I trust that VCAT and Mr Smithers, Mr Bowman, Mr Garde, not to mention Mr Michael Keith McGarvie and his pitch fork wielding team of a dozen in house lawyers, see where all of this is heading and take the opportunity at this hearing to put a stop to their rot and contemplate their futures in today’s “Pentridge Prisons.”I suggest that you “gentlemen” and “gentlewomen’ who have so freely abused your positions of public status and public duties ought contemplate future experiences that whistleblower Mr Gerrit Schorel-Hlavka was wrongly subjected to as detailed in his damning 18 page Memorandum …Quite apart from your rampages against me, Mr Schlorel-Hlavka’s Memorandum begs two questions:

1. How many of the people in our prisons (we can add the unfortunate Mr Ryan D’Orta-Ekenaike to a distinguished list that includes Pastors Lindy and Michael Chamberlain, Former Federal MP Pauline Hanson, journalists such as Derryn Hinch … and the list goes on) are in effect political prisoners of conscience against your corrupt unchecked regime; and

2. How many of you will we find at the end of these forthcoming Nuremberg-style investigations and trials that should be, and will be in our prisons.

How dare you abuse your privileges of birth and of education in the pursuit of such devilish designs.I thank you for putting them so plainly on your VCAT records of this political vendetta against me, for all the world to see and act upon.What is VCAT Senior Member Jonathan Smithers doing sitting on the VCAT bench here, when he is one of 3 senior faux-“judicial” VCAT “bureaucrats” (along with Mr Greg Garde and Mr John Bowman) who have effectvely put themselves on trial, for incredibly serious crimes, here?”

  James JohnsonB.Ec (Hons). LLB. Mem CLA. Mem MEAA. Journalist. Whistleblower. Independent Documentary MakerMail: PO Box 6137 Point Cook Victoria Australia 3030 Mob: +61 (0)401 865 914 “To sin by silence when they should protest makes cowards of men.” – Abraham Lincoln“Truth is a weapon, to be picked up and used in the fight against injustice” – James Johnson 

29 January 2013	URGENT – PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIALFOR VCAT HEARING 2:00 PM ON 30/01/2013 VCAT: “You are not a whistleblower Mr Johnson.”
Mr Jim NelmsSenior RegistrarLegal Practice List DivisionVictorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal55 King Street Melbourne Victoria 3000	Mr JOHNSON: “I AM a whistleblower, protected by State, Federal, Constitutional and International Laws. And YOU are a corrupt Unconstitutional star chamber VCAT. YOU have no power or authority whatsoever. YOU don’t even exist.”   BY FACSIMILE: 03 9628 9788 (3 + 4 +22 = 29 pages)(Telephone: 03 9628 9081 )
Instructions to Mr Nelms: Please read and copy to the following three “judicial members” of your unconstitutional “non-judicial” and highly criminal organisation – Mr Greg Garde, Mr John Bowman and Mr Jonathan Smithers	cc: Mr Robert Clark MLA and Attorney-General  cc: Special Investigations Unitcc: GLOBAL MEDIA LIST
The Hon Robert Clark MLA for Box HillAttorney-General for Victoria24 Rutland Road, Box Hill Victoria Australia	BY FACSIMILE: 03 9890 7180 | 03 8684 1100(Email: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.Telephone: 03 9890 6606 | 03 8684 1101)

  

1. Michael Keith McGarvie – Legal Services Commissioner v Harold James Johnson,

VCAT Proceeding J134/2011

2. Harold James Johnson v David William Hanlon (solicitor), Harwood Andrews Pty Ltd (Law Firm) & Ors, Victorian Supreme Court Proceedings No. 3731 of 2009 (initially commenced against Harold James Johnson (defendant) as No. 9263 of 2008); etc
3. Unlawful, Unconstitutional Cost Hearing scheduled in VCAT Proceeding J134/2011 on 30 January 2013 at 2pm at 55 King Street, Melbourne

I refer to my 48 page facsimile to VCAT of 25 January 2013 including the draft orders sought and the resignation letters for Mr Jonathan Smithers, Mr John Bowman and Mr Greg Garde required (since first drafted back for the hearing not properly conducted by Mr Jonathan Smithers on 5 October 2012). I attach my 27 page facsimile to VCAT of 29 January 2013 including copy further clarified instructions to Mr Robert Clark MP, 2 media releases and an 18 page Memorandum previously provided to VCAT directly by Mr Gerrit Schorel-Hlavka. To expedite the smooth order of affairs at this hearing I ask that VCAT confirm at the start of the hearing that it has received and understood these materials and written submissions. I ask for an acknowledgement from the presiding VCAT official at this hearing, as to whether Senior Member Jonathan Smithers (call him in and put him in the witness box, please): 

• acknowledges that he rubber stamped a conviction for a prosecution case that was totally null, a nulle prosequoi and totally void of any prosecution evidence;

  

• acknowledges that he failed to make any examination of what actually happened and did not happen at the Federal Magistrates Court hearing on which these false (and un-evidenced and un-witnessed) allegations against me were subsequently fabricated?

