Donna Bugat -v- State of Victoria, Australia & Ors: Re Cour Pénale Internationale @ Den Haag & 28th June 2002 – 28th June 2019 etc: I have… already as a responsible adult made… my own lawful decision & officially renounced political crime of ‘adoption court order’ (before I was officially diagnosed with recurrent cancer) that politicians have ‘no recognised defence in law’ to using, because it is illegally used (by politicians like fmr British PM Johnson) to illegally target me (the torture & attempted murder of me) as ‘part of’ a ’specific group’ labelled ‘adopted’ to illegally try & stop me ever making my own lawful adult decisions about self determination that includes being able to safely live in my own home in Breizh, France (Australian politicians illegally seek to remove a ‘separation of powers’ in ‘universal jurisdiction’ to ‘politicize’ torture etc) so my own ‘lived experience’ as someone labelled ‘adopted’ and a peace campaigner is that what is obviously missing in International Law is the ’new Jerusalem’ of an International Civil Court with the choice of juries (07.07.2023)
My own identity of Donna Bugat is essential to my peaceful freedom of expression and legal right like anyone else to self determination.
___________
The legal reality is politicians cannot legally target a ’specific group’ labelled ‘adopted’ to illegally try and stop any of us freely asserting our absolute legal right to as responsible adults officially renounce an ‘adoption court order’ made against us as minors, without needing to go to court, and regardless of where we live. We are not legally obliged to return to the state or country of origin and go through any court proceedings of any kind.
I first visited the International Criminal Court in Den Haag in 2013:
The likes of the former British PM Johnson who covered up the torture and attempted murder of me along with the ‘trophy CCTV’ knew a civil jury would at the very least conclude:
a) I am a responsible adult legally entitled to make my own lawful decision as an adult to officially renounce the ‘adoption court order’ without needing to go through any court proceedings and regardless of where we live.
b) I should be awarded exemplary damages etc, because Johnson et al should also have been prosecuted in a criminal court, in a timely manner, because they always knew they have no recognised defence in law.
It wasn’t Johnson’s ‘choice’ as to whether or not he handed over the ‘trophy CCTV’ of the torture and attempted murder of me, to me, and what adult decision I made about how I wished to proceed/the legal avenue which was never limited to any civil court:
The politicians who do not… officially recognise the absolute legal right of a responsible adult to make our own decision to officially renounce an adoption court order made when we were minors, without our needing to go to any court, are committing a criminal offence, including at the very least, false imprisonment, and human trafficking.
It is not possible for politicians to say they did not know they were illegally imposing unlawful ‘adoption court orders’ because the politicians are adults who know other adults labelled adopted have the absolute legal right to make our own lawful decision at any time, to officially renounce an adoption court order without needing to go through court proceedings. The problem of unlawful ‘adoption court orders’ that can have wide-ranging adverse legal consequences is entirely of politicians making, because politicians are effectively trying to sell off vulnerable children as chattels with ‘cut and paste’ legislation from slavery.
The Australian politicians and Australian Ambassador to the Netherlands also obviously know it was absolutely unlawful to try and circumvent ‘Universal Jurisdiction’ through an ‘Amendment’ to a Federal Torture etc Act 2010 to illegally remove even any pretence of a separation of powers, between politicians and a judiciary:
The obvious problem with the Cour Pénale Internationale @ Den Haag is that it is still solely a… political court, created by politicians for politicians.
(My personal view is Blair & Co probably publicly grandstanded about having an International Criminal Court in the run up to the Iraq War because when they set it up, they made sure that it wouldn’t at that time -and not until 17th July 2017- investigate the ‘crime of aggression’ we now know they were intending to commit)
I would not personally put my own trust in a Mr Karim Khan formerly from the British CPS (not to be confused with his brother, one of Johnson’s former British Tory MP’s, the registered sex offender and former UN ‘Special Assistant’ Ahmad Khan) who was also put forward by Johnson to be the latest senior prosecutor at the International Criminal Court.
The legal reality is the former British PM Johnson has no pretence of any legal immunity over the torture and attempted murder of me that happened… before he became PM.
A reason the International Criminal Court cannot effectively investigate ONGOING child and human trafficking of a ’specific group’ like people labelled ‘adopted’ is because the International Criminal Court would need to itself, officially recognise that people labelled ‘adopted’ can make our own lawful decision as responsible adults to officially renounce an ‘adoption court order’ without needing to go through any court proceedings. The politicians who legislate to impose unlawful ‘adoption court orders’ obviously have ‘no recognised defence in law’ to what is at the very least a ‘strict liability offence’. The first time I saw even a photocopy of what it is claimed is an ‘adoption court order’ was when I was forced to return to Victoria, Australia in July 2019. There are so many ‘secrets’ and lies told by many politicians about what they call ‘adoption’.
The politicians are at the very least legally obliged to facilitate an office to register the official renunciations of adoption court orders by people labelled adopted, who should be helped, supported and encouraged on the journey to freedom from what has been the very serious political persecution of any adopted person who does not go along with what politicians want. It was of course always impossible to guarantee there would never be completely and utterly corrupt and unscrupulous politicians like for example Johnson who would have access to ‘adoption court orders’ they would use for their own political advantage. When Johnson fast-tracked himself through to be PM (its a legal impossibility to explain how he passed any ‘security vetting’) he knew he did not have legal immunity over what he did to me, that happened… BEFORE he became PM, and that he could not legally qualify for publicly funded permanent police protection, including while being one of Lord Rothermere’s Daily Mail ‘journalists’.
I remember my own home in Breizh, France (in my own Breton Wood) had the most beautiful symphony of birdsong I have ever heard in my life.
_________________
A kinder evolution is possible.
This statement is true.
Donna Bugat
(formerly known as Babs Tucker)
Donna Bugat 