I report to our beloved “Boss” the public and tax payers about my statement in the Federal Court of Australia, KIM MUBARAK V AUSTRALIAN ELECTORAL COMMISION. Unfortunately, the Court refused to give me a copy of my Transcript, I was asked to pay $ 50 after that sit in a small room and record notes derived from a 15 page court transcript. They don’t allow even complainants have copies of their own statements matters of public interest. I think someone should step in and change the rules. Urgent review of some Federal Court rules is very necessary particularly in dealing with matters of public interest. They should have published the entire hearing on their website so that our Bosses “tax payers” should have a chance to follow about this historical case.
On the 16th July, 2018, appeared before Justice Barker at Court room No.1, Level 7, Peter Durack Commonwealth Law Court, 1 Victoria Avenue, Perth, Western Australia.
Your Honour, My Names are Mubarak Kim.K, representing myself. I am here in this honourable court seeking for the justice of my cause. I do have trust in this Honourable court.
Your Honour, before I proceed to my application please allow me stress on these four points:-
(1) The definition of a candidate-is a person who is nominated for election or a person who is competing to get a job or to be elected for a public office.
(2) Independent Candidate-is an individual not affiliated to any political party.
(3) Political Party-is an alliance of like-minded people who work together to win elections and control to the government. Is also an organisation of group of people with similar political opinion.
(4) Vote-is to elect or choose someone to hold a public office or some other position by voting.
Your Honour, Political Parties are not Candidates nor Human beings. Australian Constitution doesn’t recognise Political Parties nor the word Prime Minister. Electors vote for Candidates as human beings to represent their views in Parliament. Parties don’t speak only people do.
Your Honour, The Australian Electoral Commission is not Independent in determining the election. The current system elections are determined by leaders of political parties who are in government of the day. They pass laws of elections in favour of their political interests against the Independent Candidates. The commission has been conniving with them or with a Party of the day executing discriminatory practices against Independent Candidates. The Australian Electoral Commission is bias against the Independents.
For Example:-During Nominations Independents are being forced to gather 100 signatures from electors.Suprisingly,Political Parties Candidates are not forced to do the same, when we are all Human beings vying for the same position wanting to represent people of the same areas. We pay the same fees for our Nominations to be qualified as Candidates, so that voters or electors can choose a person as a candidate to go and speak for them on their behalf or debate about issues which are in the best interest of the public.
Your Honour, I won’t go through all the wrongs committed by the Australian Electoral Commission. My focus today is about my Originating Application Form 15 rule 8.01(1) and my affidavit Form 59 rule 29.02(1).
Your Honour, First and foremost, I would like to thank this Honourable Court and the Staff I have been dealing with for their Professional approach in this historical matter, and for the urgency you have given me listing for this hearing. I thank you abundantly.
1-Your Honour, I am the applicant and authorised in my capacity as Independent Candidate to make this affidavit in the matter of my nomination to campaign.
2-On 4th July, 2018, Lodged my nomination forms annexure KM1-EFO60/KM2-EFO60, Nomination by 100 electors KM3-EFO60-C1/KM3-EFO60-C21 and single Nomination of unendorsed check KM4-EFO60-C all checked and received by officers of the AEC at address Level 13/200 St. Georges Terrace Perth, WA, 6000.
3-On the 5th July, 20018, Complied and lodged a form with 38 electors in time before 12:00pm.I asked the officer if she needed more names?. Her response was no.I left the office after a while an officer from the AEC rang me to come back and pay the fees of $ 1,000 for my nomination. Annexure AEC Receipt KM5 was issued in time before 12:00pm closure of nominations. Everything was received in time. Annexure KM2-EFO60.I stand my position on substantial compliance.
4-At a later stage about 2:00pm after the closing of the nominations, was informed by Divisional Returning Officer and her staff that I won’t be allowed to campaign because they have just discovered from the 133 names of electors submitted to the AEC only 4 of them are not electors of Perth. “I was wrongly rejected”, and had no choice rather than giving them my objection in writing. Annexure KM6-1/KM6-2.I believe that, I had complied with the Australian Electoral Commission act 1918, Sec.170, Sec, 171, Sec.167, Sec.166 on substantial compliance before 12:00pm.
