Summary of Events

Rupert Murdoch - Hacking Helen Handbury - www.absentjustice.com/australian-federal-police-investigations-1/afp-investigation-2/rupert-murdoch-hacked-documents/rupert-murdoch---hacking---helen-handbury. Explore Helen Handbury's role in the Rupert Murdoch hacked documents in AFP Investigation 2 on Absent Justice.
Chapter 6 - Julian Assange - Hacking - 3 - www.absentjustice.com/australian-federal-police-investigations-1/consumer-affairs/chapter-6-julian-assange---hacking--3. Delve into Chapter 6 insights of Australian Federal Police Investigations: Julian Assange - Hacking (3). Explore the world of hacking with valuable in…
Chapter 7 - Faxing Problems Continuewww. - absentjustice.com/australian-federal-police-investigations-1/consumer-affairs/chapter-7-faxing-problems-continue. Discover the ongoing faxing problems in Chapter 7 of Australian Federal Police Investigations. Dive into the persistent issues faced by consumers.
Absent Justice Part 1 - Chapter 10 Julian Assange - Hacking - www.absentjustice.com/australian-federal-police-investigations-1/absent-justice-part-1-part-2-and-part-3/chapter-10---julian-assange---hacking. Dive into Chapter 10 of Absent Justice's investigative series, focusing on Julian Assange's hacking. Gain insights into the complexities of cy…

Summary of events (1)

In September 1995, after having read an 'Open Letter' from Amanda Davis " File 501 - AS-CAV Exhibits 495 to 541 who had been the previous General Manager of Consumer Affairs at AUSTEL, (the then government communications regulator) my Federal Member of Parliament, The Hon David Hawker MP arranged for some of the COT members to meet with the then-Shadow Minister for Communications, Senator Richard Alston, in his office in Canberra late September 1995. Senator Alston was more than concerned about the way my arbitration was conducted.

It appeared that, when we signed for arbitration, both Senator Richard Alston and the then Senate Whip in the Australian Senate, on behalf of the National Party, Senator Ron Boswell had been under the same delusion as the COT four; believing that the arbitration would be a non-legalistic and fast-tracked process and that the arbitrator could not bring down an award and/or a finding until all of the ongoing phone problems had been fixed.

My evidence confirmed a major systemic problem within the Ericsson-installed AXE equipment in Telstra's telephone exchanges around Australia that prompted Senator Alston to demand answers from Telstra and AUSTEL in a Senate hearing on 25 February 1994. This non-addressed Ericsson ongoing problem raised by me in my arbitration alarmed Senator Alston, especially when The Hon David Hawker MP mentioned he was receiving several complaints from residents in his electorate (which was also my electorate) who was also complaining of the same phone and faxing problems.

Then, Senator Alston asked the Hon. David Hawker MP if he would liaise with me on these ongoing phone problems and why I believed the arbitration process was covering up these ongoing faults. The Hon David Hawker agreed he would provide a base for me to submit my findings which ended up with me writing this report (Refer to Open Letter File No/41/Part-One and File No/41 Part-Two)

Bribery and corruption, including misleading and deceptive conduct, are destroying the world economy while the powerful bureaucrats worldwide attempt to fight this fire with the talk of change. This bribery and corruption plagued the COT cases’ government-endorsed arbitrations.

Senate Hansard - 20 September 1995

Senate Hansard records under the heading A MATTER OF PUBLIC INTEREST dated 20 September 1995, shows a very emotional Senator Ron Boswell discussing the above type of injustices that we four COT claimants ( i.e. Ann Garms, Maureen Gillan, Graham Schorer and me) suffered prior during and after our 'so-called' government endorsed arbitrations - (see Senate Evidence File No 1 20-9-95 Senate Hansard A Matter of Public Interest):

“...Eleven years after their first complaints to Telstra, where are they now? They are acknowledged as the motivators of Telecom’s customer complaint reforms. … But, as individuals, they have been beaten both emotionally and financially through an 11-year battle with Telstra.

