~ Open letter to Mrs Vanessa Goodwin - Justice minister of Tasmania ~

Reference the validity or otherwise of the Sovereign Constitutional Authority today.

Dear Madam, I write this letter to you because it appears that you are my 'last' source of information on a matter that is of absolute importance not only for every Tasmanian, but in fact for every child of God on this planet, a 'space' in the universe is soon to seethe and writhe in insanity, confrontation and destruction, the 'likes' of which has never before been seen and for reasons known by me.

I see the following words on your web site:

"With a responsible Government that lives within its means, has the right priorities and can be trusted."

The matter at hand is in respect of God's command unto mankind to live at peace with their neighbour and never cause harm and turn the other cheek if assaulted. These words are 'echoed' within the Tasmanian and Australia Constitutions wherein it is apparent to me that the 'powers' granted unto officials of government are LIMITED to a very great extent, albeit they see IT not.

Government officials are limited insofar that IF any person wishes to live by their own conscience, their belief or their religious ideology they are entitled to do so, but more significantly, they are granted protection to so do.

These ACTS are enshrined as LAW so that those absolute pacifists such as myself can live according to our  belief or doctrine apart from the 'mainstream' ideological doctrine of control, police protection, punishment and war as long as we are of moral standing and do not disturb the peace of the land.

It is important to understand that the Constitution is supposed to GUARANTEE that these absolute pacifists living their religious belief are NOT TO BE PERSECUTED OR DISADVANTAGED by any officials of the organisation or institution named 'The government of Australia.'

My concerns are due to the fact that the peaceful are being harassed, intimidated and persecuted by officials of the justice department and other government officials. In fact, said officials are imposing their own doctrine forcefully in contravention of the Constitutional Acts.

Constitution Acts. Acts which authorise and LIMIT the actions of public servants:

Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act (9th July 1900) section 116

"The Commonwealth shall not make any law for establishing any religion, or for imposing any religious observance, or for prohibiting the free exercise of any religion, - and

Constitution Act 1934 (Tasmania)

This document includes a legal guarantee of the religious liberty and equality of Tasmanians. Every citizen is guaranteed freedom of conscience and the free exercise of religion under Section 46(1) of this Act.

Part V - General provisions - Religious freedom

46. (1) Freedom of conscience and the free profession and practice of religion are, subject to public order and morality, guaranteed to every citizen

(2) No person shall be subject to any disability, or be required to take any oath on account of his religion or religious belief.

So, I ask:

If it is true that the Constitution is in fact the 'leading light' of the legal system which authorises all legislators and subsequent legislation and is the authority to RULE granted unto the government officers by THE CONSTITUTION, it follows that, - - -

The 'Freedom of Religion' Acts above LIMIT the IMPOSITION of some 'subsequent' legislation in that IF a person wishes to 'follow God' and live by their own conscience, belief and ideology they are ENTITLED to so do with no fear that they will be persecuted as long as they are moral and peaceful. - - - So I BELIEVE.

I am 'aware' that all Constitutional matters of 'faith' and religious ideology or conscience can only be 'heard and judged' LEGALLY in the High Court and, - - -

Since state officials are placing Freedom of Religion' cases before magistrates in the lower 'petty' courts who are hearing and judging said cases placed before them ILLEGALLY, then said magistrates and prosecutors are in 'collusion' because they are attempting to coerce people into changing their ideology from that of peace (absolute pacifism) to that of condoning, supporting and funding the contra ideology of control, punishment and war.  

The 'crux' of the QUESTIONS I have for you are:

1 - Who is to be the authority bringing said treasonable persons to account?
2 - In your mind, is the authority of the Constitution still valid or has IT become invalid?
3 - If officials and magistrates are usurping the Sovereign Constitutional Authority why is no one 'hauling them in' for a treasonable breach of their own Constitution?
4 - Who or 'which' government 'body' UPHOLDS the Tasmanian and Commonwealth Constitutions. Is it the Justice department or is it the Governor-General's department or is it the 'Queen's' armed forces? 

I have been 'testing' the validity of the Freedom of Religion' Act for over fifteen years and I have been doing my best to defend IT and my 'client' an elderly lady living in Launceston. This elderly lady has been and yet is persecuted, intimidated and threatened while also still being coerced into changing her ideological belief by persons in 'high' places who I deem to be treasonable anarchists defiant of their constitutional mandate.

From my enquiries it appears that state officials, court registrars and magistrates have absolutely NO 'interest' in THE Freedom of Religion Act and unfortunately, are 'happy' to remain in ignorance of ITS implications in spite of being informed of their error, and they simply continue 'hearing' all cases brought before their lower 'petty' courts and cause an awful lot of terror, intimidation, harm, loss and suffering to their VICTIMS due to arrogance, vanity and ignorance.

My 'other' question is: "Who can show their invisible God that they are trustworthy and they are faithful to His Word (Peace & love & mercy & compassion) and that they are doing their very best for His children"?

Let it be made quite clear from the outset that there are many TRUE believers such as myself who are absolute pacifists who obey the Command of their God. They also cannot condone, support or fund any person or institution having the conflicting code of conduct policy of using 'armed men' in the activity of control, subjugation, interference, punishment, invasion of property or killing. We believers only fund benign community effort.

Not only this, but absolute pacifists are also of the BELIEF that our God is the Sovereign Monarch, Power and Authority. Thus 'we' do not hold the false belief held by many that a mortal personage, government or ‘council of men’ body is ones lord or master or 'sovereign' to be adored and obeyed. Our peaceful non-intrusive living ways rely solely on the advocacy of our Sovereign Lord, God.

My 'task' is soon done, I have 'unmasked' the presence of the EVIL ONE who rules everyone who wields a sword in defiance of God's Holy Word of 'Peace & Love.'

