Radical Honoursty EcoFeminist vs. Knights Templar Anders Breivik
  • Ecofeminist v Breivik: Suspended Publication

Disciplinary Board for Advocates: Request for Clarification on 'Legal Interest' definition & non-environmental complaints policy

20/6/2012

0 Comments

 
Picture
Request for Clarification to Disciplinary Board for Advocates: RE: 'Legal Interest' definition and non-environmental complaints policy.

Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2012 2:38 PM 
Request for Access to Environment and Health Information in terms of S.28 (Freedom of Information Act) and S.10 (Environmental Law) RE: Complaints filed with Disciplinary Board against Attorneys for Victims Families in Norway v. Breivik matter: Violation of: 2.1 (Independence), 2.2 (Honesty), 2.4 (Multiculti Legal Respect) & 4,1 (Rule of Law Conduct) of CCBE Code of Ethics (Norwegian translation) : Obstruction of Justice Participation in a StaliNorsk Political Psychiatry Show Trial, to (1) deny Defendant his Political Necessity Treason Trial; and (2) support Corruption of the Court to deny submittal to the Court of Controversial Evidence related to: [1] Media’s Environment-Population-Terrorism Connection; [2] Norway’s endorsement of Political Psychiatry & Psychiatric Fraud; [3] Masculine Insecurity Human Farming for Profit Kaffir Legal Matrix; [4] Norwegian Goverments Endorsement for ANC’s Terrorism & Breeding War; [5] Norwegian Commitment to Rainbow Race Multiculturism is a Fraud (PDF) 

Text of Email Response to Disciplinary Board for Advocates

From: Lara Johnstone
Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2012 2:38 PM
To: 'Disiplinærnemnden for advokater'; 'Judge Ernst Moe'
Subject: Disciplinary Board Head: Judge Ernst Moe: Req for Env. & Health Info ITO S.28 and S.10

Head: Judge Ernst Moe
Sec: Beate Sundstrøm
Disciplinary Committee | Disiplinærnemnden
Kristian Augustsgt. 9 0164 OSLO
Tlf. 22 03 50 50 | Tlf: 22 03 51 08 | Fax 22 11 53 25

Dear Judge Moe,

Request for Access to Environment and Health Information in terms of S.28 (Freedom of Information Act) and S.10 (Environmental Law) RE: Complaints filed with Disciplinary Board against Attorneys for Victims Families in Norway v. Breivik matter: Violation of: 2.1 (Independence), 2.2 (Honesty), 2.4 (Multiculti Legal Respect) & 4,1 (Rule of Law Conduct) of CCBE Code of Ethics (Norwegian translation) : Obstruction of Justice Participation in a StaliNorsk Political Psychiatry Show Trial, to (1) deny Defendant his Political Necessity Treason Trial; and (2) support Corruption of the Court to deny submittal to the Court of Controversial Evidence related to: [1] Media’s Environment-Population-Terrorism Connection; [2] Norway’s endorsement of Political Psychiatry & Psychiatric Fraud; [3] Masculine Insecurity Human Farming for Profit Kaffir Legal Matrix; [4] Norwegian Goverments Endorsement for ANC’s Terrorism & Breeding War; [5] Norwegian Commitment to Rainbow Race Multiculturism is a Fraud

Thank you for your email from the Disciplinary Board, dated Tue 6/19/2012 10:26 AM; in response to the 170 complaints I filed against Attorney’s for Defendant (4) and Victims Families (166) in Norway v. Breivik matter. I am awaiting response from the Disciplinary Committee to inform me which Attorney’s are not members of the Bar Association, whose complaints I am required to file with the Disciplinary Board. In the meantime, in response to the issues raised in your Tue 6/19/2012 10:26 AM email, I request the following information:

Request for Information: 

[2] The Disciplinary Board’s ‘Legal Interest’ Decision Making Justifications: 

[A] Does the Disciplinary Board endorse the European Court of Human Rights (Lithgow & others v United Kingdom ) principle that every individual who files a legal application to a Norwegian Court has a right to a timeous and precise written response informing them whether their application has been accepted, or if denied, reasons for such denial, or to inform the individual of additional information required before the complaint can be accepted?

[B] If so, if or when any Judge refuses to provide any applicant in any court proceeding that any Norwegian Lawyer is a participant in, with such prompt written response, it is the duty of honourable and ethical Lawyers to uphold the respect for impartial court due process proceedings to object to, and expose such discrimatory corrupt practices being practiced by a Norwegian Magistrate or Judge? 

[C] In consideration for [A] and [B], could the Disciplinary Board be detailed specific about how and why it alleges that my complaints do not meet the Disciplinary Boards ‘legal interest requirement’?