 

• acknowledges that his Tribunal secretly conspired with the Legal Services Commissioner to ensure that the pretend trial would be a total evidence free zone – rulings purportedly made by his colleague Mr John Bowman (who purports to be both County Court Judge and a non-judicial officer of government agency VCAT at the same time) so as to keep the Federal Magistrates Court transcript of those proceedings, and indeed my alleged (by VCAT) false accuser Mr Federal Magistrate Daniel O’Dwyer “out of Tribunal” altogether.

 

• acknowledges the grotesque bias (according to Johnson v Johnson principles laid down by the High Court of Australia) rampant in Mr Smithers (for example at hearings in October 2012 amongst others, including perhaps this one) purporting to be sitting in judgement over a man, namely this Mr Johnson (no relation) without regard to whether Mr Smithers has any powers at law at all or proper processes he is lacking to observe (eg right to legal representation, right to question his alleged accusers etc etc) and in circumstances where this Mr Johnson is demanding he be fired by his responsible Minister, Mr Robert Clark and be investigated, prosecuted and locked-up for the term of his natural life for a personal crime spree against me including multiple counts of multiple crimes of the calibres listed in sections 320 and 321 of the Crimes Act (and that’s just for starters)?

 I ask that VCAT state at the start of the hearing what it’s intentions are regarding obeying and respecting the laws and the Constitution of this nation and of the State of Victoria, by signing sealing and delivering those draft orders (amongst other things throwing out this vexatious and criminally conspired proceeding, and ordering costs / compensation to me in the concessional amount stated in those draft orders) and delivering each of Mr Smithers, Mr Bowman and Mr Garde’s signed sealed and delivered resignation letters forthwith.  I ask that VCAT state its responses clearly (verbally and then in writing) to each of the first of points 1 to 6 of my instructions letter today to Mr Robert Clark. Should VCAT resist these overtures to legality, I request that VCAT then state its position clearly (verbally and then in writing) on each of the second set of points 1 to 6 of my instruction letter today to Mr Robert Clark. As a further matter, I demand undertakings from VCAT and LSC bureaucrats present at this VCAT hearing that they will respect and abide and extend all whistleblower protections, at common law, under sweeping State and Federal Laws and as reproduced in the Whistleblowers Protection Act and the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act, to and as are the rights of Mr Schorel-Hlavka, myself and all others appearing to represent me and / or prepared to testify for me (including Mr Robert Clark MP and his Federal near-equivalent the former Federal Attorney-General Robert McClelland). As an embarrassing necessity thrust on me by the keystone cops bizarre, Byzantine and wholly criminal antics of VCAT and LSC bureaucrats on 5 October 2012 (I refer to the phoney VCAT President hearing / Supreme Court of Victoria Practice Court Chapter 2 / Chapter 3 ‘Separation of Powers” bending and breaking farce before Mr Greg Garde (who purports to be both a “judicial officer” and a “non-judicial officer” of the State of Victoria at the same time and in the same embodiments): 

• I do not consent to any more impromptu snap hearings, without prior notice to me, without due notice periods, without time to prepare appropriate submissions directed to the issues of bias / reconstitution of the tribunal I also raise with the Tribunal and on structural, conduct and process appoint Mr Kelvin thank you once again for accepting this commission to represent me before your own bureaucrats at VCAT at 2 pm tomorrow;

 

• I do not appoint any person yet, not Mr Clark, not Mr H####, not Mr G#### on any hypothetical footing to represent me on any basis at any hypothetical repeat of such impromptu villainy conspired on the spot by any VCAT / LSC bureaucrats;

  

• I reserve all rights to appoint representatives and to prepare submissions in the eventuality of any such hearing

 I trust that VCAT and Mr Smithers, Mr Bowman, Mr Garde, not to mention Mr Michael Keith McGarvie and his pitch fork wielding team of a dozen in house lawyers, see where all of this is heading and take the opportunity at this hearing to put a stop to their rot and contemplate their futures in today’s “Pentridge Prisons.” I suggest that you “gentlemen” and “gentlewomen’ who have so freely abused your positions of public status and public duties ought contemplate future experiences that whistleblower Mr Gerrit Schorel-Hlavka was wrongly subjected to as detailed in his damning 18 page Memorandum. No doubt the prisons full of men (and I expect from reports from other reliable sources) women put there in circumstances by conspirators and criminals such as yourselves, as Mr Schorel-Hlavka and many other men and women of my recent acquaintanceship were “done” will be pleased to have you amongst them as they were to have a champion like Mr Schorel-Hlavka (and I can name plenty more such champions) put amongst them. Quite apart from your rampages against me, Mr Schlorel-Hlavka‘s Memorandum begs two questions: 

1. How many of the people in our prisons (we can add the unfortunate Mr Ryan D’Orta-Ekenaike to a distinguished list that includes Pastors Lindy and Michael Chamberlain, Former Federal MP Pauline Hanson, journalists such as Derryn Hinch … and the list goes on) are in effect political prisoners of conscience against your corrupt unchecked regime; and

 

2. How many of you will we find at the end of these forthcoming Nuremberg-style investigations and trials that should be, and will be in our prisons.