Each of you who can READ my holy scripture must now choose to WIN or LOSE the FINAL battle for their SOUL. Those who continue to use the forceful power of God to plunder the pockets of His children will FAIL, - - - it is their choice to eternally quail and shriek in anguish.

I am still formulating my final 'complaint' document concerning this matter to the Police minister and yourself but in the meantime, I would be grateful if you would give me a reply to the above so that I can forward a copy of my complaint to the appropriate 'body' in a few days.

My 'finding' on the matter is of the highest importance to everyone, as is the 'response' received from yourself in regard to my four questions above as well as from the recipients of my main outreach 'complaint' you will receive in a few days.

Sincerely - Terence

16th May 2015

To assist you I give some relevant information:

In order to 'prove' and 'Judge' the case at hand one way or the other one first needs to understand the meaning of the words 'Freedom of Religion' and how they are applicable to citizens of Australia and every land mass on earth.

Equally important to understand and accept is that on this ‘material’ level, the overriding power of the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act (9th July 1900) section 116 supersedes all subsequent legislation.

Section 116 of this Act is a general prohibition applying to all laws and subsequent legislation, under whatever powers these laws have been made.

It does not compete with other provisions of the Constitution and it prevails over all laws and limits all provisions that give power to make laws.

Accordingly no law can escape the application of s 116 and all legislative powers are subject to the condition which s 116 imposes. Clause 5 of the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act says:

Operation of the Constitution and laws [see Note 3] This Act. - All laws made by the Parliament of the Commonwealth under the Constitution shall be binding on the courts, judges, and people of every State and of every part of the Commonwealth, notwithstanding anything in the laws of any State.

It follows that the 116 'Freedom of Religion' Clause giving immunity and protection to those who wish to live by their belief clearly overrides any latter day Acts.

Equally, Constitution Act 1934 (Tas) and its Part V - General provisions "Religious freedom" applies to every State of Australia.

The implication being that State law is valid unless it is overruled by a Commonwealth Law such as the ‘Freedom of Religion’ Act. This is an Act that is only 'valid' to those who have not disturbed the peace of the land and have their God as head of house rather than mortal man.

In the Annotated Constitution of the Commonwealth of Australia, Section 330 titled "Its Interpretation," John Quick and Robert Randolph Garran say:

"In the exercise of the duty of interpretation and adjudication not only in the High Court, but every court of competent jurisdiction has the right to declare that: A law of the Commonwealth or of a State is void by reason of transgressing the Constitution.

This is a duty cast upon the courts by the very nature of the judicial function. The federal Parliament and the State Parliaments are not sovereign bodies; they are legislatures with limited powers; and any law which they attempt to pass in excess of those powers is no law at all, it is simply a nullity, entitled to no obedience."

The question of today is 'What is the meaning of the word 'Religion'?

The right of and importance of Religious freedom for the citizens of Australia has been clearly affirmed by the rulings of the High Court of Australia (The case of Church of the New Faith V Commissioner of Pay roll Tax (Vic) 1983 154 CLR 120) where: Justices Mason and Brennan, in a joint judgment, stressed the importance of the case in determining fundamental questions of religious freedom in Australia and the extent to which an individual is free to believe and act without legal restraint.

Justices Mason and Brennan said, "Freedom of religion, the paradigm freedom of conscience, is of the essence of a free society. The chief function in the law of a definition of religion is to mark out an area within which a person subject to the law is free to believe and act in accordance with his belief without legal restraint."
The definition affected the operation of the religious-freedom guarantee under the Constitution and many other laws granting religions special benefits. "Protection is accorded to preserve the dignity and freedom of each man so that he may adhere to any religion of his choosing or to none," they said. "The freedom of religion being equally conferred on all, the variety of religious beliefs which are within the area of legal immunity is not restricted." The judges stressed the importance of the "Actions of the adherents" rather than the dogma itself.

I Terence de Malaherre believe that the word ‘Religion’ is the belief in a superpower entitled to be revered and obeyed and, IT IS THE IDEOLOGICAL CODE OF CONDUCT POLICY as Commanded by the Sovereign Power (God) that is to be obeyed.

Note: Australia's own Macquarie dictionary – page 835 (Compact version)

Religion = - - - - the quest for the values of the ideal life - - - the ideal, the practices for attaining the values of the ideal, - - - a system of belief in the worship of a supernatural power or God' or the recognition by man of a superhuman power entitled to obedience, reverence, and worship.

Religious = - - - - scrupulously faithful, pious, devotion - - - this means that ones 'religion' is not any named 'Church' organisation, but it is the policy of ones daily code of conduct interaction with other children of God.

I Terence am an EDUCATOR and I see the Dark controlling ways of politicians leading to more interference, more extortion of money, more control and more punishment. Thus I choose to ‘suffer’ at the hands of the merciless and ignorant so as to be able to show them the ERROR of their ways and to TRY and save them from excruciating suffering and terror which results from any defiance of God.

I seek to set a precedent whereby true believers in GOD and peace can go about their way without being persecuted as is their RIGHT granted by God and within the freedom of religion clause of the Constitution, as they strictly observe the precepts within the Command of God.

Is there a time when I could be ‘legally’ subjected to State rules? Yes, if I voted for the government to PROTECT me using force of arms and RULE me. Why? Because I would be paying the wages of ‘armed men’ to interfere in the lives of others and cause others harm on my behalf and in my name.

What role do the courts play in Australian governance?

Australia's system of courts is the third arm of Australian governance and is known as the Judiciary - The role of the Judiciary is to apply the law as made by the Parliament where necessary, interpret the laws made by Parliament and ensure that laws comply with the Australian Constitution

I Will to Will God’s ‘Will’

May truth, light & love prevail.