OSTF BONDI FOLLOW UP

ETHICAL DONATORS AND COMMUNITY MEMBERS REQUIRED, TO FILL THIS SPACE WITH YOUR POLITICAL SLOGANS, ADVERTISING OFFERS, WEBSITE DETAILS, CHARITY REQUESTS, LECTURE OPPORTUNITIES, EDUCATIONAL WORKSHOPS, SPIRITUAL AND/OR HEALTH ENLIGHTENMENT COURSES. AS AN IMPORTANT MEMBER OF THE GLOBAL INDEPENDENT MEDIA COMMUNITY, MIKIVERSE POLITICS HONOURABLY REQUESTS YOUR HELP TO KEEP YOUR NEWS, DIVERSE,AND FREE OF CORPORATE, GOVERNMENT SPIN AND CONTROL. FOR MORE INFO ON HOW YOU MAY ASSIST, PLEASE CONTACT:themikiverse@gmail.com 

DECLARATION OF SELF-DETERMINATION AND NATIONHOOD OF THE AUTONOMOUS AUTOCHTHONOUS ORIGINAL TRIBAL PEOPLES OF TERRA AUSTRALIS

PREAMBLE

To All and Singular to whom these presents shall come,

We, the Autochthonous and Original Tribal Peoples of the Great South Land, the noble Peoples of the Great Southern land known in this modern era as 'Australia', support and address the United Nations in that We solemnly proclaim the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples as a standard of achievement to be pursued in a spirit of partnership, truth and mutual respect. Therefore, in this same spirit and pursuit we adhered to this proclamation and so have adopted the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples as a template to claim and declare our Sovereignty and Nationhood and all the rights and privileges afforded to nations, both within the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and according to our Sovereign Tribal status, to the world.

We, the Original Tribes of this continent, declare to the world that no matter our geography, tribe, faith or political affiliation we are united as one People through the Almighty, the Creator of all things, the Creator confirms our Brotherhood and Nationhood, with and by the Creators’ will and blessing we exist.

Terra Australis, Terra Australis Ignota or Terra Australis Incognita (Latin for "the unknown land of the South") was a hypothesized continent, not even appearing on European maps until the 15th century. However, since time immemorial, for many millennia before it 'appeared' on European maps, this continent has been the Sovereign lands of the Original Tribes. Other names used to acknowledge our continent by various other peoples over the times have been Magallanica ("the land of Magellan"), or La Australia del Espíritu Santo (Spanish: "the southern land of the Holy Spirit"), and La grande isle de Java (French: "the great island of Java"). Terra Australis was one of several names applied to the land mass of what is now known as the continent of Australia.

In this Declaration we use the term Terra Australis, for the sake of ease only, in referenced to this continent.

We are the Original Tribes and Sovereigns of Terra Australis, and we here-by Declare that we have exercised and are exercising our right to self determination having united as a people to create the Original Sovereign Tribal Federation so as to unify the Original Tribal Peoples under the authority and blessing of the Creator commensurate with our law.

We wish to be known as “the Autochthonous Tribes of the Originals” and by the short name of “Originals”. “Originals” defining the unified joint and several autochthonous Original Tribes, peoples, principalities and provinces of Terra Australis in the geographical region being the land mass that lies in the southern hemisphere of this, our Mother Earth, between the Pacific Ocean in the East, to the Indian Ocean in the West, the Great Southern Ocean in the South and the Timor and Arafura Seas to the North and including the islands around the Island continent within a 200 mile limit to sea.

We, the autochthonous Original Tribal peoples are the Original Tribal Peoples which are, by way of common Treaty between ourselves, the member Tribes of the Original Sovereign Tribal Federation (OSTF).

“Origine" and "Original" are terms meaning an autochthonous creation of the creator and giver of life, but in particular respect of this Declaration, these terms mean the flesh and blood Sovereign Original Tribal men, women and or children being from historical and geographical Terra Australis which are party to the OSTF Treaty.

We, the Indigenous Tribes of Terra Australis confirm that we are the most ancient autochthonous Peoples on this, our Mother Earth, and our contribution into the development of humanity is unique. As is our contribution to and maintenance of the maintenance of the most Ancient Tribal culture, songs, dances and ceremonies and the oldest surviving system of law on the planet.

The history of our People can be traced from the birth of time itself on the lands of Terra Australis, the material evidence of which can be found all over the Original Tribal peoples' territories. The Tribal culture and law of this continent are worthy of, and a number have attained, world heritage recognition.

It is Our belief that Our People, our ethnic and Tribal customs, our rituals, culture, Law and languages have emerged throughout these territories over the past tens of millennia – long before legal history and beyond legal memory.

Terra Australis – the Autochthonous and historical homeland territories of the Original Tribal peoples is the continent referred to in modern times by the term 'Australia'

The most ancient ethno-genetic sources of the Original Tribes are to be found today in the Tribal populations and within the Original archaeological culture of the Continent.

Throughout the millennia the Original Tribes have lived and loved all across the Continent, visited irregularly by representatives of the various European and other cultures across the planet with which we conducted commerce under our own terms and laws as the Sovereign Tribes we were and remain.

Man’s Ancient customs state, that flesh and blood man was divided by the Creator into nations and tongues. The Original nations, a creation of the almighty Creator, were Crowned by the hand of the Creator and granted the ownership and custodianship over Terra Australis by him. Proof of this dignity is the acknowledgment by all the Nations of this planet, that we are the unquestionable first and Autochthonous Nations of Terra Australis.

We the Original Tribes, by divine right, are the Creators' assigned owners and legal guardians of Terra Australis and have been since time immemorial. Autochthony, being our Holy mandate - the divine testament of our inheritance - the confirmation of our Royal rule of this, The Creators land "Terra Australis”.

By the Creators' will we were created the Sovereign Autochthonous Peoples of Terra Australis with unlimited, inalienable and unassailable rights and freedoms as a Peoples and a Nation and with Sovereign authority over ourselves and Tribal our lands.

We have suffered cruel turns of fate; Our Tribes had known peace for tens of thousands of years. This was until the arrival of the British on Darug Tribal lands in 1788 at the place now commonly referred to as Sydney Cove.

Since that time the British have attempted to usurp our Sovereignty. They have unlawfully occupied our lands, and, with neither consent nor authority, have stolen and interrupted our Natural wealth, sacred sites, culture, families and other matters and sites of significance to our Tribes. They have done so despite our making it clear to them that this is against our will, law and culture. They have done so despite being mere guests upon Original Tribal lands, and in the process have committed ethnic cleansing on some of our fellow Tribes.

The Crowns parliaments have attempted to illegally disperse and dispossess Our peoples across the continent in an attempt to displace us from our domicile upon our Tribal lands in an attempt to justify their fraudulent usurpation of our absolute title and sovereignty over our Tribal lands, ourselves and our Creator granted status upon this continent.