  How dare you abuse your privileges of birth and of education in the pursuit of such devilish designs. I thank you for putting them so plainly on your VCAT records of this political vendetta against me, for all the world to see and act upon. What is VCAT Senior Member Jonathan Smithers doing sitting on the VCAT bench here, when he is one of 3 senior faux-“judicial” VCAT “bureaucrats” (along with Mr Greg Garde and Mr John Bowman) who have effectvely put themselves on trial, for incredibly serious crimes, here?  Harold James JohnsonJournalist – Whistleblower – Law ReformerIndependent Federal Candidate for LalorSolicitor and Barrister of the High Court of Australia(Celebrating 20 Years of Legal Practice 1990 – 2010)JAmes JohnsonB.Ec (Hons). LLB. Mem CLA. Mem MEAA. Journalist. Whistleblower. Independent Documentary MakerMail: PO Box 6137 Point Cook Victoria Australia 3030 Mob: +61 (0)401 865 914 “To sin by silence when they should protest makes cowards of men.” – Abraham Lincoln“Truth is a weapon, to be picked up and used against injustice.” – James Johnson 

29 January 2013	URGENT – PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIALFOR VCAT HEARING 2:00 PM TOMORROW
The Hon Robert Clark MLA for Box HillAttorney-General for Victoria24 Rutland Road, Box Hill Victoria Australia Dear Mr Clark	BY FACSIMILE: 03 9890 7180 | 03 8684 1100(Email: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.Telephone: 03 9890 6606 | 03 8684 1101) (4 + 22 = 26 pages)

 All the Attorney-General’s Men – VCAT Political Crime Spree (Show Trial J134/2011) I thank you once again for accepting this commission to represent me before your own bureaucrats at VCAT at 2 pm tomorrow. I attach for your information copies of media releases of 28 January (3 pages) and 29 January (1 page) as authorised by me and issued by FRIENDS OF JAMES JOHNSON. I am sure you will be very disturbed by the content information. But that information, which you can so easily verify from the source (Court transcripts) will readily verify my veracity and the monstrous nature of these criminal misuses of (non-existent) powers by your LSC and VCAT staff. I also attach a damning 18 page whistleblowing statement of past and present witch hunting vendettas by the criminal minds of these same government agencies against the leader of the non-lawyer defence team that spoke up for me at the VCAT hearings in August, September and October 2012 – the angel advocate, “village elders” who dared to stand up for me where no qualified legal practitioner dared to tread (for fear of being put on the point of the pitch forks just like I, and now Mr Schorel-Hlavka again, have been). I ask that you see that the protected disclosure provisions of the Whistleblowers Protection Act are invoked and extended to Mr Schorel-Hlavka, just as they should all along have been extended to me. Surely you are appalled at these reports of misconduct and corruption, spanning the entire life of these unauthorised proceedings by your corrupt legal regulator and a tribunal where its “masters” consistently (as Greg Garde damningly did on 5 October 2012) say that they can do what they like to government administrators let alone citizens, alike without having to consider the scope of their legitimate powers and authorities and processes (effectively making themselves Star Chambers of unlimited powers) because basic issues such as the scope of their powers to do things are for appeal courts to decide after VCAT has “finished” with its victims and not before VCAT it starts to do things in purported performance of its defined public duties and (any) defined public powers. This is not government “for the peace, welfare and good government” of the people by bureaucrats acting according to law and according to lawful delegations as agents for an elected representative Parliament. This is self-appointed tyranny by privileged men from privileged families. This is self-appointed tyranny by men who belong inside prison cells, not in positions where they can put men in prison cells.  Clearly you as Attorney General, and the entire Parliament, must act on this information in Mr Schorel-Hlavka’s memorandum (and hundreds of other such reports that are begging for audience for far too long). Clearly you cannot afford to “trust” any of your existing bureaucrats who are tainted by years of inaction. Clearly this is something that your oaths of office and profession and your personal sense of honor and dignity commands you to initiate and see to proper conclusions.At the VCAT hearing tomorrow I ask that you: 

4. Request the presiding VCAT official to make the draft orders as I furnished with my correspondences to you of 20 January 2012. (These will be no surprise to your LSC or VCAT staff since the drafting remains unchanged, though fully and repeatedly ignored, since 3 October 2012.) The gist of these draft orders is to have this whole vexatious and false prosecution thrown out and costs / compensation ordered in my favour.

