Donna Bugat -v- State of Victoria, Australia & Ors: Re A ‘Concerns notice’ for a Senator Van; I… know it is… defamatory etc for any politician to ‘officially’ rely on using a politically motivated ‘adoption court order’ on me against my will, that politicians also base on corrupt ’84 legislation (that was cynically designed to illegally try & avoid lawsuits) incl while I have recurrent cancer, so compensation ‘could’ include a Senator Van forfeiting his Senate seat to me (’77 Senate referendum spin after Murphy imbroglio considered marriage reform but illegally ’sidestepped’ adoption reform, resulting in ’84 state legislation, while Murdoch family United States Supreme Court hire Coney-Barrett similarly also recently ‘sidestepped’ lack of political et al legal standing to continue to impose… adoption court orders on adults) (19.06.2023)
My own identity of Donna Bugat is essential to my peaceful freedom of expression and legal right like anyone else to self determination.
‐—-
The legal reality is ’84 adoption legislation in Victoria that is really about politicians et al cynically trying to sidestep lawsuits is… defamatory, because it suggests that an adopted person may have done something wrong by not wanting to be forced to be adopted. The politicians do after all use ’84 legislation to unlawfully ‘suggest’ an adopted person must have done something so wrong that it should result in a lifelong ‘adoption court order’ unless a court agrees to change/remove it -if- the person labelled adopted pays money to the court that did the dirty deed, and goes through an unreasonable and onerous legal obstacle course that was only ever really designed to obstruct the administration of justice with regard to lawsuits. The ’84 … state legislation can also be illegally used to stop a dual national from standing in federal politics, where politicians who are not adopted, only have to say they have made the legally meaningless “reasonable effort” to renounce any other citizenship, because the true legal reality is it is not legally necessary to renounce a citizenship that could be returned later anyway or refused, depending on the foreign government. My own case proved it was an Australian PM like Rudd who does not publicly make a claim to dual citizenship who would make a financial deal with a foreign government, when he laundered $1.4 billion dollars from the British government through Ingeus, when he was complicit in illegally stopping my having possession of CCTV of the torture and attempted murder of me, so I could make my own decisions about what I wanted to do.
The reality is most politicians sign up to a political… party to collect the taxpayer dime, by doing whatever political leaders want, rather than representing any or all members of the public including by respecting the autonomy of the peace and harmony of the rule of law.
A Senator Van has just gone along with whatever legislation his political party endorses without any regard to any harm any legislation may intentionally cause to any law abiding members of the public.
It is inexplicable that when politicians spun their ’77 Senate referendum after the various Murphy imbroglios, and when marriage laws were reformed in ’75 that adoption court orders which were even more in need of reform not only did not happen, because adoption was still very widespread, but adoption legislation was made worse with for example ’84 legislation in Victoria, Australia. That ’84
legislation was based on me, like ss 141-150 etc PRSR Act 2011 legislation was based on me in the UK for the same reason, to illegally try and avoid lawsuits.
An ‘adoption court order’ is officially being illegally used against me, which resulted in my being forced to leave my own home in Breizh, France and return to Australia in July 2019, while a Senator Van who claims to represent Victorians (whatever that really means that hasn’t involved representing me) has been grandstanding on the taxpayer dime in the Australian Federal Senate.
I reasonably believe that part of the compensation for illegally having a politically motivated adoption court order officially imposed on me can that can also help reform the Senate, can include a Senator Van forfeiting his Senate seat to me.
A Senator Van willingly signed on the Liberal Party dotted line to put a political… party before the rights of members of the public and Australian citizens. He isn’t really utilising his Senate seat for any legal or political reasons, and nor does he care if it at some point his Senate seat automatically reverts back to a political… party because of defective legislation. There are obviously a number of legal problems with the Senate in Australia that in some respects reflects the worst aspects of political patronage/ upholding the inequality of the class system like the British House of Lords etc.
(I proved… in court, what was done to me was seriously illegal:
(I have personally long advocated that members of the public should not be dragged into corridors etc in government buildings where it is only later claimed there is no CCTV, where the government also illegally destroyed independent video, all of which I proved in a court it was illegal for the government to do, before the British government with the complicity of Australian politicians then illegally refused to hand over into my possession the CCTV of the subsequent torture and attempted murder of me, so I could make my own decisions about what I also wanted to do about that.
The British and Australian politicians then illegally stopped my taking possession of the CCTV of the torture and attempted murder of me:
This landmark possession distraction (which Australian politicians did not miss) was all about illegally continuing to stop my taking… possession of the CCTV of the torture and attempted murder of me:
(Australian politicians illegally tried to pretend I was not an Australian citizen when I was in the UK, and the only reason they were able to do that was because of a politically motivated adoption court order from Victoria Australia, and draconian adoption legislation from 1984 in Victoria, Australia that sought to covet up courts did not give me an official court extract from the court register of my adoption before I was sent 12000 miles away as a teenager)
I guess we know know… who the Daily Mail’s supposed ‘undercover journalist’ (below) who also illegally tried to join Brian and I with Johnson’s phoney ‘Democracy Village’ was:
‘Politically motivated’:
I obviously did not voluntarily return to Australia in July 2019.
The Murdoch family United States Supreme Court hire, Coney Barrett (who like the Murdoch family has a conflict of interest) plays to the political theatre, linking adoption to Native American legislation, which does not change what is consistently ‘sidestepped’ in adoptions regardless of the adopted persons, race, religion, politics or none:
The legal reality is when people labelled adopted as vulnerable children, become… adults, politicians and courts have no, and have never had any legal standing/locus standii, to continue to impose adoption court orders, or to refuse to recognize any adopted person of any race, religion, politics or none officially renouncing the adoption court order imposed on us without needing to give reasons to anyone else, regardless of whether or not a country wishes to cloak itself in a constitution or not.
The truth is politicians and civil servants should be… helping !!!! not hindering people by officially recognising adult renunciations of adoption court orders that could be filed with any number of government departments without the adopted person even needing to go anywhere near a court, or return to the state or country which is just so unreasonable, instead of politicians dreaming up ever more tendentious excuses to not officially recognise renunciations.
______
A kinder evolution is possible.
This statement is true.
Donna Bugat
(formerly known as Babs Tucker)
Donna Bugat 