We have been pushed out by force from our own lands, and over time, the records of our existence are being gradually eliminated and destroyed in a systematic program of genocide and ethnic cleansing. The settlers' parliaments have been waging a war of ethnic cleansing and genocide against the Original Tribes since their arrival on our lands.

Our graves are robbed and destroyed by bulldozers, concreted over and flooded with water. Our Relics, Sacred and Holy sites, our bones and artefacts have been looted, stolen and illegally hidden in collections abroad and in foreign museums, and worse, in the homes of private settlers as monuments to their cunning craftiness in destroying the Creators longest surviving line of humanity and law.

Our People are facing extinction, our tribes are dying out and our tongues are losing their speech. We are the People who are losing our identity, names, voice, and Nationhood - but we haven’t lost them yet.

In light of this tragedy we have gathered together from around the continent in order to remind and confirm to the international community of Nations and the People of the world in general of our existence, and to demand and claim our Nationhood and sovereignty as an autochthonous Sovereign Peoples seeking peace, reconciliation, treaty, recompense and freedom from the oppression of the Crown and its greedy Corporate war lords.

Our people are incarcerated at horrifyingly disparate rates for either no legitimate reason or for disobeying the statutes of a Crown which has no right to rule over Us as Tribal Sovereigns.

We have taken our future in our hands, placed our feet firm back on the path of self-determination as one Autochthonous Original collective and determined our way forward.

We respectfully demand that the UN, the EU, Russia, the United States of America, The United Kingdom and Australia in particular, and the international community of nations as a whole, to uphold and defend the rights that are entitled to us under not only our law, but also various instruments including but not limited to the UN charter of Human Rights, the Declaration of the Rights of the Indigenous Peoples and all other International laws, covenants, mandates, declarations and treaties in respect of the sovereignty and rights of Indigenous Peoples, nations, and human Rights, including, but not limited to, our right to assert and establish our own Sovereign and independent States, as recognised by the International community, in accord with UN Resolution 2625 (XXV).

00000000000

We, the autochthonous Original Tribal
Peoples of Terra Australis hereby Declare that;

Article 1 … We have the right to the full enjoyment, as a collective or as individuals, of all human rights and fundamental freedoms as recognized in the Charter of the United Nations, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and international human rights and other law, including our own Tribal laws.

Article 2 … We are free and equal to all other Peoples and individuals and have the right to be free from any kind of discrimination, in the exercise of our rights, in particular those rights pertaining to our indigenous origin and or identity.

Articles 3 … We have the right to self-determination. By virtue of this right we freely determine our political status and freely pursue our economic, social, and cultural development.

Article 4 … We, in exercising our right to self-determination, have the right to autonomy and self-governance in matters relating to our internal and local affairs, as well as ways and means for financing our autonomous functions.

Article 5 … We have the right to maintain and strengthen our distinct political, legal, economic, social and cultural institutions, while retaining our right to participate fully, if we so choose, in the political, economic, social, and cultural life of the UN member State of AUSTRALIA.

Article 6 … the Original Tribal individuals have the right to a nationality and Nationhood.

Article 7 … We,

a) collectively and as individuals have rights to life, physical and mental integrity, liberty and security of our physical body and person and freedom from subjugation by any other political entity without consent.

b) the Original Tribal Peoples have the collective right to live in freedom, peace, and security as distinct Peoples and shall not be subjected to by the State any act of genocide or any other act of violence, including the forced removing of children from our Tribal group to another group.

Article 8 … We,

a) have the right not to be subjected to forced assimilation into any UN member State, nor destruction of our culture.

b) demand that pursuant to the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples that the UN member State of 'Australia' (hereafter the State) shall provide to us effective mechanisms for prevention of, and redress for:

(i) Any action which has or has the aim or effect of depriving us of our integrity and status as distinct Peoples, or of our cultural values or ethnic identities;

(i) Any action which has or had the aim or effect of dispossessing us of our lands, territories or resources;

(iii) Any form of forced population transfer which has the aim or effect of violating or undermining any of our rights;

(iv) Any form of forced assimilation or integration;

(v) Any form of propaganda designed to promote or incite racial or ethnic discrimination directed against us.

Article 9 … We, collectively and as individuals, have the right to belong to an indigenous community, society and or nation, in accordance with the laws and customs of the Indigenous Original People of Terra Australis. No discrimination of any kind may arise from the exercise of such a right.

Article 10 … We shall not be forcibly removed from our lands or territories. No relocation of Original people shall take place without the free, prior, and informed consent of the autochthonous Original Tribal People of Terra Australis and only after agreement on just and fair compensation and, where possible, with the option of return.

Article 11 … We,

1. have the right to practice and revitalize our Tribal law, customs, culture and religion. This includes the right to maintain, protect, and develop the past, present, and future manifestations of our cultures, such as archaeological and historical sites, artefacts, designs, ceremonies, technologies and visual and performing arts and literature.

2. demand that under United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples that the State shall provide redress through effective mechanisms, which may include restitution, developed in conjunction with the Original Tribeal Peoples, with respect to our cultural, intellectual, religious, and spiritual property taken without our free, prior, and informed consent, or in violation of our laws, culture, and customs.

Article 12 … We,

1. have the right to manifest, practice, develop, and teach our spiritual and religious traditions, customs, laws and ceremonies; the right to maintain, protect, and have access in privacy to our religious and cultural sites; the right to the use and control of our ceremonial objects; and the right to the repatriation of our human remains.

2. We the Indigenous Original Tribal People of Terra Australis demand that pursuant to the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples that the State shall seek and work to enable the access to and repatriation of ceremonial objects and human remains in its possession through fair, transparent, and effective mechanisms developed in conjunction with the Original Tribal Peoples of Terra Australis.

Article 13 … We,

1. have the right to revitalize, use, develop, and transmit to future generations our histories, languages, oral traditions, laws, philosophies, writing systems and literatures, and to designate and retain our own names for communities, places, and people.

2. the Indigenous Original Tribal People of Terra Australis demand that pursuant to the instruments such as but not limited to United Nations Declaration on the Rights of the Indigenous Peoples and UN Resolution 2625 (XXV) that the State shall take effective measures to ensure that this right is protected and also to ensure that the Original Tribal Peoples of Terra Australis can understand and be understood in political, legal, and administrative proceedings, where necessary through the provision of interpretation or by other appropriate means.

Article 14 …. We,

1. have the right to establish and control our educational systems and institutions providing education in our own languages, in a manner appropriate to our cultural methods of teaching and learning.

2. the Indigenous Original Tribal People of Terra Austrlis demand that under United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples that the State shall, in conjunction with indigenous Original Peoples, take effective measures, in order for indigenous Original Tribes and individuals, particularly children, including those living outside our communities, to have access, when possible, to an education in our own culture and provided in our own language without interference by the State.