 

5. Request the signed, sealed and delivered resignations of VCAT Senior Member Jonathan Smithers, immediate past Acting President John Bowman (a double resignation as both VCAT bureaucrat and County Court judiciary – an obvious Constitutional violation) and “new” VCAT President Greg Garde (another double resignation and obvious Constitutional violation).

 

6. Ask the presiding VCAT official to respond to the points of law and morality raised by Mr Schorel-Hlavka in his attached 18 page memorandum. Clearly, any points of law that the VCAT official does not 100% agree with, clearly they are a mule-ish stubborn lot, are points on which you can either direct them, or if they resist your Ministerial directions too, both the points and those resistances are issues for a Court to decide, like all the other points of law and objections to jurisdiction before VCAT moves a muscle against me, so to speak, not after VCAT exhausts all its pitch forks.

  

7. Ask each of those gentlemen (you can of course make arrangements to ensure that they bring themselves to the hearing) to show cause why they should not be prosecuted under sections 320 and 321 of the Crimes Act (contempt, misconduct in public office, perjury, conspiracy etc) amongst other laws – multiple counts of each, as clearly and undeniably etched in the transcripts and VCAT documents produced during the course of these witch hunting proceedings. It is truly alarming that men studied (if not educated) in the law could do such things. The public needs to be protected from them. And examples need to be made of them to ensure that none of your bureaucrats every engage in these sorts of criminal abuses, neglects and contempts of public office, ever again.

 At some stage in the proceedings tomorrow, I ask that you also: 

8. Inquire as to the lack of apparent progress in processing the applications for full review, for re-opening and for appeal, that I filed with VCAT (and cc’d to you) by facsimile on 21, 27 and 31 December 2012 respectively; and

 

9. Inquire as to the failure of your VCAT staff to provide proper audio CD recordings for the hearings on and after 6 July 2012 – and failure to provide any audio CD at all for the very important hearing (VCAT or Supreme Court or both or whatever) impromptu and to all intents and purposes “pretended” to occur without any notice or submission opportunity or due process or respect for the law, or for VCAT or for the Supreme Court for that matter, off the cuff on the afternoon (or so I am told) on 5 October 2012. (You might also want to ask them to justify their snap decision in late November 2012 to stop issuing audio CD’s for any VCAT hearings, requiring tribunal participants to spend thousands of dollars on typed transcripts (like in the Supreme Court, which is the opposite of the “fair efficient” “low cost” “justice” that VCAT was supposed to deliver).

  I can’t imagine that your bureaucrats will play hard-ball and resist any of these directions from you as their responsible Minister. But then again, they have done some pretty freaky things to date so I imagine the ‘sky is the limit’ for these purposes. Should your VCAT and LSC bureaucrats choose to disregard your Ministerial status over them (just as they delude that I am not a “whistleblower”) then I ask that you point out a swag of legal issues that require adjudication from a (legitimate) judicial body before VCAT can take even a millimetre of a step towards its “slam, bam, pay the government thousands of dollars” order that it intends to hit me with tomorrow (creating “anti-Dietrich / “anti-Miranda-clause” laws) on the basis that what it is empowered to do, the ambits on its power and its procedural requirements to exercise any powers (not that it has any) are not relevant to it, it can do what it likes and then it is up to me to get all the rubbish set aside by spending multiple millions (non-existent) on multiple lawyers (to fearful to engage) over multiple years on court appeals (before lawyers, solicitors, barristers and especially judges, just like them, because they are related by birth, school or other family ties and think just like they do): 

1. The first of these is the pretty obvious point that VCAT is not Constitutional. In theory, it is open to the Parliament / Governor in Council to create a “VAT” (a Victorian Administrative Tribunal) to administer its administrative staff. But it would have to have the right structure, conduct and performance to meet minimum Constitutional requirements for valid existence / valid legislation. VCAT fails that test on all three levels. For example, having “judicial members” of a “non-judicial body”. For example, having ouster clauses purporting to make VCAT final and conclusive on determination of facts (no full review on appeal to the courts), and a whole swag of other structural lack of natural justice concerns. Ditto the even greater avoidances of due process as a matter of conduct, and then as to performance, both conduct and performance unconstitutionalities being beyond the relevance of this correspondence. But no government agency can administer civilians. That is a “judicial” function. There can be no “C” in “VCAT”. The unconstitutional combining of “judicial” and “non-judicial” functions and staff, especially in the same beings, are additional grounds for striking out the whole “VCAT” not just the “AT”.

