The Babushka Principle in action: Protection of government corruption by Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit generates public protest. Public protest requires oppression of the citizenry and police violence. Such police conduct requires Fraud Upon the Court by judges...
Judge Shalhevet Kamir-Wiess fabricated a court hearing and court protocol pertaining to "Suspects", who were detained by police during Saturday night protest:
Three of the six "Suspects" were excluded from the "court hearing", but were entered in the "Protocol" as "present". An attorney appeared according to the "Protocol" as "Counsel" of "Suspects" were were not present, without their knowledge, without their consent, and without certificate of counsel. And in the meanwhile, efforts to obtain duly signed and certified copies of the "Protocol" and "Decision" have been unsuccessfull...
The request, which has been filed today, tries to clarify before the weekend, whether Judge Kamir-Wiess's "Decision" pertaining to the "Suspects" was an authentic, valid and enforceable court record, or onliy an invalid, unenforceable fabrication, so as not to miss the upcoming Saturday night silent protest...
The fundamental rights for Fair and Public Hearing and Due Process do not exist in the Israeli courts. Fabrications and fraud by judges have become the routine.
The law and justice system is the crux of government corruption! Until we jail some of the criminal judges, nothing will change!
Read the complete post: http://inproperinla.blogspot.com/2017/01/2017-01-30-protest-against-corrupt-ag.html
Figures: The Babushka Principle in action - Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit protects government corruption. Police Commander Barak Mordechai unlawfully and violently suppresses public protest, and Judge Shalhevet Kamir-Wiess perpetrates Fraud Upon the Court by perverting process and records - to cover it all up...
___
OccupyTLV, January 30 - Notice of perversion of court proces and court records was filed with Judge Shalhevet Kamir-Wiess of the Petah-Tikvah Magistrate Court. The notice originates in court process against citizens, who were detailed during protest against Attonrey General Avichai Mandelblit last on Saturday night.
The notice states that the filer and two other "Suspects" were not present at all during the court hearing. According to what they were told - Judge Kamir-Wiess decided that they would be excluded for "lack of space in the courtroom". However, in the "Protocol" they were listed as "present". The notice also states that an attonrey appeared as his Counsel without his knowledge, without his consent, without Certificate of Counsel, but was entered in the "Protocol" as "Counsel".
It is likely that Israeli legal scholars would find the entire situation a "procedural and immaterial", or perhaps part of the general development of the Israeli courts - "decline in formalism and increase in values". However, a groupd of "senior legal scholars" have recently referred to such developments as "a total jungle in the courts", where judges ignore both the law and the facts in reality... In short - Israeli judges act as they wish, in an arbitrary and capricious manner.
The notice also states that the filer received printouts from Net-HaMishpat (case management system) of the "Protocol" and "Decision" in his matter, while he was still handcuffed and shackled, and he was forced under duress to sign a "Commitment" in order to regain his liberty, which was unlawfully deprived. However, his efforts immediately after to obtain duly signed and certified copie of the records were yet unsuccessful...
The notice refers to the Obmudsman of the Judiciary decision in the Judge Varda Alshech "Fabricated Protocols" scandal. The decisoin details methods of fraud in printouts from Net-HaMishpat. The decision explicitly states that there is no way for a party or counsel to distinguish in a printout from Net-HaMishpat, whether the record is lawfully signed, valid, enforceable record of an Israeli court, or just an unsigned, invalid, unenforceable "draft".
Therefore, the filer asks to immediately receive duly signed and certified copy of the record.
The Ombudsman of the Judiciary decision in the Judge Varda Alshech "Fabricated Protocols" scandal also details forgery of "True Copy of the Original" certification by unauthorized untrained persons, who don't even know the difference between a signed and unsigned court record...
Obviously, there is no way to file an appeal, originating in an unathentic court record either... Therefore, Judge Kamir-Wiess was asked to initiate of her own volition corrective measures...
The questions, which now beg for an answer are:
* Did Judge Shalhevet Kamir-Wiess indeed sign the false and misleading "Protocol"?
* Would Judge Shalhevet Kamir-Wiess provide a signed and certified copy of such false and misleading "Protocol"?
We will have to wait and see...
Following is the complete Request (No 2) in State of Israel v Klass et al (63343-01-17) :
In the Petah-Tikvah Magistrate Court
State of Israel v Klass et al (63343-01-17)
Notice of perverted court process and
demand for immediate receipt of duly signed and certified copies of January 29,
2017 "Protocol" and “Decision” records
The Court should notice its response on
instant request within time that would permit receipt of the records before the
weekend.
Filer: Joseph
Zernik, PhD – "Suspect"
Pro
se, unrepresented
"Suspect" in instant court
file, Joseph Zernik, PhD, pro se, unrepresented, files herein Notice of
perverted court process and demand for immediate receipt of duly signed and
certified copies of the January 30, 2017 "Protocol" and “Decision”
records:
a. On January 29, 2017,a fundamentally perverted court process was
conducted in instant court file
1. The
above referenced hearing was conducted in my absence, while I am entered in the
"Protocol" as "present".
According to what I was told, the Judge decided that three (3) of the
"Suspects" would not be present in the hearing for lack of space in
the courtroom. In the same hearing, and
attorney appeared as my purported Counsel, and was entered in the
"Protocol" as my "Counsel", without my knowledge, without
my consent, and without a certificate of Counsel signed by me. At the end of
the hearing I was ushered into the hearing room. I immediately announced to the
Judge: "I am unrepresented". My notice at this stage made no
difference, since the hearing had already been concluded.
2.