Article 15 … We,

1. have the right to the dignity and diversity of our culture, traditions, history, law, and aspirations which shall be appropriately reflected in education and public information.

2. We the Indigenous Original Tribal People of Terra Australis demand that pursuant to United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and other instruments, that the State shall take effective measures, in consultation and cooperation with the Original Tribal Peoples, to combat prejudice and eliminate discrimination and to promote tolerance, understanding, and good relations among the Original Tribal Peoples and all other segments of both Tribal and the Crowns’ societies.

Article 16 … We,

1. have the right to establish our own media in our own languages and to have access to all forms of non-indigenous media without discrimination.

2. demand that pursuant to the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, UN Resolution 2625 (XXV) and other applicable instruments that the State shall take effective measures to ensure that State-owned media duly reflect Original Tribal cultural diversity. That the State, without prejudice to ensuring full freedom of expression, should encourage privately owned media to adequately reflect our Original tribal cultural diversity.

Article 17 …We,

1. collectively, and as individuals, have the right to enjoy fully all rights established under applicable labour law.

2. demand that, pursuant to the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and other appropriate instruments, the State shall, in consultation and cooperation with the Original Tribal Peoples and our stated representatives, take specific measures to protect our Original Tribal children from economic exploitation and from performing any work that is likely to be hazardous or to interfere with the child’s education, or to be harmful to the child’s health or physical, mental, spiritual, moral, or social development, taking into account our special vulnerability and the importance of education for our empowerment.

3. We, the Indigenous Original Tribal People of Terra Australis, collectively and as individuals, have the right not to be subjected to any discriminatory conditions of labour and, inter alia, employment or salary.

Article 18 … demand that pursuant to the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, UN Resolution 2625 (XXV) and other appropriate instruments, have the right to participate in decision-making in matters which would affect our rights, through representatives chosen by ourselves and not by the State in accordance with our own Tribal laws and procedures, as well as to maintain and develop our own Original Tribal decision-making institutions, including but not limited to our Tribal Elders Councils.

Article 19 … demand that pursuant to but not limited to instruments such as UN Resolution 2625 (XXV) and the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples that the State shall consult and cooperate in good faith with the Original Tribal People through our own representative institutions in order to obtain our free, prior and informed consent before adopting and implementing legislative or administrative measures that may or are intended to affect us.

Article 20 … We,

1. have the right to maintain and develop our political, economic, and social systems and institutions, to be secure in the enjoyment of our own means of subsistence and development, and to engage freely in all our Tribal and other economic activities.

2. the Original Tribal People which have been deprived of their means of subsistence and developments are entitled to just and fair redress.

Article 21 … We,

1. have the right, without discrimination, to the improvement of our economic and social conditions, including, inter alia, in the areas of education, employment, vocational training and retraining, housing, sanitation, health and social security.

2. demand that pursuant to the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, UN Resolution 2625 (XXV) and other applicable instruments, that the State shall take effective measures and, where appropriate, special measures to ensure beginning and or continuing improvement of our economic and social conditions including a removal of interferences to such improvements

3. Particular attention shall be paid to the rights and special needs of Original Tribal elders, women, youth, children and persons with disabilities.

Article 22 … We,

1. Particular attention shall be paid to the rights and special needs of Original Tribal elders, women, youth, children and persons with disabilities in the implementation of this Declaration.

2. We demand that pursuant to the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples that the State shall take measures, in conjunction with the Original Tribal Peoples, to ensure that Original Tribal men, women and children enjoy the full protection and guarantees against all forms of violence and discrimination.

Articles 23 … We, Original Tribal People have the right to determine and develop priorities and strategies for exercising our right to development. In particular, Original Tribal Peoples have the right to be actively involved in developing and determining health, housing, and other economic and social programs affecting them and, as far as possible, to administer such programs through our own institutions.

Article 24 …We,

1. have the right to our traditional and customary  medicines and to maintain our health practices, including the conservation of our vital medicinal plants, animals, and minerals. We, the Original Tribal Peoples of Terra Australis also have the right to access, without any discrimination, to all social and health services.

2. have an equal right to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health. We the Original Tribal Peoples of Terra Australis demand that pursuant to the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and other applicable instruments that the State shall take the necessary steps with a view to achieving progressively the full realization of this right.

Article 25 … We, have the right to maintain and strengthen our distinctive spiritual relationship with our lands, territories, waters and coastal seas and other resources and to uphold our responsibilities to future generations in this regard, despite the nature of the occupation of those lands.

Article 26 … We,

1. have the right to the lands, territories, and resources which we have owned, occupied or otherwise used or acquired over the millennia.

2. the Original Tribal People of Terra Australis have the right to own, use, develop, and control the lands, territories and resources that we possess by reason of our absolute Tribal  ownership or other occupation or use, as well as those which we have otherwise acquired, including a right to divest those lands to the current occupiers.

3. the Original Tribal People of Terra Australis demand that pursuant to the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and other applicable instruments that the State shall give legal recognition and protection to these lands, territories and resources. Such recognition shall be conducted with due respect to the customs, laws, traditions and land tenure systems of the indigenous Original Tribal People.

Article 27 … We,

1. have the right to redress, by means that can include restitution or, when this is not possible, just, fair, and equitable compensation, for the lands, territories and resources which we own pursuant to our Tribal law or otherwise occupied or used, and which have been confiscated or otherwise occupied or stolen, taken, used or damaged without our free, prior, and informed consent.

2. Unless otherwise freely agreed upon by the Original Tribal People of Terra Australis, compensation shall take the form of lands, territories, and resources equal in quality, size, and legal status or of monetary compensation or other appropriate redress acceptable to the Original Tribes people.

Article 28 … We,

1. the Original Tribal Peoples have the right to the conservation and protection of the environment and the productive capacity of our lands or territories and resources. We the Original Tribal Peoples of Terra Australis demand that pursuant to the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and other applicable instruments that the State shall establish and implement assistance programs for the Original Tribal Peoples for such conservation and protection, without discrimination.

2. demand that pursuant to the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples that the State shall take effective measures to ensure that no storage or disposal of hazardous materials shall take place in or on the lands or territories of Original Tribal People without our free, prior, and informed consent.

3. demand that pursuant to the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and other applicable instruments that the State shall also take effective measures to ensure, as needed, that programs for monitoring, maintaining, and restoring the health of the Original Tribal People, as developed and implemented by the Peoples affected by such materials, are duly implemented.

Article 29 …

1. Military activities shall not take place in the lands or territories of Original Tribal Peoples, unless justified by a relevant public interest and freely agreed with or requested by the Original Tribal Peoples concerned, but subject to appropriate payments for such use.

2. demand that pursuant to the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples that the State shall undertake effective consultations with the indigenous Original Tribal People, through appropriate procedures and in particular through our representative institutions, prior to using our lands or territories for military activities.