  

2. There is a pretty obvious “reasonable apprehension of bias” through all of VCAT given that I am rightly demanding resignations and apologies of its 3 relevant “judicial members”, being Mr Greg Garde, Mr John Bowman and Mr Jonathan Smithers and that they be tried and sentenced “for the terms of their natural lives” for violations of State and Federal and International laws (including sections 320 and 321 of the Crimes Act (Victoria) and the Whistleblowers Protection Act – and that their lands and estates be confiscated by the state and liquidated to compensate me for the wrongs they have done me (rather than triple wronging the public first by payments of their salaries all these years, secondly by payment of compensation to me, thirdly by leaving these men at large in the community and in government to wreak even more of their own brand of crime and corruption on less educated and less articulate members of the community than I have been fortunate enough to turn out to be. I think that this, for starts, is “reasonable apprehension of bias” material (you might put it a hundred times higher than that) within the Johnson v Johnson 2000 (no relations) High Court authority on this point. Reconstitution with any existing VCAT Members, or any persons associated with them (ie any members of the legal profession exposed to potential pitch-forkery such as scared the entire legal profession (even those who profess legal ethics and adherence to “cab rank” rules) from speak up, let alone actually representing me – yourself excluded of course Mr Clark) just recreates the basis for the same kind of Johnson v Johnson apprehended bias. The Tampion v Anderson frame of reference might be a way around the impasse – but of course the really proper process is as per the previous set of 1 – 5 numbered points (viz “throwing out” this McCarthyist attack, costs / compensation ordered in my favour etc etc).

 

3. Any suggestions that my appeal documents (any of the 3 streams) were not filed within time limits is a question of law requiring judicial determinations. On one set of customs regularly applied by your VCAT bureaucrats (so I am told), I am not even entitled to file appeal documentation at all on the guts of the wrongs asserted to have been done to me thus far by the LSC / VCAT until after the “issues on the table” for tomorrow’s hearing have been VCAT’ed (which cannot be until after they have been adjudicated in the Supreme Court).

 

4. If this nonesense proceeds further than a “thrown out and Mr Johnson compensated” etc as per the draft orders I drew up in October and represented to you and to VCAT this month, then there will be an issue as to the composition of the judicial bench and the tribunal members will need to be addressed, whether for rehearing or reopening or for appeal. I suggest that the story in Tampion v Anderson 1973 and reported in the Victorian Law Reports is a useful frame of reference, in that non-judges were ‘deputised’ especially for the tribunal and court hearings. I say “frame of reference” because in the circumstances I suggest that all, and not just even a majority” of either / each bench should be non-lawyers of the calibre of Judge Jackson (a non-lawyer US Federal Judge) who presided over the Nuremberg trials that cleaned up the corrupt lawyer bureaucracy that operated the Nazi-German legal and political system.

 

5. You might please clarify what the custom of your VCAT is regarding “stays” of execution of its challenged orders in unseemly circumstances where VCAT denies validity (existence) to the High Court principles in Dietrich’s case (to the effect that everything it has done towards me is nullified on account of being denied my Constitutional rights to independent legal advice funded by the state (not the vice versa funded by me absurdity they wish to create tomorrow). Presumably stays are automatic, as a matter of law, justice and common sense, and your Model Litigant Guidelines (consistently ignored by your bureaucrats through this entire witch hunt process). I say “presumably”, so as not to prejudice the (full) rehearing, the reopening and the (full) appeal to the higher level of the VCAT (5 members?) as well as out of respect to High Court made laws, such as Dietrich’s case. As I have learned nothing can be taken for granted, especially common sense, when dealing with bureaucrats with (unlawful and criminal) political agendas, like these.

 

6. On the “you are not a whistleblower Mr Johnson” from your frightened and deluded bureaucrats, I am sorry but my public record speaks pretty loudly “yes I am”. Perhaps the term “whistleblower” is limited in your bureaucrat’s eyes to one who holds a tin whistle pursed lips rather than one who exposes corruption affecting them and / or others, and at great peril to their own welfare, life and liberty as my circumstances amply demonstrate? Perhaps you might want to ask at VCAT tomorrow to inject a little amusement into the proceedings what your bureaucrats think the words “whistleblower” mean and whether this is a question of fact or law (ignoring that what the law is, is a fact too)? Perhaps another threshhold question of law – it being unseemly that your government agency charged with ensuring all your other government agencies comply with the State’s human rights and anti-discrimination laws can engage in processes that might be (as in my situation surely are) criminal reprisals prohibited by the Whistleblowers Protection Act without getting judicial clarification before “killing the Mocking Bird” – leaving it to the dead Mocking Bird to get law and order restored via uphill prohibitive judicial proceedings of the kind that VCAT was purportedly created to replace … Perhaps as a matter of fact or law or both, they have a similar stricto literal absurdo concept of “Minister” that will not amuse any of us sensible people either.