[D] Is the Disciplinary Board’s ‘Legal Interest’ Decision Making an Endorsement of Censoring Exposure of the Human-Farming-EcoSuicide-Kaffir-Legal-Matrix?: Whether the Disciplinary Board’s decision-making to allege that my complaint did not meet the Disciplinary Board’s ‘legal interest requirement’ had anything to do with silencing, suppressing or obstructing my legal applications to the court in this matter expoing the Human Farming Kaffir Legal Matrix: the Iron Mountain ‘War is a Racket Military Industrial Complex’s centralisation of power and tyranny , founded on Kaffir Law/Legislation which provides citizens with the Inalienable Eco-Suicide ‘Right to Breed’ and ‘Right to Vote’, but demands that Citizens need a Licence to Own a Gun, a Licence to Drive a Car, a Licence to Practice Law, a television licence, a credit licence, a licence to earn a living, a university exemption licence, a licence to fish, a licence to hunt, a liquor licence, a business licence, a marriage licence, a Marxist/Capitalist Traitor Hunting licence, etc, etc. 

[D] Is the Disciplinary Board’s ‘Legal Interest’ Decision Making an Endorsement of Censoring Exposure of Norway’s endorsement of the Legal Establishment’s use of ‘Whores of the Court’ Psychiatrists for the purposes of White Supremacy cultural supremacy and social control; ignoring the reality their ‘Whores of the Court’ Bullshit the public and the court with “psychobabble with scientific foundations equal to horoscope charts… the science behind it all is nonexistent”?

[3] The Disciplinary Board’s Environmental Principles Decision-Making 

[1] Please provide the Disciplinary Board’s Complaints Environmental Principles decision-making justifications for demanding complainants waste paper, ink and non-renewable transporation resources by printing, signing and mailing complaints to the Disciplinary Board’s; and refusing digitally signed complaints submitted by email, which are much more beneficial to the environment, and are exact environmentally digital copies of print versions? 

[2] Please provide Disciplinary Board’s Complaints Environmental Principles decision-making justifications for printed complaints; when even third world goverments and Bar Associations environmental policies allow courts and organisations to accept email complaints? 

[..] 

Conclusion: 

If an individual files a legal application to a Norwegian Court; does the Disciplinary Board’s support the due process principles; that 

1. such an individual has a right to a prompt and clear written response from the Court informing the applicant their legal application has been accepted or if not, whether further information is required or what is required from the individual for such legal application to be accepted;

2. When any legal applicant is denied such due process written response by the court; it is the honourable duty of all legal parties involved in the matter to uphold the respect for due process and the law, by demanding the Judge provide the applicant with a clear and written response to their application. 

We live on a finite resource planet and not even Bar Associations have the right to believe that resources are infinite and to demand ‘complaints’ procedures that require complainants to waste scarce resources, when alternative procedures exist that are more environmentally resource friendly.

Please see PDF for full detailed request including footnotes.

Respectfully Submitted

Lara Johnstone
Habeus Mentem: Right 2 Legal Sanity
Norway v. Breivik :: Uncensored
http://norway-v-breivik.blogspot.com/ 
0 Comments

Your comment will be posted after it is approved.


Leave a Reply.

    RH Data Archive:

    Radical Honoursty Eco-Feminist legal applications and complaints submitted to Norwegian and European Authorities in the Norway v. Breivik trial.

    Archives

    April 2016
    November 2015
    April 2014
    August 2013
    July 2013
    May 2013
    April 2013
    March 2013
    January 2013
    December 2012
    November 2012
    October 2012
    September 2012
    August 2012
    July 2012
    June 2012
    May 2012
    April 2012
    February 2012
    December 2011
    November 2011