5-I pray to this Honourable court to order the Australian Electoral Commission Include my Names “KIM MUBARAK” on a ballot paper and in the list of nominated Candidates Federal House of Representatives for the by-election of the seat of Perth, election due on 28 July, 2018.So I pray your Honour.
Your Honour, I paid my fees of $ 1,000 as Annexure:-AEC RECEIPT KM5.When you look at Annexure KM6-1/KM6-2 the second page KM6-2,starting from last second line, and quote;-Based on the reasons of my conerns,I therefore, demand that, the campaign must be put on hold until the matter is resolved by the Commissioner of the Australian Electoral Commission. I stressed that my rights as a citizen of this country must be respected.Discriminating me as an Independent Candidate is an offence, contrary to a fair go for all. It is in the best interest of Justice that my rights should be respected.
Your Honour, the DRO and the Manager Officer of Perth did not respect my humble request. When you look at annexure;-KM4-EFO60-C everything is checked and ticked by the Electoral Commission. A receipt is issued after receiving a fee of $1000 payable by cash for my nomination. When you look at Annexure:-KM-EFO60 (Nomination Form) of a Member of the House of Representatives, everything is filled in properly, my names, Address, Contact details and my date of birth. No issues and if you look at the second page KM2-EFO60, DRO received and signed. When you look at Annexure KM3-EFO60-C1, I gave them more than 133 signature’s a copy was received by Divisional Returning Officer and AEC Manager of Perth. I believe that “Substantial Compliance” was complied with.
Your Honour, Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918-Sec.172(2) states that, No nomination shall be rejected by reason of any formal defect or error in the Nomination if the officer to whom the Nomination is made is satisfied that the provisions of section 166,167 and 171 have been Substantially Complied with.
Your Honour, the Divisional Returning Officer had the capacity to respect my letter and had the power to stop the campaign at any time in the support of the Australian Electoral Commissioner. No proceedings required for them to do so.Divisional Returning Officer did not comply with Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918-Sec.170 (Roman three (b) subsection (3), Sec.167 (4) (a) (b) under Sec.170 in summary; Forthwith after a sum is deposited with the Australian Electoral Officer under Section 170, being a sum that is, or includes an amount, in respect of that candidate, that it was so deposited. The DRO also did not comply with Sec.170 (1) (b) to declare my candidacy after receiving everything in time before the closing time at 12:00 noon. Divisional Returning Officer received my Money and later decided to sabotage my campaign, segregate and discriminating me from my fellow Candidates.
Your Honour, I am not a Lawyer but my humble request to this Honourable Court is that, Please exercise your power under Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918-Sec.379(C) ,Sec.383(b),Sec.360,Sec.363A,Sec.364(Real justice to be observed. The court shall be guided by the substantial merit and good conscience of each case without regard to legal forms or technicalities, or whether the evidence before it is in accordance with the law of evidence or not.
Please find any section or provision under your jurisdiction to order the Australian Electoral Commission include my names “KIM MUBARAK” on a ballot Paper and in the list of Nominated Candidates (Federal House of Representatives for the Seat of Perth. So that those who nominated for me by the time the weather was very bad when it was raining. Those who signed with a big smile and gave me blessings should be given a chance exercise their freedom and a chance to vote for their favourite candidates. Also the public should not be denied a chance to vote for me.So I pray your Honour.
The Divisional Returning Officer and the Manager Australian Electoral Commission-Officer for Perth, both did not turn up in court. Nevertheless, two senior Counsels represented them, but only one was talking and the second one was doing recording notes and advice to his mate. I was on my own fighting in the best interest of the community. Surprisingly, I was served with a 54 pages of their defence in court by the time I was about to start my statement-representing my case. I had no time to go through those documents. But I can assure you that I handled the Senior Executive Lawyer-Australian Government Solicitor very well. That day will always be in his memories. I was disappointed by the Hon. Justice Barker. He abused the will of the people particularly those more than 133 signature’s Tax Payers who endorsed me as their favourite candidate, by the time he dismissed my application.