 I do of course have other issues to raise with you regarding my personal rights to legal aid so that I can wrap up and out these VCAT proceedings and bring to an end the cryogenised Victorian Supreme Court proceedings for which this VCAT stupidity is the payback reprisal. We must also discuss the future (ie abolition for the second time in 15 years, effectively) of that den of corruption running (again) by the name of the Law Institute of Victoria (Limited) and the investigation and abolition / substantial reorganisation and re-culturing of the other lawyer- government agencies in your portfolio – the actions I touched on in my letter to you of 20 January 2013. And the scope and extent and timing of the various Nuremberg-style investigations and prosecutions. These all go beyond the immediate needs and bounds of this communication. As noted in my earlier letters this month, I look forward to assisting you, as I assisted several of your predecessors with projects of similar magnitude, helping you to get your Lawyer Ministry and law government agencies reorganised and recultured and “serving”, rather than “serving-up (to lawyers)” the people of Victoria. Yours sincerelyHarold James JohnsonJournalist – Whistleblower – Law ReformerIndependent Federal Candidate for LalorSolicitor and Barrister of the High Court of Australia(Celebrating 20 Years of Legal Practice 1990 – 2010) 

Friends of James Johnson web: http://friendsofjamesjohnson.comemail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.sms: 0402 094 047 (sorry – text messages only)post: GPO Box 2354 Brisbane Queensland Australia 4000 “The law is guilty of the evils it is supposed to punish.” “Truth is a weapon, to be picked up and used in the fight against injustice.”

GENERAL IMMEDIATE MEDIA RELEASE: 29 JANUARY 2013 at 11:00 AM Whistleblocked! Whistleblowing lawyer facing fines and lifetime bans for exposing legal, judicial and government corruption 

WHERE:	Victorian Civil Appeals Tribunal, 55 King St Melbourne
	2:00 pm Wednesday 30 January 2013 (nb: check time, place and room number the evening prior under “Legal Practice List” at http://www.vcat.vic.gov.au/hearings/daily-hearings

 In November 2012 prominent Australian journalist, lawyer, whistleblower and political candidate Mr James Johnsonwas wrongly convicted by the Victorian Civil Appeal Tribunal on false allegations of “professional misconduct” and purportedly banned by VCAT from practising law for 2 ½ years. The Tribunal conspired with other government agencies to refuse to examine Court transcripts proving that Mr Johnson was a victim of misconduct and not a perpetrator. Despite an unblemished top-tier legal and government career spanning two decades, and subject to pending appeals to the same Tribunal, this makes Mr Johnson the first lawyer ever to be banned from practising law after appearing in Court as a litigant not as a litigator. A corrupt lawyer bureaucracy indulging in multi-million dollar multi-government agency McCarthyist attacks on a respectable civil rights campaigner? Absolutely. And the same bureaucrats have at least two more rounds of planned attacks – including a bizarre “costs” hearing ritual tomorrow. Not surprisingly, Mr Johnson is continuing 3 years of calls to Victorian Attorney-General Robert Clark to bring law and order to his bureaucrats, to restore fundamental regulatory controls and checks and balances on the legal profession that his predecessor Rob Hulls corruptly abolished 8 years ago, including Nuremberg-styleinvestigations and prosecutions of his persecutors. “This is not government. This is a bureaucratic lynch mob.” Mr Johnson said. “These bureaucrats know very well they have no legal or constitutional authority to do any of this. “On 17 May 2012 half a dozen government agencies held a secret all-government VCAT hearing, a day and a half before the pretend trial began, to rule that the trial would be an evidence free zone, and to excuse my false accusers (high placed lawyers in government pay) from testifying. They knew it would be hugely incriminated and embarrassing to the government if they were to testify and be cross-examined. Tomorrow the conspiracy plans to make me pay the fabricated costs of being stitched up without a case, without a trial.”  

	http://friendsofjamesjohnson.com/2013/01/28/whatever-happened-to-law-and-order-this-is-not-government-this-is-a-lynch-mob-part-2/  http://friendsofjamesjohnson.com/2013/01/17/these-aussie-lawyers-need-nuremberg-style-trials-and-punishments/ http://lawyerocracyontrial.com/2013/01/01/get-some-drugs-and-have-a-laugh-theyre-not-real-lawyers-anyway/
Friends of James Johnson web: http://friendsofjamesjohnson.comemail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.sms: 0402 094 047 (sorry – text messages only)post: GPO Box 2354 Brisbane Queensland Australia 4000 “The law is guilty of the evils it is supposed to punish.” “Truth is a weapon, to be picked up and used in the fight against injustice.”

 GENERAL IMMEDIATE MEDIA RELEASE: 28 JANUARY 2013 at 11:00 PM Whistleblocked! Whistleblowing lawyer facing fines and lifetime bans for exposing legal, judicial and government corruption Whistleblower demands Nuremberg-style investigations and prosecutions Amazing human rights battle, political trial, Melbourne (2pm Weds 30 January) 

WHERE:	Victorian Civil Appeals Tribunal, 55 King St Melbourne
	2:00 pm Wednesday 30 January 2013 (nb: check the time, place and room number the evening prior under “Legal Practice List” at http://www.vcat.vic.gov.au/hearings/daily-hearings
MORE:      UPDATES:	http://friendsofjamesjohnson.com/?s=nuremberg http://lawyerocracyontrial.wordpress.com/?s=corruption http://jamesjohnsonchr.wordpress.com//?s=lawyerocracy Follow @AusFoJJohnson@JamesJohnsonCHR and @21May12

