Australia’s corrupt legal system hears C-19 matter

A legal matter of state or national importance in relation to a so called government mandated jab, has an originating motion not within a court but a tribunal, the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal to be exact, how pathetic.

To make matters worse, since state tribunals are not courts they cannot exercise judicial powers.

See link:

Also, a tribunal cannot exercise power in a hearing and determining a complaint under a state Act.


A hearing was held within VCAT with regards to a woman obtaining a life saving heart operation which was denied by the Alfred Hospital in Melbourne for her not succumbing to obtain an injection that allegedly vaccinates the person against the disease called COVID-19.

This hearing was held in March 2023 over a few days from the 17th to the 21st, where it was also streamed via Zoom.

What about if one does not consent to one’s matter being streamed via Zoom for not just Australia to see, but the whole world?

No court reporters or mainstream media ‘advertising’ about such an important matter?

Well, to be fair, VCAT is not a court.

As one would be aware when the opposing parties sit at the bar table, they sprawl their paperwork over the area of their respective sides in order to put through their argument, before the ‘member’, the person they both consented to in hearing their arguments.

After a while humans need nourishment, where a lunch break, mandates a halt in the proceedings where the whole room is evacuated.

It is not out of the norm to leave one’s paperwork at the table, before vacating for a well deserved break.

That’s what one party did, whereas the other party packed up the documentation prior to exiting with it in a small luggage suitcase on wheels.

What happened next is quite odd, and definitely outside of the norm.

When the room was empty, after a few minutes, the member and her ‘accomplice’ went back into the room and started to sift through paperwork on the benches.

Why is it necessary to find some paperwork during a ‘lunch break’, where it cannot wait until everyone resumes?

Is there a document that was to be removed or referred to?

If this is a ‘conspiracy theory’ as some may suggest, then why cannot this document be referred with everyone present and most importantly ‘on the record’?

After scurrying through the benches for whatever, the ‘accomplice’ then noticed that the camera was still ‘rolling’, where that problem as soon attended to.

What was the public not allowed to see?
Isn’t this supposed to be a public matter, well and truly in the ‘interest of the public’?
Will the mainstream media ever mention of this?
From what can be gathered on-line, the first time the mainstream media mentioned Ms Derderian was a couple of days ago, yet a hearing was a foot in March, and all the people heard was, crickets.


You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

Leave a Reply

Powered by WordPress | Designed by: Premium WordPress Themes | Thanks to Themes Gallery, Bromoney and Wordpress Themes