Posted by: transparencynz | June 12, 2017

Is Transparency New Zealand supporting the perception or being serious about corruption .

Recently I applied to join Transparency International  ( again)  the new Zealand branch of Transparency International  appears to be at odds with the rest of the movement and I have again been rejected .


I found the declaration after  visiting  the  Unmask the corrupt  pages by   Transparency international   .

It would appear that internationally we  are exposing corruption but Transparency International New Zealand  feels uncomfortable  even with acknowledging that there  is such a thing as corruption in New Zealand.

The events of last week  have driven it home to me just how corrupt we are and how  unseen cowards can pull strings in the background to  ensure that whistle blowers are dealt to .

A small Probono job  in 2006  saw my life change  and 11 years later I am still suffering the fall out, that is because I stumbled on corruption which is being actively concealed by the National   government and the last Labour government .

The man involved is a labour man  an animal welfare lawyer who  wrote legislation for his own business plan, advised on it  as independent adviser to the select committee  and made what I know  to be , a fraudulent application to  the  crown  for law enforcement for a fictional organisation which in reality was just him.

He ran his  “ approved organisation “ from Waitakere city council  premises where he was manager . He  used the staff, infrastructure  and vehicles  to  run his operation and re branded the building  to give it the same appearance as the  fictional “ organisation” which had the extensive law enforcement powers of search seizure and prosecution.

The logo top right was that of his  fictional organisation  the buildings are the dog Pound at the then Waitakere city council  where  he was the manager.

When I asked questions of  council  and MAF I was sued by him for defamation    , I was denied the statutory defence of truth and honest opinion for stating that the  trust AWINZ could not have made an application in 1999 as it did not exist at that time and was only created in 2006 to  effect a cover up to conceal this in court .

IN  2007  he  wrote to MAF expressing  his intention to bankrupt me

He  had about a  dozen attempts at bankruptcy  and even put my company into liquidation using a  false affidavit .  The  liquidation was reversed ( by court order )  and I fought off bankruptcy. there were no concerns about my  health and  well being   I was  severely depressed  dam near suicidal and the attacks  kept coming .  But as they say what doesn’t kill you makes you stronger  so  it woudl appear that this sick old man has come back for a second attack on me because he is so fearful that he will be found out .

Apparently standing up for your rights  is  being called  litigious .  But guess that sounds better than  saying  I  fought for  .. justice . which is a silly fight as I do not believe there is any in NZ.

Questioning  the lack of existence of AWINZ has devastated my life and torn my family apart. I moved to Napier thinking it was all   over  and hoped  that one day   the barrister would  be found out.

Next thing my private investigators licence cames up for its 5yr renewal and is declined because the “authority”   thinks that the opinion of a police woman,  who spoke to me on the phone  in 2012, matters   and calls me a conspiracy theorist on that basis.

This is such an important issue that  when I appeal the declinature of my  Private investigators licence it makes headlines in the news.

For my appeal I do some research , I  see what  penalty lawyers ( Officers of  the court ) get for committing real offences  as opposed to being judged on their perceived opinion .  I find an article on the lawyers  news site    see here

I read it and  from the information provided  and my knowledge identify the lawyer

At last  I saw him for what I know him to be  and in a blog , exercising my right  to freedom of expression and right to hold an opinion. I expressed my opinion   as to the identity of this person.

I  am aware that suppression in the lawyers and conveyancers act is given by not releasing his name , hence he was called mr M  I was not part of the process and did not know that  he had been before the tribunal  I just  knew of the circumstances outlined in the  news item, in fact I had known  since 2006 that he was attempting to get his hands on  the funds of  this dear old lady  and  even had correspondence relating to this.

Two weeks  after my publication  I was charged  , No one has been able to  provide me with a  “ order “  for suppression and the police charge is ambiguous using  wording for one alleged offence and the statutory  basis of another .

I was provided with an almost totally  redacted document    when the full version is publicly available on line .

I did  note  that Fear appears to be plaguing  Mr M states  at 26 the practitioner has in the past been pursued by a litigious and irrational person who might be expected to re-engage in a campaign against the practitioner should the present matters come to that person’s attention. And then puts the boot in  stating “[27] The litigation pursued by this person has been the subject of adverse judicial comment at all levels.”( yes prompted by his lawyers  who never checked the facts  and were good at  attacking  character but lousy at identifying facts ) see Is the AWINZ Charity complicit in fraud on the courts ?

So again I am made out to be this   less than desirable person  and  despite the fact that this lawyer has now committed  what appears to be a criminal act he gets his identity  withheld  and Is not charged  with  his serious offences  .

I go  to court the press is there  and  next day my  name age and  the fact that I have been charged  appears in the local paper, nationally on line and  nationally on the radio .  Do you spot the  irony here  I do  . I thought you were innocent until proved guilty  .

If the prosecution guide lines had been followed for me then  I would not have been charged . But  it is  so very important to charge me and   publicly execute me before The trial , while Mr M    comes out  unidentifiable and   unscathed.

I have to wonder     Why am I so important  and why   do the various ministers that I have written to over the years  not  care  about the   use of public office for private gain  by the man who got law enforcement powers for a fictional  organisation.

Ministers have the  ability to   investigate  ,  I have written to Amy Adams   recently and over the years have written to half of cabinet. For some examples see  2014 Open letter to Mr Key – will you condone corruption?   2011Inability to question corruption in NZ – open letter to John Key

Do the ministers not understand  what corruption is   or are they condoning it

Corruption destroys lives   it has to be an election issue

You need only look at the  news item   regarding the censured lawyer and you will see that the  Lawyers tribunal is effectively condoning   theft by a person in a special relationship  ( theft by failing to account )  they should have sent this matter to the police for criminal prosecution  .   If they can condone serious offences such as that  why I am  being persecuted for  exercising my rights under the bill of  rights.

If this is not “ evidence”  of a corrupt society  what is  ?  what are our standards ? Warped  I would  say .

Protect the lawyers   crucify whistle blowers  only means one thing.. there is a lot more corruption than they like to pretend.

Looking forward to having an investigation into AWINZ   11 years is long enough   it is not going to go away


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.