“Then followed the Federal Police investigation into Telecom’s monitoring of COT case services. The Federal Police also found there was a prima facie case to institute proceedings against Telecom but the DPP [Director of Public Prosecutions], in a terse advice, recommended against proceeding.

“Once again, the only relief COT members received was to become the catalyst for Telecom to introduce a revised privacy and protection policy. Despite the strong evidence against Telecom, they still received no justice at all.

“These COT members have been forced to go to the Commonwealth Ombudsman to force Telecom to comply with the law. Not only were they being denied all necessary documents to mount their case against Telecom, causing much delay, but they were denied access to documents that could have influenced them when negotiating the arbitration rules, and even in whether to enter arbitration at all. …

"This is an arbitration process not only far exceeding the four-month period, but one which has become so legalistic that it has forced members to borrow hundreds of thousands just to take part in it. It has become a process far beyond the one represented when they agreed to enter into it, and one which professionals involved in the arbitration agree can never deliver as intended and never give them justice."

"I regard it as a grave matter that a government instrumentality like Telstra can give assurances to Senate leaders that it will fast track a process and then turn it into an expensive legalistic process making a farce of the promise given to COT members and the unducement to go into arbitration. “Telecom has treated the Parliament with contempt. No government monopoly should be allowed to trample over the rights of individual Australians, such as has happened here.”

Evidence ignored by Minister and Chief of Staff

However, it will be apparent from the following information (see Open Letter File No/41/Part-One and File No/41 Part-Two), that the tampering with evidence during my arbitration was ignored in 1996, by the newly elected Minister for Communications The Hon Richard Alston and his Chief of Staff Paul Fletcher, less than two years after this crime had been committed. Evidence Bad Bureaucrats - Tampering of Evidence confirms beyond any doubt that a crime was committed against me during my arbitration. Both the Hon David Hawker MP and I provided Senator Richard Alston at his request two other similar falsified arbitration reports submitted by Telstra under oath to the arbitrator namley: Telstra's Falsified BCI Report and Telstra's Falsified SVT Report.

A letter I received from Mr Paul Fletcher, dated 4 September 1996 (see Open Letter File No/41/Part-One), notes:

“In addition, I have examined the material you sent me.

“On the basis of the information I have received, I do not believe that there is any action in relation to your case that would be appropriate for the Minister to take at this time. The Minister has no power to intervene in the conduct of the COT arbitrations, which are being administered by the Telecommunications Industry Ombudsman.”

After reading Open Letter File No/41/Part-One and File No/41 Part-Two, it will become clear that the exhibits and evidence that were attached to the report show that, if Paul Fletcher had properly investigated that evidence in June 1996 then most (if not all) of the issues that I have been trying to have investigated since then, would have been settled in 1996.

Read about the corruption within the government bureaucracy that plagued the COT arbitrations. Learn who committed these horrendous crimes and where they sit in Australia’s Establishment and the legal system that allowed these injustices to occur.

In September 1995, the Hon David Hawker MP and I discussed this with Senator Richard Alston (Shadow Minister for Communications) in parliament house Canberra, who assured us he would have it addressed and asked me to provide further supporting material because the accompanying documents provided to him by the Hon David Hawker MP, suggested the whole arbitration process should put on hold until after an investigation into my claims had been provided to the government.

In March 1996, Senator Richard Alston became the new Minister for Communications in the John Howard government, and Mr Fletcher became the Senator's communications advisor. Had this report been investigated by Paul Fletcher and Senator Richard Alston in June 1996, these arbitration issues would have been validated 24 years ago. One must ask whether the appointment of Warwick Smith as Sports Minister in March 1996, who, as administrator to the first four COT arbitrations, had covertly used Telstra's arbitration agreement instead of an independent agreement which the government had been told would be used, did that unethical conduct by Warwick Smith prompt both Senator Richard Alston and Paul Fletcher into dropping their investigation when Warwick Smith became a minister in the John Howard Government?