Article 30 … We,

1. have the right to maintain, control, protect, and develop our laws, cultural heritage, tribal knowledge and tribal cultural expressions, as well as the manifestations of our sciences, technologies, and cultures, including human and genetic resources, seeds, medicines, knowledge of the properties of fauna and flora, oral traditions, literatures, designs, sports and traditional games and visual and performing arts. We also have the right to maintain, control, protect and develop our intellectual property over such cultural heritage, Tribal knowledge, and cultural expressions.

2. In conjunction with Original Tribal Peoples, the State shall take effective measures to recognize and protect the exercise of these rights.

Articles 31 … We,

1 the Original Tribal Peoples of Terra Australis have the right to determine and develop priorities and strategies for the development or use of our lands or territories and other resources.

2. demand that pursuant to the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples that the State shall consult and cooperate in good faith with the Original Tribal Peoples through our own representative institutions in order to obtain our free and informed consent prior to the approval of any project affecting our lands or territories and other resources, particularly in connection with the development, utilization, or exploitation of mineral, water, gas and or other resources.

3. demand that pursuant to the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples that the State shall provide effective mechanisms for just and fair redress for any such activities, and appropriate measures shall be taken to mitigate adverse environmental, economic, social, cultural, or spiritual impact.

Article 32 … we,

1. have the right to determine our own identity or membership in the State in accordance with our laws, customs and traditions. This does not impair the right of Original Tribal individuals to obtain citizenship of the State in which we live, however, such citizenship shall not limit or restrict such peoples’ right to their Tribal status.

2. We the Original Tribal Peoples of Terra Australis have the right to determine the structures and to select the membership of our institutions, both representative and non-representative, in accordance with our own procedures and laws.

Articles 33 … We have the right to promote, develop and maintain our institutional structures and our distinctive laws, customs, spirituality, traditions, procedures, practices and, in the cases where they exist, juridical systems or customs, in accordance with international human rights standards.

Article 34 … We have the right to determine the responsibilities of individuals to our communities.

Article 35 … We,

1. have and maintain the right to maintain and develop contacts, relations, and cooperation, including activities for spiritual, cultural, political, economic and social purposes, with our own members as well as other Peoples across borders.

2. demand that pursuant to the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples that the State, in consultation and cooperation with Original Tribal Peoples, shall take effective measures to facilitate the exercise and ensure the implementation of this right.

Article 36 … We,

1. have the right to the recognition, observance and enforcement of treaties, agreements, and other constructive arrangements concluded with the State or our successors when and if such agreement have been entered into in full and fair circumstances, and to have the State Honour and respect such treaties, agreements, and other constructive arrangements.

2. Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as diminishing or eliminating the rights of the Original Tribal Peoples contained in treaties, agreements and other constructive arrangements.

Article 37 … We demand that pursuant to the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples that the State, in consultation and cooperation with indigenous Peoples, shall take the appropriate measures, including legislative measures, to achieve the ends of this Declaration.

Articles 38 … We have the right to have access to financial and technical assistance from the State and through international cooperation, for the enjoyment of the rights contained in this Declaration.

Article 39 … We have the right to access to and prompt decision through just and fair procedures for the resolution of conflicts and disputes with the State or other parties, as well as to effective remedies for all infringements of our individual and collective rights and laws. Such a decision shall give due consideration to the customs, traditions, rules, laws, and legal systems of the Original Tribal Peoples and international human rights.

Article 40 … We acknowledge and thank with great humbleness the organs and specialized agencies of the United Nations system and other intergovernmental organizations that they shall contribute to the full realization of the provisions of this Declaration through the mobilization, inter alia, of financial cooperation and technical assistance. Ways and means of ensuring the effective participation of the Tribal Peoples, including the Original Tribal peoples of Terra Australis, on issues affecting, them shall be established.

Article 41 … We acknowledge respectfully that The United Nations, its bodies, including the Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues, and specialized agencies, including at the country level, and the State shall promote respect for and full application of the provisions of this Declaration and follow up the effectiveness of this Declaration.

Article 42 … The rights recognized herein constitute the minimum standards for the survival, dignity, and well-being of the Original Tribal Peoples.

Article 43 … All the rights and freedoms recognized herein are equally guaranteed to male and female Original Tribal Peoples and individuals.

Article 44 … Nothing in this Declaration may be construed as diminishing or extinguishing the rights  Original Tribal Peoples have now or may acquire in the future.

Article 45 …

1. Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, People, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act contrary to the Charter of the United Nations or construed as authorizing or encouraging any action which would dismember or impair, totally or in part, the territorial integrity or political unity of sovereign and independent States, other than is necessary to give effect to the terms of this declaration.

2. In the exercise of the rights enunciated in the present Declaration, human rights and fundamental freedoms of all shall be respected. The exercise of the rights set forth in this Declaration shall be subject only to such limitations as are determined by law and in accordance with international human rights obligations. Any such limitations shall be non-discriminatory and strictly necessary solely for the purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and for meeting the just and most compelling requirements of a democratic society unless it impairs the observance of the independence and Sovereignty of the Original Tribes of Terra Australis over our lands and selves.

3. The provisions set forth in this Declaration shall be interpreted in accordance with the principles of justice, democracy, and respect for Peoples’ rights, equality, non-discrimination, good governance, and good faith.

© ORIGINAL SOVEREIGN TRIBAL FEDERATION (OSTF 2013)

http://ostf.weebly.com/ostf-declaration-of-sovereignty-and-nationhood.html

ETHICAL DONATORS AND COMMUNITY MEMBERS REQUIRED, TO FILL THIS SPACE WITH YOUR POLITICAL SLOGANS, ADVERTISING OFFERS, WEBSITE DETAILS, CHARITY REQUESTS, LECTURE OPPORTUNITIES, EDUCATIONAL WORKSHOPS, SPIRITUAL AND/OR HEALTH ENLIGHTENMENT COURSES.
AS AN IMPORTANT MEMBER OF THE GLOBAL INDEPENDENT MEDIA COMMUNITY, MIKIVERSE LAW HONOURABLY REQUESTS YOUR HELP TO KEEP YOUR NEWS, DIVERSE,AND FREE OF CORPORATE, GOVERNMENT SPIN AND CONTROL. FOR MORE INFORMATION ON HOW YOU MAY ASSIST, PLEASE CONTACT: themikiverse@gmail.com

ORIGINAL SOVEREIGN TRIBAL FEDERATION MELBOURNE TREATY SIGNING CEREMONY

..................................ATTENTION..............................................               ..............186 Customs House........................
WILL BE HOLDING O-S-T-F TREATY SIGNING CEREMONY AND LORE TALK ON THIS WEDNESDAY 9TH JANUARY 1PM AT 186 GERTRUDE ST FITZROY. 