In November 2012 prominent Australian journalist, lawyer and political candidate Mr James Johnson was wrongly convicted by the Victorian Civil Appeal Tribunal on false allegations of “professional misconduct” and purportedly banned by VCAT from practising law for 2 ½ years. “The purported bans were made ‘over-the-counter’, not even at a proper hearing”, Mr Johnson says. “On hearing about them, I filed the prescribed applications ‘in triplet’ for ‘rehearing’, ‘re-opening’ and ‘appeal’ in VCAT, respectively. All 3 applications VCAT has so far totally ignored for 5 weeks now.” Referring to the “Circumlocution Office” public service parody that features in Charles Dickens’ novel “Little Dorrit”, Mr Johnson comments that, “Dickens would have had a seizure if he saw what Victoria’s public service lawyers had done with his blueprint for circumventing due process, justice and the law. These unethical and unaccountable public service lawyers have had a field day.” Although retired for some years now, Mr Johnson is a senior member of the legal profession, with a distinguished two-decade, top-tier legal career and solid contributions to legal professional bodies including 20 years of service to the Law Institute of Victoria Limited and its “flagship publication” the Law Institute Journal and for the Legal Practitioners Liability Committee. Mr Johnson says he “has never stolen a penny from a client, never cheated his taxes, never committed any crime and in 20 years has never had a client complain about him to any legal regulatory or professional body.” However, retired or not, distinguished career or not, Mr Johnson is now the first lawyer ever to be banned from practising law for appearing in a court case as a litigant not as a litigator. The allegations against Mr Johnson concern a federal court hearing back in October 2008. Mr Johnson appeared as a litigant, seeking an adjournment on three grounds. First, in order to obtain lawyer representation after his original lawyer had mistreated him (“screwed up” and “screwed him over”). Second, on grounds that the Magistrate didn’t have the authority to hear such a complex case (the Magistrate had admitted this at a hearing 5 months earlier). And third because the Magistrate had twice behaved with extreme bias – which had violent consequences for Mr Johnson and others affected by the proceedings. The Federal Magistrate, judged himself as not having been seen to be possibly biased. He then dismissed all 3 of Mr Johnson’s claims (ignoring his prior admission he lacked jurisdiction) and insisted that the trial must proceed forthwith. At that point, Mr Johnson withdrew his application and quit the proceedings – only to find out six months later the Magistrate and the lawyers had gone on and heard the withdrawn case for two days, without him. Mr Johnson notes that he was not even a practising legal practitioner at the time of the October 2008 court hearing, having closed his practice in June 2008. “The 2 ½ year ban is a blatant, and pretty desperate, political payback to punish and discredit me for blowing the whistle on widespread corruption and misconduct in Australia’s legal system, exposing senior lawyers, including barristers, bureaucrats and judges and demanding that positive law reforms introduced by the 1996 Kennett-Wade government but abandoned by the 2004 – 2005 Bracks-Brumby-Hulls government need to be urgently reinstated to protect the public from bad lawyers.” Mr Johnson says he has not said anything more about the state of corruption in the legal system than has been said by dozens of other prominent legal figures including parliamentarians, cabinet ministers and judges, such as former Federal Attorney Robert McClelland who was ready to testify for Mr Johnson. “These bureaucrats have a hard time ahead, explaining why they have repeatedly gone after me for whistleblowing, while not going after any of the dozens of high profile legal and political figures who have said the same things as me over the years, including recently.” Mr Johnson has campaigned for years to the Victorian Premier and Attorney-General on the need to heed the calls of a damning 2009 Annual Report to Parliament by Victorian State Government Ombudsman on widespread corruption and failure in the office of the Victorian Legal Services Commissioner. “The Baillieu Clark government needs to turn the clock back on the legal profession, only as far back as 2005, when lawyers were regulated by an independent non-lawyer regulator, Ms Kate Hamond the former Victorian Legal Ombudsman.” “These false allegations, which the Legal Services Commissioner has itself dismissed 2 ¾ times previously in the past 4 ½ years, came about because the month after I walked from the Federal Magistrates Court in October 2008 I issued a multi-million dollar Supreme Court counterclaim against 14 co-defendants, including the Legal Services Commissioner (prosecutor) and his three alleged witnesses against me, Federal Magistrate Daniel O’Dwyer, Melbourne Barrister Graeme Devries and Fitzroy North Psychologist David List.” Mr Johnson said. “So the whole VCAT process is an abuse of process, a criminal conspiracy and multiple contempt of [Victorian Supreme] court proceedings as well. The LSC and VCAT know they have no legal powers to do any of this. But they, including new VCAT President / Justice Greg Garde, at an impromtu joint VCAT – Supreme Court hearing on 5 October 2012, insist that they can just go ahead with or without power anyway (they don’t need to justify jurisdiction first) because I can always spend millions I don’t have on dozens of lawyers who won’t represent me (for fear of being witch-hunted themselves) over multiple years to have the courts undo all the wrongs that they’ll