Donna Bugat -v- State of Victoria, Australia & Ors: I have… already personally as a responsible adult made my own lawful decision that is also in the public interest to… officially renounce ‘adoption court order’ (before I was officially diagnosed with recurrent cancer) because illegal ‘adoption court order’ that corrupt & unscrupulous politicians can access & use for their own political advantage is a political crime that targets me as part of a ‘specific group’ labelled ‘adopted’ & so I do know main reason Lord Rothermere et al’s Daily Mail ‘journalist’ Johnson illegally avoided being cross examined in… a court & fast-tracked becoming British FM & PM when he could not have legally passed ‘security vetting’ was to illegally try & guarantee himself permanent publicly funded police protection he always knew he was never legally entitled to, because torture & attempted murder of me & cover up of that CCTV that also illegally stopped me making my own decisions as a responsible adult about that too, happened… BEFORE Johnson became British PM which only happened… after I was forced to leave my own home in Breizh, France (06.07.2023)
My own identity of Donna Bugat is essential to my peaceful freedom of expression and legal right like anyone else to self determination.
______________
It is self evident that ‘adoption court orders’ as they stand, are absolutely unlawful because no-one has any legal standing to stop anyone making their own lawful decision as a responsible adult, to officially renounce an ‘adoption court order’ made when labelled ‘adopted’ as a minor, without needing to go to any court etc.
The politicians are obviously legally obliged to facilitate a public office where people can safely register our official renunciation of an ‘adoption court order’ regardless of where we live, and have any help, support and encouragement necessary to successfully work through what should be a liberating experience. The experience of officially renouncing an adoption court order should provide peace of mind and legal certainty which is what is always missing among all the secrets and lies of an ‘adoption court order’ that in my own case I never even saw a copy of until July 2019, because it was illegally withheld from me while I was living overseas.
Johnson et al like to grandstand in the oddly all male ‘news media’ rather than be on a witness stand in a court, being cross examined let alone in front of a jury:
The problem with what politicians call ‘adoption’ is that it has always been based on the unlawful political interference of a corrupt ‘class system’ who falsely claim adults who are labelled ‘adopted’ do not as a ‘specific group’ have the absolute legal right to make our own lawful decision as adults to officially renounce an ‘adoption court order’ that was made while a minor, when of course we do.
I was correct this was a politically motivated cover-up by Johnson et al hiding what was really going on, where it’s a legal impossibility to explain how Johnson who was publicly grandstanding in the ‘news’ media, avoided being on the witness stand in court, being cross examined:
The reality is corrupt and unscrupulous politicians like Johnson do have unlawful access to information about ‘adoption court orders’ to improperly use to advance their own political careers. The main reason Johnson was desperate to become British PM was to illegally try and have publicly funded permanent police protection, although he always knew that would be unlawful because the torture and attempted murder of me (and the cover up of the CCTV of that) which was the worst kept ‘secret’ in Westminster happened… BEFORE Johnson bccame PM etc etc. It’s a legal impossibility for Johnson to have legally passed any ‘security vetting’.
Mr McClelland could not legally legislate to give himself legal authority to circumvent ‘universal jurisdiction’.
There’s some undeclared conflicts of interest here (below) that also involve money changing hands over the political language in Australia of ‘forced adoptions’ :
Of course, most people know there are obviously members of the judiciary who have rubber stamped ‘adoption court orders’ etc just like they rubber-stamped ‘whites only Australia’ too. There’s a lot of people from all ‘sides’ of ‘politics’ in for example the UK and Australia who have supported and enabled Johnson. There are many things that Johnson can accurately be accused of being, but being a responsible adult who makes lawful decisions in the public interest, is not one of them.
______________
A kinder evolution is possible.
This statement is true.
Donna Bugat
(formerly known as Babs Tucker)
Donna Bugat 