Thread:Comments:High Court of Australia dismisses appeal against conviction, compulsory voting/Consideration of "human rights" requires conviction/reply (13)

It should be understood that any legislation that violates the legal principles embedded in the constitution is no legislation at all. “A pretend law made in excess of power is not and never has been a law at all. Anybody in the country is entitled to disregard it”. Chief Justice Latham 1942

As I successfully submitted that the Framers of the Constitution specifically refused to make voting compulsory. Neither the Commonwealth and/or the 9 Attorney-Generals challenged me on this. The Appeal was not before the High Court of Australia but before the County Court of Victoria exercising federal jurisdiction. However, on 4 December 2002 the Magistrates Court of Victoria at Heidelberg issued an order that the NOTICE OF CONSTITUTIONAL MATTER (also served upon all Attorney-Generals) was to be heard and determined by the High Court of Australia. The High Court of Australia more than 21 years later has not done so, this because technically they cannot do so because of implied bias, where they have to decide if they themselves are validly commissioned as judges. The right to vote or not to vote is like the right to walk along the street or not to walk along the street. You may walk along the street as long as you follow legal requirements but if you decide to stay home that is your choice. Likewise, if you exercise your right to vote you must do so as legally required but if you do not desire to exercise to vote you cannot be forced to do so. This never was about human rights, etc, but about legal principles enshrined in the constitution and the Court upheld both appeals on 19 July 2006 on this and other constitutional issues I submitted to the court, and again neither the Commonwealth and/or any of the Attorney-Generals challenged my numerous submissions!