citing s47 of the Commonwealth Constitution of Australia, which had been ignored by the High Court.
This section states: ‘Until the Parliament otherwise provides, any question respecting the qualification of a senator or of a member of the House of Representatives, or respecting a vacancy in either House of the Parliament, and any question of a disputed election to either House, shall be determined by the House in which the question arises.’
The High Court, sitting as the Court of Disputed Returns, expelled him from the senate in 2017 on a referral from then Attorney General, Senator George Brandis.
“Preliminary guidance from my case manager in the UK Supreme Court referred me to a legal maxim from a case precedent, Hilary Term [2014] UKSC 3.”
The case precedent cites “….. Blackstone (Commentaries on the Laws of England) says that the whole of the law and custom of Parliament has its original from this one maxim: ‘that whatever matter arises concerning either House of Parliament, ought to be examined, discussed, and adjudged in that house to which it relates, and not elsewhere.’
“The senate now has no choice but to remove all of those candidates who filled casual vacancies created by the High Court and reinstate me, because a legal maxim is the final say, there is no law above it,” Culleton said.
“This includes Jacquie Lambie and Bob Day who have indicated to me they will now contest their expulsions by the High Court under s44 of the Constitution.
“The senate will have to decide on my eligibility to sit as a senator.”
Tomorrow Culleton intends to inform the Clerk of the senate of this legal maxim leaving the Clerk no choice but to ask the senate to reinstate any senator expelled by the High Court.
“The Parliament is compelled and bound by this maxim. The senate cannot abuse its powers and must immediately ask the surrogate senators to remove themselves from the House as they are only filling a vacancy,” he said.
“Furthermore, I believe those unelected surrogate Senators are now impersonating a Commonwealth Public Official and putting the Senate in disrepute through their unlawful representations and I quote Odgers Australian Senate Practice, 13th Edition, 2012 page 160:
“Presumably if a conviction is quashed on appeal the vacancy which was taken to have occurred upon conviction and sentence is taken not to have occurred. If such a presumed vacancy has been filled the filling of the vacancy would then also be void.”
Listen to the radio podcast discussion about Rod’s case here:
12 thoughts on “Senator Culleton Vindicated”
How will this affect laws and decisions made by car takers acting in parlement ?.
They must step aside and the rightful Senators elected by the People must take back their seats. Of course, this is all a waste of time because even though the Senators were elected by the people they were elected under false pretenses, thinking that we have a Commonwealth of Australia Government when in fact we have an AUSTRALIAN GOVERNMENT….two totally different entities. The Australian Government is a political party corporation registered in the USA, and therefore it is IN TREASON.
Interestingly, the official Privy Council caselaw website doesn’t mention any decision regarding Culleton in 2018 or 2019
https://www.jcpc.uk/current-cases/index.html
Is there anyone in a position to provide an informed and independent comment on the Culleton – UK judicial system matter ?
Contact Senator Culleton. He’s on Facebook.
Thanks, will do that.
There is pitiful little action on the Culleton facebook group. Apart from a single post in January 2019 (apparently by Culleton)which has not drawn a single comment, the next most recent posts were a year ago.
I note the following comment ‘In January Culleton filed an appeal, contrary to legal advice, against his senate expulsion in the Supreme Court(Privy Council)’
The UK Supreme Court and the UK Privy Council are NOT the same entity as is suggested. Furthermore there is no record on the Privy Council caselaw website of any matter involving Culleton. Is anyone in a position to shed some light on this issue?
Leaving aside for the moment the issue of whether or not the Privy Council matter is real or simply a figment of someone’s imagination as the lack of any mention of a Culleton matter implies, the protocol as I understand it is for a Privy Council decision to be referred back to the Australian High Court for its attention. That would be essential, together with a decision in Culleton’s favour, before Culleton was permitted to register for election. I appreciate that a lot of people are very keen to get Culleton back into federal parliament, however it appears that in their zeal they have overlooked critical elements. Personally I don’t care one way or the other about Culleton, but I am vitally interested in the prospect of being able to appeal a High Court matter to the Privy Council. Whilst only precious few will have the resources to go this far, I am aware of at least two extremely serious human rights abuse issues involving influential official entities that need to be addressed by some judicial entity outside Australia. We’ve had limited success with the Human Rights Council and International Criminal Court. However. the acceptance criteria for the ICC make this avenue inaccessible to most.
The appeal to the Privy Council exists only in Culleton’s imagination.
All avenues of appeal from the High Court to the PC (with the now theoretical exception of section 74 inter se matters) were eliminated by Commonwealth legislation in 1968 and 1975. The Australia Acts of 1986 (simultaneously enacted by the Commonwealth, all of the States’ and the UK Parliaments) similarly eliminated appeals from the State Supreme Courts to the PC. The only remaining avenue, via section 74 of the Constitution, is restricted to inter se matters and requires a certificate by the High Court to proceed. The High Court has stated, clearly and unambiguously, that no further certificates will be granted.
Furthermore, Culleton’s beef is with the Court of Disputed Returns – not the High Court, per se. Decisions of the CoDR are very specifically non-appelable.
Neither the UK Supreme Court nor the Privy Council (separate tribunals, by the way, which appears to be news to Culleton) have jurisdiction to hear any matter on appeal from any Australian court. They simply would not entertain an action of the type Culleton claims he has initiated. The claim that he has “advice” from the Supreme Court is as ludicrous as it is untrue. Courts do not give advice; they render judgement in matters which are legitimately initiated and argued before them. In Culleton’s matter neither of those things have occurred and nor will they occur.
I think Rod has watched too many re-runs of The Castle. Somebody should tell him he’s dreamin’.
I have approved your comment so that everyone can see what a political party apologist like you with no knowledge of how the Constitution and our Common Law works can try to justify the very system that has enslaved you. You are basing your opinion (that is all it is) on a fallacy put out by the unlawful political party system. In other words, you have swallowed their lies hook, line and sinker.
As you are here on our website, please take the time to actually read the articles we have published. There is plenty of evidence here that exposes the wrongdoing, and in fact TREASON the political party criminals have perpetrated against We, the People of the Commonwealth of Australia. We highly recommend you take the time to read why the Australia Act, which is the basis of your argument, is unlawful and therefore all other acts, legislation and statues have no basis in law either since then. Read this:
Commonwealth of Australia Vs the Australia Act
when did we abolish the privcy
council in australia
Congratulations a great win for democracy but we all have a lot more to do to restore it and to establish a people’s government again. Great work.
Rod Culleton has lost his job in the senate. Disgraceful. Can he get his job back?