|
|
| Back |
An example of how the legal system refuses to grant basic rights to those who are forced by poverty to try to self represent (and in this case even to know in detail why your father is being held in prison).
If you do not have the cash to pay legal professionals the system treats you with contempt. Brian Fyffe's daughter has the authority to get access to documents but the court official will not give access.
Unfortunately in Australia there is no crime of a court being in contempt of the people, only of a person being in contempt of a court.
From: judy You will not believe this but I went to the Melbourne Magistrates Court to get the Judgments of Hannon and Lewis, being the two magistrates that remanded dad in custody, and they wouldn't give them to me. The reasons were that the matter is still pending and they can't release the documents. Can you honestly believe that? The officer at the Criminal matters register first of all looked up the case on the pc and said that yes it is here. He then went away somewhere, came back about 10 minutes later and told me that they could not give me a copy of the judgments. He said even though I had authority to collect it he did not have authorization to release the documents to me. He suggested that I get in touch with a solicitor. I told him about legal aid and showed him the legal aid documents. He then told me to get in with them. So, again I get the run around and waste time. Very very frustrating ! |
Concerned by this development OVOP attempted again to get assistance for Mr Fyffe;
From: One Voice - One People, Human Rights Defenders Sent: Monday, 5 March 2001 4:10 AM To: Abetz, Hon E; Allison, L; Alston, Hon R; Bartlett, A; Bishop, M; Bolkus, Hon N; Boswell, R; Bourne, V; Brandis, G; Brown, B; Buckland, G; Calvert, P; Campbell, G; Campbell, Hon I; Carr, K; Chapman, G; Collins, J; Conroy, S; Cook, Hon P; Coonan, H Subject: Most Urgent Attention! Importance: High cc: The Human Rights Commissioner Mrs Mary Robinson UNHRC, Geneva To Elected Representatives of the People ONE VOICE - ONE PEOPLE Human Rights Defenders (OVOP) herewith request your immediate intervention as a representative of the people in this most serious case of abuse of a man's human rights. Since October last year OVOP have sent thousands of e-mails and letters about this case to you and all other Members of the Federal Parliament and Senate including all Members of Parliament of the State Victoria and international NGO's: Brian Fyffe, a 62 year old man, has been kept for 4 months in prison because of allegations of threats to a police officer. In order to gain access to Brian Fyffe's home, the police obtained a search warrant for illegal possession of firearms and on 10 October 2000 a 60 men armed force invaded Brian Fyffe's home. He was jailed for having an Israeli Uzi machine gun mounted to his front door. In the following bail hearings the police admitted that they had not found any machine guns. This "revelation" however did not result in a release of Brian Fyffe from jail but he was kept jailed because a magistrate said that he was a danger to the public. To date Brian Fyffe has not been provided with any evidence of a crime. After 4 months in jail and the denial of legal aid, Brian Fyffe finally has been granted legal aid. Brian Fyffe's daughter - a mother who has five children and a dairy farm to look after - travelled to Melbourne in an attempt to get copies of the judgments to prepare her father's defence for a committal hearing on 13 March 2001 because these documents contained the reasons of the court for Brian Fyffe's imprisonment. (see e-mail below). Previous attempts to obtain copies were frustrated because she was unable to pay for it. Although being authorised by her father and proving the granting of legal aid the court refused a copy of the judgments without giving any reasons. OVOP herewith alerts you of this further violation of Brian Fyffe's human rights. According to article 14 (3a, 3b) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights Brian Fyffe has the right "To be informed promptly and in detail ..... of the nature of the charge against him" ..... "and to have adequate time and facilities for the preparation of his defence..." OVOP herewith demands that you personally take all measures necessary to ensure that copies of the judgments and the allegations/evidence filed against Brian Fyffe will be provided immediately per fax, e-mail and additional copies to be send per mail to the address of Judy XXXXXX ( Contact details supplied in original ) One can only conclude that the Australian Government takes greatest pride in even excelling the bad human rights standards of Russia, Indonesia and other 3rd world countries whilst at the same time they enjoy criticising others human rights abuses so openly on the international platform. Please urgently confirm the receipt of this message and let us know what action you as representative of the people have taken to protect this man's rights. Yours faithfully Brigitte Straulino President ONE VOICE - ONE PEOPLE, Human Rights Defenders |
Which got the following reply from the office of a Senator:
From: Crane, Arthur (Senator) [mailto:Senator.Crane@aph.gov.au] Dear Ms Straulino Thank you for your email itemised below. Senator Crane has requested I forward your correspondence to the Minister for Justice, Senator the Hon Chris Ellison, for his action. This has been done. Yours sincerely, Ms Thea White Electorate Officer |
And a few days letter the following Email from Judy was received by OVOP :
From: judy ...Dad has not been able to secure legal rep. for the committal hearing on Tuesday.
