Voters being treated as illiterates :When did the REJECTED Abortion Law Reform Bill 2016 become the Reproductive Health Care Reform Bill 2019: Is the Dept Of Justice again playing politics; if yes further evidence that the 2019 Bill is tainted by bad advice
by Ganesh Sahathevan
In 2017 the Abortion Law Reform (Miscellaneous Acts Amendment) Bill 2016 was defeated in the NSW Parliament. It had been introduced by Greens MLC Dr Mehreen Faruqi.
In 2019 proposed legislation with the same or similar effect has been reintroduced as the
Reproductive Health Care Reform Bill 2019.
In 2019 proposed legislation with the same or similar effect has been reintroduced as the
Reproductive Health Care Reform Bill 2019.
This does seem like an attempt at too clever marketing by the Department of Justice which is responsible for drafting and proposing law reform(see article below). This subterfuge seems to be an attempt to mislead voters and Parliamentarians and provides further grounds for members of the upper house to reject this Bill.
Voters do not like being treated as illiterates.
END
by Ganesh Sahathevan
SkyNews reported:
Leader of the Shooters, Fishers and Farmers Party Robert Borsak said his party will attempt to block the abortion decriminalisation bill when it comes before the NSW upper house on Tuesday. Speaking to Sky News he said the government has rushed the legislation through parliament and it is destined 'to be a shambolic mess'.
Readers are reminded that the Department Of Justice is the division of the civil service responsible for law reform and drafting legislation.This writer has shown that the Department considers itself a player, not merely adviser , in NSW (and quite likely national) politics.
That overstepping of boundaries is compounded by poor research skills and judgement, as illustrated by the article(see below) in The Australian published early this year.
It is further compounded by poor legal research skills,as this writer has shown here. In that case the Department's officers actually re-wrote thefacts of a decision of the Supreme Court Of NSW to arrive at their desired outcome.
Other members of the NSW upper house would do best to follow in the example of the Shooters.Those who feel strongly about the need to de-crimilinalize abortion can always send the bill back for re-drafting.
END
The body overseen by Chief Justice Tom Bathurst responsible for deciding who can practise law in NSW relied on a wildly defamatory Malaysian blog depicting ABC journalists, former British prime minister Tony Blair, financier George Soros and others as part of a global conspiracy when deciding to deny a would-be solicitor a certificate to practise.
Chief Justice Bathurst and Legal Practitioner Admission Board executive officer Louise Pritchard declined to answer TheAustralian’s questions about how the article came into theboard’s hands and why its members felt the conspiracy-laden material could be relied upon as part of a decision to deny Sydney man Ganesh Sahathevan admission as a lawyer. Nor would either say which of the 10 members of the LPAB, three of whom are serving NSW Supreme Court judges, was on the deciding panel.
Ms Pritchard has left her role at the LPAB since TheAustralian began making inquiries in September. The article, published in December 2017 on website The Third Force, accuses Mr Sahathevan of engaging in a conspiracy to attack then Malaysian prime minister Najib Razak.
SkyNews reported:
Leader of the Shooters, Fishers and Farmers Party Robert Borsak said his party will attempt to block the abortion decriminalisation bill when it comes before the NSW upper house on Tuesday. Speaking to Sky News he said the government has rushed the legislation through parliament and it is destined 'to be a shambolic mess'.
Readers are reminded that the Department Of Justice is the division of the civil service responsible for law reform and drafting legislation.This writer has shown that the Department considers itself a player, not merely adviser , in NSW (and quite likely national) politics.
That overstepping of boundaries is compounded by poor research skills and judgement, as illustrated by the article(see below) in The Australian published early this year.
It is further compounded by poor legal research skills,as this writer has shown here. In that case the Department's officers actually re-wrote thefacts of a decision of the Supreme Court Of NSW to arrive at their desired outcome.
Other members of the NSW upper house would do best to follow in the example of the Shooters.Those who feel strongly about the need to de-crimilinalize abortion can always send the bill back for re-drafting.
END
Bizarre blog claims used to deny man right to practise law
The body overseen by Chief Justice Tom Bathurst responsible for deciding who can practise law in NSW relied on a wildly defamatory Malaysian blog depicting ABC journalists, former British prime minister Tony Blair, financier George Soros and others as part of a global conspiracy when deciding to deny a would-be solicitor a certificate to practise.
Chief Justice Bathurst and Legal Practitioner Admission Board executive officer Louise Pritchard declined to answer TheAustralian’s questions about how the article came into theboard’s hands and why its members felt the conspiracy-laden material could be relied upon as part of a decision to deny Sydney man Ganesh Sahathevan admission as a lawyer. Nor would either say which of the 10 members of the LPAB, three of whom are serving NSW Supreme Court judges, was on the deciding panel.
Ms Pritchard has left her role at the LPAB since TheAustralian began making inquiries in September. The article, published in December 2017 on website The Third Force, accuses Mr Sahathevan of engaging in a conspiracy to attack then Malaysian prime minister Najib Razak.
Comments