do to me in the meantime – if their mates in the judiciary conceed that they acted all along improperly and with out authority.” “The prosecutor did not present any evidence or call any witnesses against me. VCAT did not require the prosecutor to do that. VCAT’s Senior Member Jonathan Smithersjust rubber stamped the false allegations, fabricated some more nasty things about me, and dropped a defamatory “gulity” note he wrote about me on the VCAT counter for my friends to collect.” Mr Johnson said. “If this had been a legitimate trial process, a legitimate tribunal would have reviewed the transcripts of the Federal Magistrates Court hearing in October 2008 and taken evidence from the presiding Federal Magistrate. But VCAT refused to do this. It would have cleared me … and embarrased Mr McGarvie and his team of a dozen government salaried lawyers responsible for attacking me. ” “I sought to clear my name by summonsing the Federal Court transcript and summonsing my alleged accusers, most importantly, the Melbourne based Federal Magistrate Daniel O’Dwyer.”“Unbelievably, VCAT’s public service lawyers conspired with the Legal Services Commissioner’s team (a dozen prosecuting lawyers) and another few dozen government-salaried-for-life lawyers from other government agencies. They included lawyers for Prime Minister Julia Gillardand Federal Attorney-General Nicola Roxon, and government lawyers for former ALP Victorian Attorney-General Rob Hulls). They held a secret all-government hearing without me on 17 May 2012, a day ‘and a half’ before the trial began on 21 May 2012. VCAT Acting President John Bowman ruled that none of that essential evidence would be allowed into the VCAT hearing. I was even banned, at that secret hearing, from being able to produce any evidence to defend myself.” “Where’s the due process where the accused has to summons his accusers and their government records into the tribunal, has to force his accusers to present themselves and give their evidence against him, so that he can cross-examine them and clear his name?” Mr Johnson asks. “What kind of a tribunal rubber stamps false allegations by a prosecution that doesn’t even present a case against the accused? The prosecution did not call a single witness to testify against me, and the tribunal didn’t bother to require the prosecution to present a case or explain not having one.” “And what kind of tribunal holds secret hearings behind the accused’s back, the day and a half before the trial to clear the way for the trial to proceed without any evidence?” Mr Johnson asks, “They even used pre-printed toxic pink stickers on their files to make sure that I couldn’t summons any evidence before the tribunal to clear my name and to prove the corruption of my false accusers. So it’s obviously not the first time that these government bureaucrats have stitched up an innocent man on false charges without evidence and without a trial.” “And the same bureaucrats are lining up to do the same thing to me again in a few months time, based on another set of false allegations from another Federal Magistrate – Federal Magistrate Anne Demack from the Federal Magistrates Court in Brisbane. It’s the same deal. All that is necessary is to read the first two hours of court transcripts and cross examine Federal Magistrate Anne Demack (the daughter of Queensland’s first Corruption and Misconduct Commissioner Alan Demack). The transcripts again show that I should be receiving human rights and bravery awards. She is another judge who should be facing Nuremberg-style investigations, trials and punishments for her outrageous misconduct in public office of a magistrate.” But first, they have organised this VCAT hearing on 30 January 2013 where they are planning to make me pay $12,000 on top of my purported 2 ½ year ban. They claim these are “legal costs” for their secret all-Government hearing on 17 May 2012 to keep all the evidence out of the trial. “Australia is the only country in the world where, and only since 2005, it is against the law to sue lawyers who are negligent in the court room. Before 2005 only 1% of lawyers, barristers, were above the law. And even that was only true for Australia.” Mr Johnson said, “On top of this, we have a lame legal regulator who refuses to investigate more than 90% of the 2,000 complaints about lawyers that the Legal Services Commissioner receives every year. The complaints he refuses to hear include complaints about family lawyers (over 40% of complaints), lawyers executing wills and estates (nearly 30% of complaints) and litigation lawyers generally (another 20% of complaints). The stories, and the statistics, are chilling. I’ve two sets of Victorian Supreme Court rulings telling him he can and should police 100% of lawyers. Yet the legal regulator wilfully ignores the Court rulings.” Mr Johnson is calling on the Baillieu-Clark government, which “inherited the mess from the Brumby-Bracks-Hullslabor years, after Kennett and Wade made some heroic reforms in 1996” to turn the clock back 8 years and “clean up” the legal profession. “As Christine Assange said, ‘we live in an age where whistleblowers are criminals, and journalists are enemy combatants. And I am a whistleblower and a journalist. Worse still, I am a highly trained and experienced constitutional and human rights lawyer. Worst of all, I am a political candidate opposed to Julia Gillard who, quite the opposite of me, is a protected species.” he said. This is not just James Johnson’s personal battle for justice, freedom of speech and the right to speak out against corruption in government – a “lawyerocracy” as Mr Johnson famously calls it, “This is a personal and political battle that affects 100,000 more Australian families every year.”