I was then taken
back into the detention cell, still shackled and handcuffed, where I was
provided a printout from Net-HaMishpat of the "Protocol" and
"Decision", referenced above. [1] Based on such records I signed under duress
the "Commitment Record", [2] in order to regain my liberty,
which had been lawlessly deprived.
3. Immediately
upon my release, I attempted to obtain duly signed and certified "True
Copy of the Original" records, but the Office of the Clerk was already
closed to the public.
b. Notice to Judge Shalhevet Kamir-Weiss
4.
I herein notice
Judge Shalhevet Kamir-Wiess, that the hearing yesterday was fundamentally
perverted. An honest Judge would
initiate corrective measures sua sponte.
c. Absent "True Copy of the Original"
certification, the "Protocol" and "Decision" records,
referenced above, are invalid and unenforceable, and likewise the
"Commitment Record".
5.
The May 31, 2012
Ombudsman of the Judiciary Decision (88/12/Tel-Aviv District) in the Judge
Varda Alshech “Fabricated Protocols” scandal [3] clarifies that it is
impossible to distinguish in printouts from Net-HaMishapt (case management
system) between a lawfully, electronically signed record, which is a valid
decision record of an Israeli court, and an unsigned record, which is a “draft”
- i.e. - invalid,
sham/simulated/”fabricated” record. The same decision also clarifies that
judges routinely distribute Net-HaMishapt printouts, which are not lawfully
electronically signed, and are invalid “drafts. Likewise, a court record, which
is not certified, "True Copy of the Original" is not enforceable.
6.
Therefore,
inasmuch as Judge Shalhevet Kamir-Wiess holds the above referenced records
authentic, valid and enforceable court records, I herein demand immediate
notice by the Court, where and when I could come and obtain duly signed and
certified copies of the records, as detailed below.
d. Duly signed and certified decision record
7.
The
records are also required for filing with international forums, including the
upcoming Universal Periodic Review of Human Rights in Israel by the UN Human
Rights Council. Therefore, I herein
request that Judge Moshe Sobel order the Office of the Clerk to provide me a
copy of the above referenced “Decision” record, which would be deemed admissible
by international forums pursuant to the Hague Apostille Convention
(1961). Namely – duly signed by Judge Moshe Sobel and duly certified by a
lawfully appointed Chief Clerk, or the Magistrate of the Court.
8.
Certification
by a duly appointed Chief Clerk:
(a) The Regulations of the Courts (Office
of the Clerk) 2004, Regulation 6a, says:
The Chief Clerks of the courts are
authorized certify that a copy of a court record is true copy of the original
in the court file.
(b)
The State Service Administration publication “Basic Principles in Employment of
Senior Staff in the State Service” (2004), pp 9-11, outlines the various ways
that lawful appointment in the State Service is documented.
(c)
Administration of Courts’ responses on a Freedom of Information requests,
pertaining to the “Chief Clerks” of the various courts have so far failed to
generate any documentation of lawful appointment of any “Chief Clerk”.
Therefore, insofar as the requested
certification is signed by the “Chief Clerk” of the Petah-Tikvah Magistrate
Court, I herein request that it be accompanied by documentation of lawful
appointment of that person as “Chief Clerk”.
9.
Certification
by the Magistrate of the Court:
The Courts Act 1984, Article 105(a)
says:
105(a) The Magistrate of the Court of the
Supreme Court, the District Court, and the Magistrate Court shall serve in any
authority that was vested in the Chief Clerk of the respective court, and
perform any duty assigned to the Chief Clerk.
Therefore, in case there is no lawfully
appointed Chief Clerk in the Petah-Tikvah Magistrate Court, the records may be
duly certified by the Magistrate of the Court.
10.
Forgery of certification by lawfully
unauthorized persons:
The Court is explicitly requested that the
certification not be signed by an unauthorized person, such as “The Judge’s
secretary”. In a competent court, the
certification of court records by lawfully unauthorized persons should be
deemed forgery.
11.
Certification language:
(a) The certification language should be
that, which is explicitly provided in the above referenced Regulation, “True
Copy of the Original”.
(b) The Court is explicitly requested to
avoid the use of perverted certification language, such as, “Copying is True to
the Original”.
12.
Name and authority of the certifier:
(a)
The name and authority of the certifier should appear on the face of the
record.
(b)
The Court is explicitly requested to avoid the certification by an unauthorized
person “on behalf” of the Chief Clerk or the Magistrate of the Court. The latter court officers are not permitted
by law to delegate their authority to certify court records.
A competent
court should provide a duly signed and certified copies of its decisions
pursuant to request by a requester. If I do not receive any notice in this
matter, which would make it possible for me to obtain certified records before
the weekend, I would deem myself exempt for any authority of such records,
which would then be lawfully be deemed void, not voidable.
Date: January 30, 2017 __________________
Joseph
Zernik
LINKS:
[1] State
of Israel v Klass et al
(63343-01-17)- January 29, 2017 "Protocol" and “Decision” //
מדינת ישראל נ קלס ואח'
(63343-01-17) - "פרוטוקול" ו"החלטה" מיום
29 לינואר, 2017
[2]
State
of Israel v Klass et al
(63343-01-17)- January 29, 2017 "Commitment Record" //
מדינת ישראל נ קלס ואח'
(63343-01-17) "כתב התחייבות עצמית" מיום 29 לינואר,
2017
[3]
May
31, 2012 Ombudsman of the Judiciary Decision (88/12/Tel-Aviv District) in the
Judge Varda Alshech "Fabricated Protocols" scandal //
החלטת נציב תלונות
הציבור על השופטים מיום 31 למאי, 2012 (88/12/מחוזי ת"א) בפרשת "הפרוטוקולים
המפוברקים" של השופטת ורדה אלשייך