ALL ARE WELCOME TO ATTEND IT IS FREE AND YOU WILL RECEIVE A FORMAL NOTICE OF TREATY FROM THE O-S-T-F. 

YOU DON'T HAVE TO BRING ANYTHING BUT A GOOD SENSE OF HONOR......

maybe a camera if you want your photo taken of your treaty.........

note the roo skin is full so we, have it in the form of a document now and you will get a copy for your files.

hope to see you there......

peace and good will to all.

boya-kung.

ETHICAL DONATORS AND COMMUNITY MEMBERS REQUIRED, TO FILL THIS SPACE WITH YOUR POLITICAL SLOGANS, ADVERTISING OFFERS, WEBSITE DETAILS, CHARITY REQUESTS, LECTURE OPPORTUNITIES, EDUCATIONAL WORKSHOPS, SPIRITUAL AND/OR HEALTH ENLIGHTENMENT COURSES.

AS AN IMPORTANT MEMBER OF THE GLOBAL INDEPENDENT MEDIA COMMUNITY, MIKIVERSE LAW HONOURABLY REQUESTS YOUR HELP TO KEEP YOUR NEWS, DIVERSE,AND FREE OF CORPORATE, GOVERNMENT SPIN AND CONTROL. FOR MORE INFORMATION ON HOW YOU MAY ASSIST, PLEASE CONTACT: themikiverse@gmail.com

 

ABORIGINAL GROUP CHALLENGES CONSTITUTION

Exclusive: Joanne Fosdike Dec. 17, 2012
 

A GROUP of Aboriginal people from Kingston, in the State’s south east, and the Coorong and River Murray is challenging the Australian Constitution in a case that could see it apply for sovereignty status before the United Kingdom Privy Council.
The case of Ramindjeri versus State of South Australia and Ngarrindjeri went before the National Native Title Tribunal in the Federal Magistrates Court in South Australia on Friday to ask the court to recognise the Ramindjeri as the true owners of the land and one of many sovereign groups belonging to the area.
The fight was taken to court after State Government leaders refused to sit down with Ramindjeri leaders to hear their claim that Aboriginal families calling themselves Ngarrindjeri were ruling the area but were not tied to the land by blood or stories.
Ramindjeri spokesman and tribal leader Karno Walker said Ngarrindjeri was a Ramindjeri word meaning “black fellow of country” which was chosen by missionaries at the time to describe Aboriginal people living in the area.
He said the term was adopted by a group of Aboriginal people who came to the area from Victoria and New South Wales after they were dispersed to missions in South Australia.
Mr Walker said it meant the Ngarrindjeri was not a clan or a nation and therefore, in a legal sense, had no right to native title claims.
Even though the court case has been adjourned until April 5, Mr Walker said the Federal Court recognised it did not have jurisdiction over the matter of the Ramindjeri claim for sovereignty and it was suggested they take it before the Privy Council.
Ramindjeri man Mark Koolmatrie said an application to be heard by the Privy Council had already been made and they expected to have a hearing date early next year.
“We hope the Privy Council people recognise us and that they recognise what we are saying - that we are separate nations not one big nation and that there were kings and queens of each group.
“We don’t want to take away the livelihoods of people or their houses, we just want to be recognised as the tribal owners of the land.”
University of South Australia law school professor Rick Sarre said if the case made it to the Privy Council it would raise some interesting questions because it meant the Ramindjeri were claiming not to be Australian citizens.
He said in 1975, Gough Whitlam took away the right for Australian citizens to appeal to the Privy Council after a High Court ruling; and a loophole which allowed people to appeal if they bypassed the High Court was closed in the late 1980s.
Mr Sarre said it was possible the group would get an initial hearing from a Privy Council judge who would then decide if the claim had enough merit to go before the five Privy Council members.
He said he doubted the case would make it to the second stage as it would have major implications, not only across Australia but throughout Commonwealth nations.
“It is a good anthropological argument,” he said.
“It is a very interesting angle but I am not sure the Privy Council is as adventuresome as the Ramindjeri would like.
“I would be delighted to be proven wrong.”
Mr Walker and Mr Koolmatrie said the court challenges could have been avoided if South Australian Premier Jay Weatherill and Aboriginal Affairs Minister Paul Caica had agreed to sit down and talk with the Ramindjeri about issues including their claim the Government favoured Ngarrindjeri while ignoring the Ramindjeri.
http://www.murrayvalleystandard.com.au/story/1191131/aboriginal-group-challenges-constitution/?cs=1275

ETHICAL DONATORS AND COMMUNITY MEMBERS REQUIRED, TO FILL THIS SPACE WITH YOUR POLITICAL SLOGANS, ADVERTISING OFFERS, WEBSITE DETAILS, CHARITY REQUESTS, LECTURE OPPORTUNITIES, EDUCATIONAL WORKSHOPS, SPIRITUAL AND/OR HEALTH ENLIGHTENMENT COURSES.

AS AN IMPORTANT MEMBER OF THE GLOBAL INDEPENDENT MEDIA COMMUNITY, MIKIVERSE LAW HONOURABLY REQUESTS YOUR HELP TO KEEP YOUR NEWS, DIVERSE, AND FREE OF CORPORATE, GOVERNMENT SPIN AND CONTROL. FOR MORE INFORMATION ON HOW YOU MAY ASSIST, PLEASE CONTACT: themikiverse@gmail.com

ORIGINAL SOVEREIGHN TRIBAL FEDERATION PRESS RELEASE - 21 NOVEMBER 2012 NATIVE TITLE. WHO GETS WHAT AND HOW? - IN SIMPLE TERMS.

EXACTLY What Is Native Title, and what will those signing off on Native Title Be Getting From The Crown In Return for their signature ? Are the Tribes being told they will get one standard of rights and ownership of 'Traditional' lands whilst being delivered a completely different standard ? Is the Crown being open and fair in its' Native title dealings with the Tribes ? Are the solicitors and others who 'legally' represent the PBCs aware of what they are doing ? Are the Crowns' courts that hear these matters even competent to do so - or are they disqualified due to a blatant conflict of interest because the people sitting on the benches being paid by one party to the argument ? Does the Crown own Tribal lands ? Are Tribal lands the Crowns' to 'give' back to the Tribes or are they the Tribes' to give away under the Crowns' scam of Native title ?
In order to 'claim' Native Title a 'claimant group (not a Tribe) must make an application as a 'Traditional' Owner of the concerned lands. The term 'Traditional' (in a legal context - and after all we are talking in a legal context when we talk about the legal process of Native title) comes from the following legal term/s: (from Black s Law Dictionary - HENRY CAMPBELL BLACK, M.A.ST. PAUL, MINN. WEST PUBLISHING CO. 1910).