    Categories

    All
    22.07 Defence
    22.07 Families
    22.07 Prosecution
    Aarhus Ccc
    Acquit.v.Execute
    Adv: Bar Association
    Adv: Disciplinary Board
    Adv: Disciplinary Comm
    APC: AU Press Council
    CA: Idle No More
    CA: Sec Intel Svc
    Crt: Administration
    Crt: ECHR
    Crt: EU Crt Hum Rights
    Crt: ICC: Int. Criminal Court
    Crt: Oslo District
    Crt: Rev. Breivik Judgement
    Crt: Supreme Court
    Crt: Supv Comm 4 Judges
    Crt: US C.A.A.F.
    Ecology Of Peace
    Eco: Pentti Linkola
    Eco: Wild Law Nature Rights
    ECRE: ELENA
    ECRE: NOAS
    ECRE: NO Refugee Cnl
    Env Appeals Board
    EU Cncl. Legal Medicine
    EU: MP: Mem. Parl.
    Euprol Network
    FCC: Fed Comm Comm
    FFI: NO Def. Research
    Indonesia Press Council
    Int. Legal Medicine
    M: Aargauer Zeitung
    M: ABC News
    M: Adresseavisen
    M: AFP
    M: Aftenbladet
    M: Aftenposten
    M: Agderposten
    M: Aisa Nordland
    M: Al Arabija
    M: Al Jazeera
    M: Allbritton Comm Co
    M: AMTA
    M: AP: Assoc Press
    M: Arbeidsliv I Norden
    M: A Soc News Ed
    M: Ass Alt Newsweeklies
    M: Atlantic Media Co
    M: BBC
    M: Bergensavisen
    M: Bergens Tidende
    M: Bloomberg
    M: Buddstikka
    M: Cable News Network
    M: Calgary Herald
    M: Chicago Sun Times
    M: Christian Sci. Monitor
    M: Copenhagen Post
    M: Dagbladet
    M: Dagen
    M: Dag Of Tid
    M: Dagsavisen
    M: Dawat Media
    M: Democracy Now
    M: Demokraten
    M: Dev Today
    M: Die Welt
    M: Dig Media Law Proj
    M: Document.NO
    M: Dow Jones & Co
    M: Drammens Tidende
    M: Edmonton Journal
    M: EW Scripps Co
    M: Finnmarken
    M: First Amendment Coal
    M: Fjordbladet
    M: Fjordenes Tidende
    M: Fjordingen
    M: Fjuken
    M: Foreign Policy
    M: Forsiden
    M: Fox News
    M: FrederikstadBlad
    M: Fremover
    M: Friheten
    M: FT Deutschland
    M: Gazeta Wyborcza
    M: Globe And Mail
    M: Glomdalen
    M: Guardian
    M: Ha Halden
    M: Hallingdolen
    M: Hamar Arbeiderblad
    M: Hamar Dagblad
    M: H Avis
    M: Himalayan Times
    M: Honest Thinking
    M: Icenews
    M: Idag
    M: Indre Akershus
    M: Inst Journalism
    M: Irish Times
    M: Itar-Tass
    M: Jaerbladet
    M: Jaerlsberg Avis
    M: Jakarta Post
    M: JB Ecologico
    M: Journalisten
    M: Journalistlag
    M: Klassekampen
    M: Kvinnheringen
    M: Laagendalsposten
    M: Levangeravisa
    M: Lokal Radio
    M: Medietylsynet
    M: Mena
    M: Military Rep Ed
    M: Morgenbladet
    M: Moss Avis
    M: National Post
    M: National Press Club
    M: Nat Press Photo Ass
    M: NE 1st Amend Coal
    M: Nettavisen
    M: News Assoc Of A
    M: News In English
    M: New Statesman
    M: New York Times
    M: Nordlys
    M: NRK
    M: NY Daily News
    M: Nye Troms
    M: Ny Tid
    M: Oppland Arbeiderblad
    M: Ostlandestblad
    M: Ostlandsposten
    M: Ostlendingen
    M: Politico LLC
    M: Politika
    M: Polska The Times
    M: Radio 102
    M: Radio Dager
    M: Radio France
    M: Radio Nac De Espana
    M: Radio Nyhetene
    M: Rana Blad
    M: Reason Mag.
    M: Redaktorforening
    M: Reuters
    M: Ringblad
    M: Ringsaker Blad
    M: Rogaland Avis
    M: Romerikesblad
    M: Romsdalsblad
    M: RTV 21
    M: RUV-Islands Radio
    M: Salt Lake Tribune
    M: San Bernadino Sun
    M: Sandefjordsblad
    M: San Francisco Chronicle
    M: SarpsborgA
    M: Sky News AU
    M: Soc Prof Journos
    M: SognAvis
    M: Strandbuen
    M: Sunnmorposten
    M: Svenska Dagbladet
    M: Sveriges Radio
    M: Sydney Morning Herald
    M: The Age
    M: The Daily Star
    M: The Guardian
    M: The Local
    M: The Nation
    M: The News PK
    M: Tidenskrav
    M: Tonsbergblad
    M: Tromsefolkeblad
    M: Tromso
    M: Tronderavisa
    M: TSF Radio Noticias
    M: TV2
    M: TV Azteca
    Muslim Soc Trondheim
    M: Varden
    M: Varingen
    M: Vartland
    M: VG
    M: Washington Post
    M: Wikileaks
    M: Xinhua
    M: Zweites DE Fernsehen
    NFPA: NO For Press Assoc
    NO: Intel Service
    NO: King Harald
    NO: Min Culture
    NO: Min Defence
    NO: Min Environment
    NO: Min For Affairs
    NO: Min Justice
    NO: PM Press Office
    NO: PM Stoltenberg
    NTI: Nuclear Threat Init
    NUPI: NO Inst. Int. Affairs
    Parl. Ombudsman
    PCC: Press Comp Comm
    PFU: Press Comp Comm
    Police: Interpol
    Police: Kripos
    PP: AP: Arbeiderpartiet
    PP: AP - AUF
    PP: FRP: Progress Party
    PP: Green Party
    PP: Hoyre
    PP: KRF: Kystpartiet
    PP: KSP
    PP: Pensioner Party
    PP: Rodt: Red Alliance
    PP: Senterpartiet
    PP: SV: Socialist Left
    PP: Venstre
    Psych Association
    UK: Queen Elisabeth II
    Univ Of Oslo
    Un Spec Rap Indig Rights
    Us Joint Chiefs Of Staffe78126b497

    RSS Feed



    Website Hit Counter
    Get a FREE Domain
Powered by
✕