| |
UN HUMAN RIGHTS EXPERT WARNS AGAINST EXECUTION OF
Wednesday, 14 February 2007 - 11:17 AM SL Time |  | |
GAJA LAKSHMI PARAMASIVAM
AUSTRALIAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT CONSULTANT
906/ 56, Carr Street; Coogee N.S.W. 2034; Australia ;
Email gajalakshmi_param@bigpond.com ; Phone 61 2 9315 7417
Mr. Philip Alston
UN Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions
8-14 Avenue de la Paix
1211 Geneva 10
Switzerland
14 February 2007
Dear Mr. Alston,
UN HUMAN RIGHTS EXPERT WARNS AGAINST EXECUTION OF
IRAQI FORMER VICE-PRESIDENT
I refer to the above report from your newsroom today. It is reported that you said `executive interference in the trial, `glaring procedural flaws` and the murder of defence counsel during the proceedings meant Mr. Ramadan was denied a fair hearing.`
Do you know of one country where fair hearing is guaranteed? I don`t. Is fair hearing guaranteed in your country? If yes, then your country is higher in status than my country - Australia.
As per the news report you are a ` legal professor at New York University`. Does your University practice the law that it teaches its students? Here in Australia the leading University ? the University of New South Wales does not practice the law - the basic law of ownership ? but abuses it to get rid of those whom they consider to be too lowly for their time. The Vice Chancellor of this University denied me access to the facilities I had developed through my dedicated research work, by calling the Police to arrest me, prosecute me, list me as a mentally ill person and send me to prison. Now the Sinhalese who support the Government of Sri Lanka are using that to feel superior over me in Sri Lankan ethnic issues.
My claim for compensation on the basis that merit was not used to punish me, was ruled frivolous or vexatious in the lower courts. I proved in the Supreme Court of New South Wales that my claim was not `frivolous` and the judge ruled that it was vexatious.
The Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission concluded that my complaint was `lacking in substance`.
I have given the meaning of Frivolous as well the meaning of Vexatious as per my research. Below are my definitions:
Frivolous ? Extreme form of irrelevance:
Once I establish the following my complaint cannot be dismissed as frivolous or lacking in substance:
(1) I ought to have suffered pain/ damage
(2) I ought to have provided facts that could be substantiated - through evidence external to myself - that the Defendants were part of the experience that caused me pain and/or damage.
(3) That I had a legal relationship with the Defendant.
Vexatious:
Criticism of Government Policy outside Due Process.
Once an independent user of law provides a developed definition of legal terminology, and there is no administrative definition of such terminology Democratic Courts have the responsibility to accept such terminology and prove it wrong before applying their own subjective version through their discretionary powers.
Where administration ceases / is absent, facility begins. Each owner / lawful user has the authority to interpret as per her/his investment in the law until successfully challenged by the opposition or the court.
As per my experience in Australian Courts ? `frivolous & vexatious` clauses are used subjectively to dismiss complaints from litigants who `look` insignificant ? often due to their racial appearances.
There is no common interpretation within the Courts of the State of New South Wales or between the Federal and State and most of all between the Human Rights & Equal Opportunity Commission and the Supreme Court of NSW.
How can a litigant then feel confident that she could have a fair hearing?
As written in the attached letter, a fellow victim from Africa stated that he was turning into a terrorist because the courts were denying him justice for racial discrimination and said that he would kill his university supervisors. I have been counseling him and to me that is ownership success.
The people of Iraq do not feel ownership in western / International laws. Is it right to expect them to feel deeper ownership than Australians who enjoy higher status with International governments?
Unless you have Universal Administrative Rules & Definitions, you have to accept the interpretation of the people ? even if it is a single person who demonstrates ownership investment in the respective laws through everyday use and practice.
Yours sincerely,
Gaja Laskhmi Paramasivam
CC: All Concerned
|
Source(s)
Gaja Lakshmi Paramasivam |
Gaja
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 4453
Member Profile
|
14 Feb 2007 21:09:21 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Thank you Priyanthi for your appreciation of my work. I believe that appreciation is the nicest way to participate in others' experiences. When we participate we automatically become entitled to the benefits.
I have been Australian Resource Management Consultant since 2003.
love
gaja aunty |
Gaja
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 4453
Member Profile
|
7 Mar 2007 21:31:05 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Thak you Priyanthi. I have been an Australian Resource Management Consultant since 2003.
love
aunty gaja |
|
