Menu
My Bag

Your bag is currently empty.

Menu

Chapter Six

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.

Although we have addressed the many threats the COT Cases received during their government-endorsed arbitration and mediation processes elsewhere on the website, it was relevant to introduce these threats in the introduction to our COT story because, for reasons never explained by the arbitrator and government, these threats were never transparently investigated. In my case, I visited the Telstra employee's unions rooms in Collingwood, Melbourne asking them to back off. This dispute was not with the rank-and-file union members. It was a dispute with management.

Absent Justice - My Story - Senator Ron Boswell

Threats carried out 

Threats were also made against me by Telstra arbitration officials because I assisted the Australian Federal Police with their investigations into these phone and fax hacking issues as page 180 ERC&A, from the official Australian Senate Hansard, dated 29 November 1994, reports Senator Ron Boswell asking Telstra’s legal directorate:

“Why did Telecom advise the Commonwealth Ombudsman that Telecom withheld FOI documents from Alan Smith because Alan Smith provided Telecom FOI documents to the Australian Federal Police during their investigation?”

After receiving a hollow response from Telstra, which the senator, the AFP and I all knew was utterly false, the senator states:

“…Why would Telecom withhold vital documents from the AFP? Also, why would Telecom penalise COT members for providing documents to the AFP which substantiate that Telecom had conducted unauthorised interceptions of COT members’ communications and subsequently dealt in the intercepted information by providing that information to Telecom’s external legal advisers and others?” (See Senate Evidence File No 31)

Thus, the threats became a reality. What is so appalling about the withholding of relevant documents is that no one in the TIO office or government has ever investigated the disastrous impact this had on my overall submission to the arbitrator. The arbitrator and the government (who at the time fully owned Telstra) should have initiated an investigation into why an Australian citizen, who assisted the AFP in their investigations into unlawful interception of telephone conversations, was so severely disadvantaged during a civil arbitration.

My pleas to the arbitrator, to bring Telstra to account for their actions when I had still not received my requested discovery documents amazingly, he refused to take calls as his secretary Caroline Friend is aware. Even though the Commonwealth Ombudsman had to be brought into the arbitration for Telstra to obey the Freedom of Information (FOI Act) and the government solicitors took control of the delivery of my arbitration documents, the delivery of my requested May 1994 FOI Ericsson AXE related documents never arrived until 23 May 1995 twelve months after my original request. Worse, those newly released documents came two weeks after the conclusion of my arbitration on 11 May 1995. 

Not even the Australian Federal Police came to my aid demanding to know why I had been treated so badly after heving helped the AFP with their investigations.

After the statute of limitations had expired for me to be able to use this information, I received a draft copy of Dr Hughes (the arbitrator) award he had the gall to write in this draft award at point 2.23: 

"...Although the time taken for completion of the arbitration may have been longer than initially anticipated, I hold neither party and no other person responsible. Indeed, I consider the matter has proceeded expeditiously in all the circumstances Both parties have co-operated fully..." 

That statement at point 2.23 in the final award was removed before I received it. There is no point 2.23 in the award. Likewise, the handwritten statement made by Dr Hughes states “do we really want to say this”?

In simple terms, this spineless arbitrator (Dr Gordon Hughes), who is currently a partner at Davies Collison Cave lawyers (Melbourne), was nothing more than a puppet brought in by the government to protect the government-owned Telstra Cooperation - at all costs.

The matters discussed on this website absentjustice.com are said according to my interpretation of the  Public Interest Disclosure Act 2013

© 2021 Absent Justice

Absent Justice Ebook

Read Alan's book

 

 

How can one narrate an account that appears so implausible that even the author questions its authenticity and has to consult their records before continuing with the narrative? It is essential to bring to light the conspiracy between an arbitrator, various appointed government watchdogs, and the defendants. It is crucial to demonstrate that the defendants employed equipment connected to their network to scrutinize faxed material departing from one's office during an arbitration process. Furthermore, it is imperative to show that one's advisors stored said material without one's knowledge or consent before redirecting it to its intended destination, where, in some cases, it was not directed to the addressee. In my experience, the arbitrator consultants found my claim material incomprehensible upon receiving it.

However, how could it have been illegible when the two arbitration consultants I hired to present that material had both served as senior detectives and sergeants in the Queensland police, with one having earned accolades from the Australian National Crime Authority and were presently licensed Loss Assessors? The reader will understand why this happened after reading my book and reviewing this website. It is unacceptable that my claim material had been tampered with and rearranged to make no sense when read.

I urge you to consider the gravity of this situation. The manipulation of information and the abuse of power can happen to anyone, and it is crucial to bring these injustices to light. The tampering of my claim material is a blatant violation of my rights, and it is essential to expose these injustices.

Quote Icon

“…your persistence to bring about improvements to Telecom’s country services. I regret that it was at such a high personal cost.”

The Hon David Hawker MP

“…your persistence to bring about improvements to Telecom’s country services. I regret that it was at such a high personal cost.”

Hon David Hawker

“I am writing in reference to your article in last Friday’s Herald-Sun (2nd April 1993) about phone difficulties experienced by businesses.

I wish to confirm that I have had problems trying to contact Cape Bridgewater Holiday Camp over the past 2 years.

I also experienced problems while trying to organise our family camp for September this year. On numerous occasions I have rung from both this business number 053 424 675 and also my home number and received no response – a dead line.

I rang around the end of February (1993) and twice was subjected to a piercing noise similar to a fax. I reported this incident to Telstra who got the same noise when testing.”

Cathy Lindsey

“A number of people seem to be experiencing some or all of the problems which you have outlined to me. …

“I trust that your meeting tomorrow with Senators Alston and Boswell is a profitable one.”

Hon David Hawker MP

“Only I know from personal experience that your story is true, otherwise I would find it difficult to believe. I was amazed and impressed with the thorough, detailed work you have done in your efforts to find justice”

Sister Burke

“…the very large number of persons that had been forced into an arbitration process and have been obliged to settle as a result of the sheer weight that Telstra has brought to bear on them as a consequence where they have faced financial ruin if they did not settle…”

Senator Carr

Were you denied justice in arbitration?

Would you like your story told on absentjustice.com?
 Contact Us