In August, both Warwick Smith as Sports Minister and Senator Richard Alston were treated by Telstra as one of Australia's sponsors to the 1996 Olympic Games in Atlanta. As soon as that happened, my correspondence to Senator Richard Alston regarding my claims that Telstra had perverted the course of justice on at least three occasions was not responded to in the vigour it once had been.

Hansard at (Senate Evidence File No 1-C) shows the Senate was concerned that a number of government ministers had taken kickbacks from Telstra and thus was a conflict of interest in regards to their ministerial roles. Were the Senate quiet on who they were discussing, the ramifications would have been significant if some ministers had not conducted their government affairs in an honourable way.

Questions raised during a Senate committee hearing

Senator ALLISON – Telstra was very reluctant to reveal the names of its other commercial customers that were sent to Atlanta. Why is this?

Senator – ALLISON – These customers are not, presumably, private individuals?

Senator – ALLISON – So they are in the position of being able to make decisions which could favour Telstra, that is what you are suggesting?

Senator – ALLISON – Are you familiar with Telstra’s employee code of conduct?

Senator – ALLISSON – So this is still a current code of practice? It would be familiar to those people who needed to know

Senator – ALLISON – It says, under ‘guidelines for expected behaviour — bribes, pay-offs or kick-backs': No bribes, pay-offs, kick-backs or other considerations will be paid or received directly or indirectly. In addition, such payments to domestic or foreign government officials to influence a decision or gain a benefit either directly or through a third party, are prohibited.

Senator – ALLISON – Would you like to give us a view about these trips to Atlanta and how they relate to expected behaviour in this sense?

Senator – ALLISON – With respect, a seat at the ballet is quite different from a $12,000.00 trip to the
Would you like to give us a view about these trips to Atlanta and
Atlanta Games surely?

Senator – ALLISON – Are you suggesting that there is another code for corporate conduct?

Senator SCHACHT – So the invitations to people to go to Atlanta, whether they were politicians or corporate, were approved by the CEO.

Senator ALISSON – I just come back to this question of the sensitivity of your business customers. Since they represent corporations, and since Telstra is a corporation, why is the need for such secrecy? Why is it a sensitive matter?

In the circumstance of what has been said above in a number of statements made by various Senators concerning the documented kick-backs that a number of Senators stated was a disgrace. By accepting a free for all $12,000.00 trip paid by Telstra, is a situation that, maybe part of the reason, if this named person was one of those mentioned who accepted this trip after having been part of my Telstra arbitration, an arbitration which failed to investigate one single ongoing telephone problem which was still affecting my business (as Telstra own records show) in November 2006 (see main Evidence File No/4) 11 years after my arbitration was set up to fix these problems. If the Australian Government was to ask me for the name of the “named” person, I would certainly supply that name and other information which suggests this person knowingly misled numerous people in a statement he prepared on 12 May, 1995 concerning my arbitration, which he knew was not the truth by a long way. I hope by mentioning this issue in our Senate link here on absentjustice.com that someone in Government will be interested in researching back to this particular 27 February, 1998 Hansard and the false statement made by this person, as to whether this situation is part of the reason my valid claims have never been transparently investigated by the Government.

On 26 May 2019, Paul Fletcher, became The Hon Paul Fletcher Australia’s Minister for Communications and the Arts (see Media Release: Fletcher 'deeply honoured' to be appointed Minister for Communications, Cybersafety and the Arts a portfolio he is professionally equipped to handle.

In 2019 and 2020, via my then Federal Member of Parliament the Hon Dan Tehan MP, the Hon Paul Fletcher refused to reinvestigate these criminal matters that had been before the ministers office since June 1996. Exhibit Telstra’s Falsified SVT Report shows these crimes affected the whole outcome of my arbitration and my ability to run my business on a level playing field with fellow competitors. The Hon Dan Tehan is aware of the validity of my claims, as was his predecessor the Hon David Hawker MP. That neither of them has ever had the ability or power to get the government to investigate Telstra’s corporate thuggery clearly shows how corrupt the Telstra corporation is.