Coming Soon to Project 2016 Phoenix!

Victorian Ombudsman Norman Geschke,  Special Report Relinquishing Office on 28 Februrary 1994 No 90,

"have often found that in my discussions with Ministers, following my investigation of complaints, that the proposals put to the Minister have stemmed from the personal views of someone well down the line and I am not really debating the Minister's considered view. I have often been told it is Government or departmental policy that a certain position is taken. On investigation I have found that as yet the issues have not been put to the Minister but are being developed within a department or agency and its promotion stems from one person or a small group who have taken a particular stance. Cells or persons within an agency or department see themselves as experts or crusaders to pursue certain issues which often become enshrined in legislation or practices without proper analysis or consideration of the repercussions." :- page 14 

and, "An observation after 19 ½ years of involvement: A major concern is that some legislative changes, decisions or complaints instigated by the Ombudsman and departmental policyattitudes tend to reflect the views and/or wishes of bureaucrats rather than the Government or Ministers and these changes are made following meetings of bureaucrats rather than Ministers. In other words, it is the bureaucracy programming what appears to be Government policies or proposals and practices."

and, "I believe that the Ombudsman Act envisages a joint responsibility of Parliament and the Ombudsman and this is embodied in Sections 23(5) and (6) which allows the referral to Parliament for its consideration the cases where the Ombudsman's recommendations have not been satisfied by the department or agency. Without this sanction or interest by Parliament the recalcitrant departments or agencies go unchecked and the injustices are apparently condoned. The review and action by Parliament is an essential complement to a system where the Ombudsman can only recommend." :- page 18

and "It seems, however, that in regard to the recommendations made to Parliament under Sections 23(5) and (6) of the Ombudsman Act, Parliament has forsaken its obligations and the Ombudsman. Perhaps it is because there is no Minister or Committee with a responsibility relating to the Ombudsman and progress his reports through Parliament. This scenario is not unique to Victoria but has been satisfactorily addressed by Select Committees of Parliament in a number of countries. I have referred to the need for a Select Committee or other committee to be involved in the Ombudsman Act and the operations of the Ombudsman." :- page 19

Analysis of the 1994 Victorian Ombudsman Report (Norman Geschke) for Constitutional and International Treaty Violations

The 1994 Special Report by Norman Geschke, the Victorian Ombudsman, highlights critical legal and constitutional failures that remain relevant to the systemic injustices seen in case Q10399554. 

The key findings from this report include executive overreach, suppression of evidence, failure to enforce Ombudsman recommendations, and violations of international treaty obligations.

This expanded legal analysis integrates constitutional arguments, international human rights law, and historical systemic failures to establish causation links to current judicial misconduct in Q10399554.

1. Constitutional Violations & Executive OverreachLegal Violation: Government Agencies Ignoring Legislation & Ombudsman Powers

The Ombudsman Act 1973 (Vic), Section 25, empowers the Ombudsman to report to Parliament on systemic failures in government administration. 

Geschke’s 1994 report provides direct evidence that Victorian government agencies deliberately ignored legislation and Ombudsman recommendations, undermining constitutional governance.

In case Q10399554, similar violations have been observed, including:
Victoria Police and court officials suppressing evidence in legal proceedings.Executive agencies bypassing legal accountability mechanisms, as described in Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth), Section 39B.

Judicial officers failing to act independently, 

contrary to Chapter III of the Australian Constitution.

Statutory & Case Law References

Australian Constitution 

– Chapter III, Section 71 – Judicial power must remain independent of executive control.

Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth) 

– Section 39B – Federal courts can intervene in cases where executive agencies interfere with judicial functions.

Ombudsman Act 1973 (Vic) – Section 25 – Ombudsman reports to Parliament on systemic failures in government administration.

Kable v DPP (1996) 189 CLR 51 – State agencies cannot assume judicial functions.

Supporting Evidence

Geschke Ombudsman Report (1994), Pages 9-12 

– Documents deliberate policy decisions to ignore Ombudsman rulings.

Q10399554 Court Transcripts 

– Confirm suppression of judicial records and procedural fairness violations.

Causation➡ Government refusal to follow legal oversight → Executive agencies operate with impunity → Unconstitutional suppression of justice. 

 The emergence of Subversion of the Australian Commonwealth Constitution Act is asserted to be present and thriving as a consequence of routine failures in accountability and enforcement of the rule of law. The State is interfering in the natural course of Justice of citizens and in particular, vulnerable citizens who do not posses the resources to defend themselves with access to a privately funded lawyer who is definitively independent of State influence of legal aid funding. 

"""Victorian Ombudsman, Deborah Glass OBE, Alleged politicisation of the public sector December 2023Key Legal Findings:“I can’t tell them the bad news, no one wants to know it.”“Do this and retrofit the arguments in the Cabinet submission.”“The notion that the VPS should just implement government policy, notchallenge policy or offer new ideas, is a misguided article of political faith.”– Quotes from former agency headsNo Evidence of Partisan Stacking:

• The investigation did not find widespread evidence of partisan hiring aimed at advancing political party objectives. However, perceptions of politicization persist      due to questionable recruitment practices.

Merit Selection Undermined:

• Merit-based hiring processes were often bypassed. Instances of direct appointments, often      without proper documentation or justification, contributed to perceptions of favoritism and politicization.

Marginalization of Public Sector Expertise:

• Over-reliance on external consultants and secrecy in major projects weakened the public      sector’s capacity to provide independent and evidence-based advice.

Culture of Fear:

• Many public servants reported fear of career repercussions for providing "frank and fearless" advice, compromising the integrity of the Westminster tradition.

Secrecy and Poor Record-Keeping:

• Excessive secrecy in projects like the Suburban Rail Loop and the Commonwealth Games highlighted governance risks, with poor documentation undermining transparency and accountability.

Recommendations for Reform:Enhancing Public Service Independence:

• Establish an independent authority to oversee the recruitment and employment of department secretaries and agency leaders to safeguard against undue      political influence.

Strengthening Merit-Based Recruitment:

• Clarify legal guidelines around direct appointments and enforce stricter oversight by the Victorian Public Sector Commission to ensure fair hiring practices.

Improving Job Security for Executives:

• Reform employment frameworks to reduce reliance on "at will" termination clauses,      enabling public servants to provide impartial advice without fear of dismissal.

"""Personal experience identifies two of the six state jurisdictions which corroborates Geschke's views in 1994, and more recently, Victorian Ombudsman Deborah Glass OBE, the years of damning independent public reviews, and the normalisation of gaslighting to shut down open public debate between citizens and the state. My time is over, and I continue on this path while fearing for the children and what harms the prolific corruption will inflict upon them when they inherit this Nation and the sins of generations before them.

"Since 1855, the Victorian Constitution has provided a framework for responsible government, and a series of subsequent Public Service Acts has shaped the notion of a stable, merit-based public sector based on the Westminster tradition....[206] As reflected in the earlier discussion of recent landmark reports, government actions at odds with the Westminster tradition have attracted strong criticism across Australia. The Robodebt Royal Commission found senior APS officials knowingly shielded ministers from unwelcome advice, the Coaldrake Review highlighted the reluctance of Queensland officials to provide frank advice, and the Head Review found a senior New South Wales executive appointment decision was not kept at arms-length from a minister[207] Here in Victoria, the Coate Report found responsibility and reasons for a significant Government decision were opaque, and IBAC’s Operation Daintree criticised senior VPS staff for allowing ministerial staffers to interfere with advice and decisions (discussed later in this chapter)."

I keep being labeled and dismissed and mentally ill and delusional. Does this Mean all these reports authors are delusional as well?