After the Australian Government Solicitor’s presentation, this was my last statement appealing to the Judge to order the Australian Electoral Commission allow me proceed with my campaigns.
Your Honour, there is no provision in the act that I should gather signatures and put them in the computers. I am not allowed to do that. The only requirement is to provide 100 signatures’, I gave them more than 100.The checking of the names is none of my business. I complied substantially 100%.By the time they accepted to receive my money before the closing time of the nomination, which was automatically endorsing my candidacy. I was a candidate by then, I am still are. I consider myself a candidate because they have my money. I have a receipt to confirm that and the provision is very clear that if you receive someone’s money, Forthwith-Forthwith, there is no other way around, you can read that your Honour.
As I stated before the commissions current position is not Independent. Why do you force me Independent Candidate to gather 100 signatures whereby my fellow candidates of political Parties doesn’t provide none?. “That is discrimination”. We are all vying for the same position, for the same Seat of Perth by-election. We are all candidates and we are all human beings. Why do you single out Independents only to provide 100 signature’s and you don’t ask the same requirements from Political Parties Candidates?. “That’s black and white discrimination”.
So as I told you Your Honour, I am not a Lawyer, I do have faith in this Honourable Court. I kindly ask you to exercise your power within the sections that I have just mentioned. I kindly ask you to stress on section 364 look for any sections that will support the justice of my cause. To allow me participate in this election. This is the job I want to do. Discrimination is forbidden according to the law. When you read section 327(1) about discrimination and read more subsections in that act, you will find that, they don’t have any right stopping me from seeking employment. Stopping me or interferes with a person’s ability to freely participate in the electoral process. The right to stand for election and the right to support or oppose a candidate, group of candidates or political party.
Your Honour, this is employment and if elected, I will be earning a salary paid for by tax payer’s money. They are denying me that opportunity. They are discriminating those who worked very hard to sign for me.Gathering signature’s your honour is not a simple matter. Convincing people to sign for you and particularly where there is a requirement of giving date of birth, it’s not a simple matter. Some people don’t comply because they have issues with proving their date of birth. There is no any provision in the act that we should be asking people to provide date of birth. The people who endorsed me with big smile and who have much hope in me should have a chance, have a say and exercise their freedom rights as citizens of this country. So I pray your honour.
AFTER PRESENTING MY STATEMENT,THE HON.JUSTICE BARKER AGREED WITH MY CLAIM IN HIS WORDS HE FOUND THAT EVERY THING WAS IN MY FEVOUR AND THAT DRO COMMITTED MISTAKES.NEVERTHELESS,HE SLAPPED THE PUBLIC “TAX PAYERS” IN THE FACE WITH HIS ORDER THAT,APPLICATION DISMISSED.
Now it’s very clear that I won’t be on the ballot paper in this election. The decision is yours Judge them accordingly. It could be best if we start the revolution now before it’s too late. If you have a chance to boycott this election that may be a good start because that is the only voice we have to be honest. If we don’t wake up now fighting for our democracy, freedom, Justice and a fair go for all, this madness will never stop.
Any public officer enjoying tax payer’s money and who doesn’t recognise that, Independent candidates are being treated differently in this country, then, that person don’t deserve to be in that position. A culture of treating voters with contempt must cease with immediate effect. We are a generation of the 21st Century not any more to the 1901.
The discriminatory election Laws in this country is championed by The Hon.Gary Gray AO MP, Special Minister of State. Following the introduction of the Bill on 27 June 2012 it was referred to the joint standing committee on Electoral Matters. The committee considered the Bill and reported on 16 August, 2012.Mr Melham spoke to the Committee noting that the recommendations made in the Joint Standing Committee Electoral Matters Report were unanimous. I appeal to you my beloved electors that, those who participated in changing Electoral Procedure Bill 2012 must be dealt with accordingly, in the forth- coming General election May, 2019.They think that by controlling the Media will get away with it and peoples power cannot defeat them.