I believe they will move dad on Friday...tomorrow...up to Bairnsdale. I am not sure
what we are going to do.....legal aid are being difficult...first they said yes, they will
fund the case, then Greg Thomas from legal aid said that after looking at the case
he is of the opinion that dad should go before a judge alone in the magistrates court
to have the charges heard. Dad has a legal right to choose how he wishes his case
to be heard and he wants a trial by judge and jury. Mr. Thomas said that if dad
wishes to go before a judge and jury legal aid will not fund the case. So, does dad
really have much choice???? I think not when it comes to legal aid. How many
millions of dollars have the Victorian government spent on this stupid inquiry into
Intergraph, the ambulance service which the kennet government awarded a
contract to???? something like $60M when it is finally finished!!!!! The labor gov.
initiated an inquiry into the tendering process which the Liberal gov. gave to this
organization. It is a blatant waste, utter waste, of legal aid funds!!!!!!! Gotta go
now...I will get back to you tonight with more info. Yours sincerely, Judy
|
A court hearing in Mr Fyffe's case takes place on 7 May :
From: judy Well, the court started off yesterday with typical fashion; someone forgot to inform the prison that dad was to be brought before the magistrates court at 10 a.m. so after a couple of hours dad finally arrived. The magistrate read out the charges and asked dad how he intended to plead. Dad replied not guilty to all charges. Dad then went on to inform the magistrate that, under the federal constitution, the magistrates court did not have the jurisdiction to hear his case. The magistrate asked dad how long his presentation would take and dad replied as long as he needed. The magistrate then had a few words to his clerk, then announced the case was being transferred from court 14 to court 3. We all then down to court 3 and waited, and waited. By this time it was nearly 1pm and the clerk announced an hours break for lunch. Mum and Iapproach the clerks in both courts to see if we could get dad's legal material to him. Unfortunately, I had to leave during the lunch break as I had kids to pick up from school, cows to feed and milk etc. so I was unable to stay to see the results of the proceedings. Mum rang me last night to let me know that the case had been adjourned until the 1st of June, 2001, which is the same date as his other charge is to be heard. Dad then informed the magistrate that he wanted bail on his own recognisance. I will just jump back a step here and explain something that happened when we were changing courts. A social worker, who was in court on another matter, heard what was going on with dad's case and approached me to enquire why dad didn't have any legal representation. I explained to this bloke what legal aid had said to dad, that is, if you don't play it our way we won't fund you. This bloke then said that he would make some inquiries on dad's behalf and, shortly afterwards, a legal aid solicitor turned up to speak with the prosecution and dad. I am not sure the full extent of what transpired but, according to mum, when dad requested bail this solicitor spend a considerable amount of time talking to dad, the prosecution and the sitting judge. By the time all this had been dealt with it was 4pm so the judge adjourned the case until this morning when he will hear further evidence and make a decision. So, it's back to the magistrates court in Melbourne this morning for everyone but me. I have far too much work to do on the farm at the moment and I can't afford to lose another day. I have explained this to mum and my brother Joe. Must run. Hope all is well with you Judy. |
| Back |
Case last updated: 10 May 2000