TRADITION: Delivery. (the word is) A close translation or formation from the Latin "traditio." 2 Bl. Comm. 307. - The tradition or delivery is the transferring of the thing sold into the power and possession of the buyer. Civ. Code La. art. 2477.
TRADITIO: - (this is the word that the English word Tradition comes from) it is from the Latin In the civil law. It means the delivery; or transfer of possession; a derivative mode of acquiring, by which the owner of a corporeal thing, having the right and the will of aliening it, transfers it for a lawful consideration to the receiver. Heinecc. Elem. lib. 2, tit. 1, § 380.
CORPOREAL: A term descriptive of such things as have an objective, material existence; perceptible by the senses of sight and touch; possessing a real body. Opposed to incorporeal and spiritual. Civ. Code La. 1900, a r t 460; Sullivan v. Richardson, 33 Fla. 1, 14 South. 692.
So...if you are a 'TRADITIO-nal' Owner....you are someone who has traded your land to someone else. The first part of the con job.
Accordingly, and logically, if you are asking the Crown for some of that land 'back' under NATIVE title you are now asking for some of the lands you apparently 'sold' to the Crown, back from the Crown, under the terms of the Crowns' registered Native Title.
So; lets have a look at that word 'Native' and its' true LEGAL meaning.
NATIVE: (From the Latin word NATIVUS) A natural-born subject or citizen; a denizen by birth; one who owes his domicile (right to have a home) or citizenship to the fact of his birth within the country referred to. (EG: the Crowns' Corporate State of Australia)
NATIVUS: Lat In old English law, a native; specifically, one born into a condition of servitude (a slave); a born serf or villain (a Criminal).

Then, also consider that under the Crowns' Native (Slaves) Title, the lands DO NOT get returned to the Tribes' people...they are merely 'vested' in a PBC - a Prescribed Body Corporate, which is a corporation registered to the Crowns Office of the Registrar of Indigenous Corporations (ORIC) - and when the Crown is ready...its' Registrar will appoint an administrator who will then sell those lands out from under the Tribes via the PBC, and, HEY ! PRESTO !, the land laundering is complete.
Have you ever wondered why the two legal terms that all the Native Title legislation relies on, 'Traditional' and 'Native', are not defined in Part 15 of the Native Title Act (where everything else is 'defined') ?
Maybe it is because the Crown is committing extrinsic fraud and extortion, amongst other crimes, against the Tribes using these legal terms and don't want us to know about it ?
The reason the Crown insists upon the Tribes negotiating via its' Native Title scam is clear. Without the Tribes signing an Indigenous Land Use Agreement (think about the name for a second) there is no agreement between the tribe/s and the Crown as to ownership and occupation rights/costs of the Tribes lands. The Crown needs its' fraudulent Native Title process to coerce Tribes into giving rights over a Tribes' lands to the Crown for the consideration of 'Native' or 'Slaves' Title over a small portion of that Tribes' lands.
Why do the tribes need to give consent via the 'Native Title' process to the 'Indigenous Land Use' Agreement (ILUA) if the Tribe isn't the owner of the concerned lands to be 'used' ?
The Crown knows this. According to advice given by Dr Stephen Davis (Samuel Griffith Society Volume 9 Chapter Eleven), the issue of Sovereignty over this continent is open for contention and it the Crowns' domestic courts do not have a right to determine the arguement. The issue of 'Royalties' or, to put it simply - 'payment', for minerals etc removed from our lands, both in the past AND in the future, is one thing that needs addressing.
Have you ever wondered why one of the first things that 'Native' Title applicants are required to do, is sign off, at Point 'Q' of the 'Native' Title Application Form, and grant ownership of OUR mineral and other resources to the Crown ?
There is no part of the Native Title process which provides an advantage to the Tribes in any form.
The whole Native Title process has been designed to 'legally thieve' ownership of Tribal lands from the Tribes and hand it to the Crown. What is meant by 'legally thieve' is that this is done according to the Crowns' corporate legislation/statutes which have only ever applied to Her Majesties subjects - something the Tribes have never been.
The only claim ever put forward by the Crown in respect of Tribal lands was founded in the ancient Roman concept called 'Terra Nullius'. This particular rort was debunked as a myth by the Crowns' own High Court in Mabo (2). The Crown had to accept that its' assertion of Sovereignty, based upon a fraudulent claim that this land was unoccupied and or waste, was baseless in fact and just plain incorrect at law.
Now, let's open the legal position of the Crown up to analogy. Just imagine you get pinched for driving without a licence. You go to court and tell the court you didn't think you needed a licence because of your Sovereignty. The magistrate then decides that you are wrong and finds you guilty.
Wouldn't it be amazing if you were allowed to just walk from that court and continue to do as you did before the hearing without ANY need for restitution for your illegal actions to date AND the self-proclaimed right to bash anyone who properly questioned your right to continue in your criminal ways.
Well, that's EXACTLY what the Crown did after Mabo !!!
It just ignored the umpires' decision (even though the Crown owned the umpire that found against the Crown) and continued to 'drive without a licence', so to speak, in respect of Sovereignty on this continent.
In 1970, the UN passed Resolution 2625 (XXV), that requires:
Every [UN Member] State (eg: Australia) has the duty to promote, through joint and separate action, realization of the principle of Equal Rights and Self-Determination (ER&SD) of [Tribal] peoples, in accord with the provisions of the [UN] charter, and to render assistance to the United Nations in carrying out the responsibilities entrusted to it by the Charter regarding the implementation of the Principle, in order:
(a) To promote friendly relations and co-operation among States; and
(b) To bring a speedy end to colonialism, having due regard to the freely expressed will of the peoples [Tribe] concerned.
and bearing in mind that subjection of peoples [Tribes] to alien [Crown] subjugation, domination and exploitation constitutes a violation of the principle [of ER&SD], as well as a denial of fundamental human rights, and is contrary to the [UN] Charter.........
........The establishment of a sovereign and independent State, [or] the free association or integration with an independent State or the emergence into any other political status freely determined by a people [Tribe] constitute modes of implementing the right to self-determination by that people [Tribe].
The reason the Crown forces us to go down the road of Native Title is because THAT is the option which leads the Tribes to the point of '... free association or integration with an independent State' : in this case 'Australia'.
We also have the right to establish our own independent SOVEREIGN State. But the Crown hasn't told Us that - has it ? Those who the Crown has selected to talk for us at the UN won't say much about it either. No need to wonder why.
Gunham Badi Jakamarra
Convenor
Original Sovereign Tribal Federation (OSTF)

THE FOUNDATION OF THE AUSTRALIAN COLONIES AND THE SOURCE OF THEIR LAWS AND INSTITUTIONS BEFORE FEDERATION.

This has been transcribed by Mikiverse Law from a book entitled "The Constitution of The Commonwealth of Australia by W. Harrison Moore. It was first published in 1902, but this transcription is from the Second Edition, published in 1910.

Moore is described in his book as being "of King's College Cambridge, and of the Middle Temple, Barrister-At-Law; Dean of the faculty of Law in The University of Melbourne."  My comments, as always are in red. Comments, queries etc are always welcomed in the thread below. Feel free to share this url.

The Commonwealth of Australia is formed of the Colonies of New South Wales, Victoria, Queensland, Tasmania, and Western Australia, and the Province of South Australia. It appears therefore desirable to state briefly the time and circumstances of their foundation, and the sources to which regard must be had in the administration of their laws.

The first thing which must strike an English lawyer who turns to the study of Colonial institutions is the multiplicity and complexity of the sources of the law and their striking contrast with the singleness of authority which dominates the English system.

The Common Law, the Prerogative, Acts of Parliament and Orders thereunder play their part as in England. But the Prerogative looms larger in Colonial than in Home institutions; Acts of Parliament have varying force and authority according to their date and their nature; Orders in Council are less frequently acts of supplementary legislation than the exercise of a statutory suspending power or power put into operation. In addition to these are the Acts and Ordinances of Colonial Legislature, sometimes of Legislatures between which the power of legislation is divided, sometimes of Legislatures which have been superseded by others, as Colonies have been divided or joined together, or their progressive development has been marked by changes in their institutions.

All the Australian Colonies belonged to the class of colonies acquired by settlement or occupancy. The doubts once held as to the status of New South Wales as a penal settlement (see Bentham, Works, vol. iv.) must now be regarded as set at rest by the decision of the Privy Council in Cooper v. Stewart.[1] The sources of law common to all these Colonies are the following:—

            1. The laws of England at the time of settlement (or some date fixed by Statute in lieu thereof) so far as they are applicable to the conditions of the infant colony. “It hath been held that if an uninhabited country be discovered and planted by English subjects, all the English Laws then in being which are the birthright of every English subject are immediately in force (Salkeld, 411, 666). But this must be understood with very many and very great restrictions. Such colonists carry with them only so much of the English Law as is applicable to their own situation, and the condition as an infant colony.”[2]

            The “laws of England” include Statute Law as well as the rules of common law and equity; the law so imported forms what is sometimes called the common law of the Colony. The applicability of any law according to the principle laid down is one for judicial determination as the occasion arises; it forms one of the most difficult tasks of the colonial judiciary, and from its nature gives rise to many conflicts of opinion. Even the principle itself appears not yet to be wholly settled. Does the “infant colony” attract more of English Law as its needs develop (as is suggested by Lord Watson in Cooper v. Stewart)[3] or must a Court called on in 1909 to determine the applicability of any English law take its stand upon the condition of the Colony at the time of its foundation, as laid down by High Court of Australia in Quan Yick v. Hinds?[4] If the latter be the true view, a Colony may be founded in conditions which make very little of English Law applicable as of authority; and its legal development will then be peculiary in the hands of its Judges who would theoretically have a large field for the expression of that “private justice, moral fitness, and public convenience”[5] which make common law. Practically, however, whether by way of authority or doctrine, English Law is applied as of course unless there be some striking cause of inapplicability or unsuitability. If there be, any theoretical difficulty in avoiding the particular rule of English Law is overcome by the consideration that it would certainly not be more suitable or applicable at the foundation of the Colony than it is to-day.

            Another way of approaching this subject is suggested by the dictum of Sir W. Grant, M.R., in Att.-Gen. v. Stewart. [6] “Whether the Statute (of Mortmain) be in force in the island of Grenada will, as it seems to me, depend upon this consideration—whether it be a law of local policy adopted solely to the country in which it was made, or a general regulation of property equally applicable to any country in which it is by the rules of English Law that property is governed.” According to this view, attention is fixed, not on the condition of the Colony, but on the English Law. That law consists in part of institutions and rules which operate upon or in relation to facts and conditions which are peculiar and local; in part, of laws and institutions which are so far general as to be reasonably applicable wherever English Law is the lex terræ. The whole of the latter law becomes the law of a settlement Colony except so far as it may be particularly excluded. In other words, the rule depends upon a distinction analogous to one of the antitheses of jus civile and jus gentium in Roman Law. The principle has much to commend it: it substitutes a more definitely legal test than “suitability,” one which gives the same result in the case of all the settlement Colonies, and one which if adopted would give a real meaning to the expression “British law.” It overcomes also the difficulty already referred to as to the time to be regarded in determining suitability, and that of subsequent attraction. It was adopted by the High Court of Australia in Delohery v. Permanent Trustees Co.,[7] but is not adverted to in Quan Yick v. Hinds.[8] It Is certainly not from this point of view that the matter has commonly been dealt with by the Courts.

            In any case, this class of laws—the “common law” of the Colony in the sense above described—falls completely within the power of the Colonial Legislature, which may declare what laws are in force and may repeal any of them; and on the same principle no repeal of such laws by the Parliament of the United Kingdom affects their operation in the Colony.[9]

            2. ACTS OF THE IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT MADE APPLICABLE—Acts of the Imperial Parliament made applicable to the Colony either in common with other dominions of the Crown or specially, whether by express words, or necessary intendment—these Acts are of paramount obligation. The expression made applicable to the Colony requires some explanation. In the first place, it excludes those Acts of Parliament which being part of the general law of England applicable to the circumstances of the Colony are received at its settlement as part of the common law; and it includes all Acts by which Parliament intends to bind the Colonies, whether those Acts were passed before or after the settlement of the Colony.[10] In the second place, an Act of the Imperial Parliament may relate to a Colony without being in force there, just as it may relate to a foreign country; but the enforcement of the regulation established by the Act may belong to the English Courts alone, and be limited by the powers of those Courts to make their orders effective. The Colonies, through their inhabitants and in other ways, receive by many Statutes certain favourable treatment in England and in English Courts, either absolutely or upon terms of reciprocity, e.g., by the Colonial Solicitors Act 1900, the Colonial Probates Act 1892, and the Finance Act 1894. These and the like Acts are very commonly regarded as “applicable to” the Colony; they are in fact “in operation in England in respect to” the Colony. The importance of this distinction is obvious; but it was ignored by those who compared the financial proposals of the Chancellor of the Exchequer in 1894 with the Stamp Act of 1765 and the Tea Duty of 1770. Again, the Wills Act 1861, sec. 1 and 2, affects wills made in the Colonies and wills of persons domiciled in the Colonies, but only for the purposes of admitting them to probate in England or Ireland, and in Scotland to confirmation. The Bankruptcy Acts and the Companies Act illustrate the two different kinds of operation. The Bankruptcy Acts and the Companies Act illustrate the two different kinds of operation. The Bankruptcy Acts vest in the trustee the debtors’ property everywhere in such a way that the trustee’s title is enforceable in all parts of the British Dominions; and a discharge in bankruptcy in England is a discharge in a paramount jurisdiction, recognized and enforced in all parts of the British Dominions.[11] On the other hand, in the winding up of a company in England, while the English Court will treat its orders as affecting all Colonial property of the debtor and as binding all his Colonial creditors, the operation of these orders is limited by the power of the English Court to give effect to them, and any recognition they may obtain in the Colonies is due, not to any paramount jurisdiction, but to the “comity of nations.”[12]

                Statutes of this class, i.e., made applicable or extending to the Colonies, may not in general be repealed or varied except by the Imperial Parliament (Colonial Laws Validity Act 1865, sec. 2). But the application of this rule is occasionally excluded by a provision giving special power to the Colonial Legislature to make laws as if the Act had not been passed, and to alter or vary it (e.g., Coinage Act 1853), or to repeal the Act or some part of it (e.g., the Merchant Shipping Act 1894, sec. 735). A special reason for such a provision is that the machinery for carrying out an Act, even upon an Imperial matter, as extradition, may be more conveniently devised by the Colonial Legislature.

            3. STATUTORY ORDERS AND REGULATIONS.—Orders or Regulations made by the Crown in pursuance of Acts of the Imperial Parliament, to which they are equal in authority. These Orders—

            (a) Put an Act into operation in a Colony, the Act being in terms postponed in the case of such Colony until an Order is made. This is the commonest case, and many illustrations might be given, e.g., Colonial Courts of Admiralty Act 1890, in the case of four Colonies scheduled.

            (b) Suspend the Act or a portion of it, or apply it with modifications in the case of a Colony, generally on the ground that the Legislature of the Colony has made suitable provision  for carrying out the purpose of the Act, e.g., the Extradition Act 1870, sec. 18; Coinage Act 1853; Colonial Copyright Act 1847; International Copyright Act 1886, sec. 8, sub-sec. 3; Patents Designs and Trade Marks Act 1883, sec.104.

            (c) Supplement the Act, e.g., The Charters of Justice of New South Wales 1823 and Tasmania 1831.

            (d) Bring new subjects within the scope of the Act, as where the operation of the Act depends upon treaties, e.g., the Extradition Act 1870 and the International Copyright Act 1886.

            (e) Give to a Colonial Law the force of law throughout the British Dominions, e.g., Colonial Prisoners Removal Act 1884, secs. 670-675 (Colonial Lighthouses, &c.) are made upon an address of the Colonial Legislature.

            3. PREROGATIVE ORDERS, CHARTERS, AND LETTERS PATENT.—Prerogative Orders, including Charters and Letters Patent, are not of the same importance in a settled as in a conquered Colony; as Constitutions come to rest more and more on Statute, the Prerogative recedes. Its most important exercise is in the grant of Constitutions, the establishment of Executive authority, the appointment of Governors and the definition of their powers, and the setting up of Courts of Justice. Most of these things in Australia, however, are done by the Crown under statutory authority, and so fall into the preceding class. The Orders in Council relating to colonial currency are conspicuous cases of Prerogative Orders in operation in the Colonies.

            These instruments are contained in volumes published annually by authority, and those in force are periodically collected and published under the description “Statutory Rules and Orders Revised.”

            5. STATUTES AND ORDINANCES OF COLONIAL LEGISLATURES.—Statutes and Ordinances made by the Legislature of the Colony, meaning thereby the authority other than the Imperial Parliament or the Crown in Council competent to make laws for the Colony, are of course the ordinary source of new laws in the Colony. There may be more than one such authority. Some Colonies have been formed by separation from others, and inherit the laws enacted by the Legislature of the mother Colony before the separation. Such laws, so far as they apply within her borders, the daughter Colony may repeal. In other cases, there may be legislatures with exclusive powers over different subjects, or with concurrent powers but so related that in case of conflict the enactment of the one shall prevail over the enactment of the other. Both these conditions are true of the Dominion of Canada, and of those Colonies of Australasia which were members of the Federal Council of Australasia. Generally, the powers are exclusive, but where the same matter is within the power of both the central and the local Legislature, the enactment of the central Legislature prevails. Each authority retains control over its own laws, and alone may alter or repeal them.

            Amongst “Laws and Ordinances made by the Legislature of the Colony” are included many Acts of the Imperial Parliament which have been adopted for the Colony by the local Legislature. They form part of the ordinary legislation of the Colony, and are to be distinguished from other local laws merely by a rule that where a Statute has before its adoption by the Colony received an authoritative judicial construction in England, that construction is generally deemed binding in the Colonies.[13]

            6. ORDERS UNDER ACTS OF COLONIAL LEGISLATURE.—Rules, Orders and Regulations issued by some authority within the Colony under powers conferred by the Colonial Legislature, e.g., the Governor in Council, are hardly to be regarded as an independent source of law, since they are issued by an authority acting by delegation merely and are subject to the control of the Legislature.

---

[1] (1889) 14 A.C. 286

[2] Blackstone, Com. i. 107.

[3] (1889) 14 A.C. 286

[4] (1905) 2 C.L.R. 345, 356.

[5] Per Willes J. in Millar v. Taylor (1779), 4 Burr. 2303, at p. 2312.

[6] 2 Mer. 143, at p. 160.

[7] (1904) 1 C.L.R. 283.

[8] (1905) 2 C.L.R. 345

[9] See per Fellows J. in R. v. Mount, 4 A.J.R., at p. 39.

[10] See Lewis, Government of Dependencies, p. 201.

[11] Ellis v. McHenry, L.R. 6 C.P. 228

[12] New Zealand Loan and Mercantile Agency Co. Ltd. v. Morrison, L.R. 1898 A.C. 349.

[13] See Harding v. Commissioners of Stamps for Queensland (1898), A.C. 769. But in R. V. Hyland (1898), 24 V.L.R. 101, the Supreme Court of Victoria declined to follow R. v. Hillman (1863), 9 Cox. 386, a decision on an English Statute subsequently adopted in Victoria.

ETHICAL DONATORS AND COMMUNITY MEMBERS REQUIRED, TO FILL THIS SPACE WITH YOUR POLITICAL SLOGANS, ADVERTISING OFFERS, WEBSITE DETAILS, CHARITY REQUESTS, LECTURE OPPORTUNITIES, EDUCATIONAL WORKSHOPS, SPIRITUAL AND/OR HEALTH ENLIGHTENMENT COURSES.
AS AN IMPORTANT MEMBER OF THE GLOBAL INDEPENDENT MEDIA COMMUNITY, MIKIVERSE LAW HONOURABLY REQUESTS YOUR HELP TO KEEP YOUR NEWS, DIVERSE,AND FREE OF CORPORATE, GOVERNMENT SPIN AND CONTROL. FOR MORE INFORMATION ON HOW YOU MAY ASSIST, PLEASE CONTACT: themikiverse@gmail.com