Archive for August 2017
Transparency International NZ and whistleblowers
I received a reply from TINZ director David McNeill in response to my post Open letter to David McNeill Director Transparency International New Zealand
the email can be found here response from TINZ director David McNeill
In the interest of transparency I publish my response
From: Grace Haden [mailto:grace@verisure.co.nz]
Sent: Wednesday, 9 August 2017 11:37 a.m.
To: ‘David McNeill’ <dm@ti.org.nz>
Subject: RE: open letter to David Mc Neil
Thank you for your response David
I am sorry that you don’t agree with the methods I use to pursue my case but after 11 years I think I have tried everything to bring this matter to the attention of the authorities and misters .
Should bringing corruption to the attention of the government be this hard ?
If it is ignored what does it say about our values?
The only reason I have kept on with it is because it has cost me so much it cost me my marriage and my family not to mention the obscene sum of money which was taken t from me through the subsequent fraud on the court where Wyn Hoadley Barrister, Graeme courts JP and Tom Didovich the conflicted former manager Waitakere city council dog control along with Wells set up a similarly named trust and passed themselves off as the law enforcement authority .. a total legal nonsense but the names were the same so it was OK
I acted in good faith on a matter of public interest which I raised with the purest of intentions after a council employee had come to me .
In becoming a vocal whistle-blower I also became a go to person for those with issues of their own . In the 11 years at the coal face of corruption I have found why corruption is so prevalent in New Zealand and I thought that this information would be of use to TINZ.
How can you work on the issues of integrity , change of policy and political attitude if you yourselves remain uninformed of what is occurring and shun whistle-blowers.
You ask “If Neil Wells is so horribly corrupt, who is he exploiting now?” well the short answer is that he died last week but the legacy of what he set in action lives on.
He has proved that in New Zealand
-
writing legislation for your own business plan is condoned.
-
you can be an independent adviser to the select committee on matters in which you have a personal financial interest.
-
you can make a fraudulent application for Law enforcement powers and influence the decision makers
-
Those investigating an application for statutory powers do not check if the organisation exists or any alleged fact
-
Obtain your own legal opinion for government and have input into it
-
You can draft your own documents for the government
-
You can contract to councils and government department using a fictional name MOU Waitakere MOU MAF
-
That he can influence the government department to such an extent that the Whistle-blower is discredited and no one verifies that a fraud has occurred or not .
Simply put he has proved that if you make it easy for the public servant , have their trust and liaise with them frequently and meet with minister then you can get them to accept anything and they won’t check. Rule number one never verify . Being a barrister helps after all a man of the law knows and would never be corrupt .
Ironically today there is an article in the newspaper “SPCA confiscates man’s dog based on ‘hearsay’, he claims “ this is very relevant currently the RNZSPCA is undertaking a very dodgy “ amalgamation “ and will be focusing on the inspectorate which will see more personal properties raided by persons who are privately employed. But that is not for now
You say “We see the global trend towards tip-offs and leaks being more effective than formal whistleblowing” Please tell me the difference . If I am screaming corruption now it’s probably because after 11 years of hitting my head against a wall and having my reputation maligned it’s the only thing left to do .
You state “Transparency International NZ “approaches corruption in a different way, attempting to give the whole system more tools & techniques for exposing and preventing corruption. ‘ How can you prevent corruption when you don’t know what the symptoms are ?
Cancer left untreated will kill you corruption left untreated will kill our country and indeed will have killed many in its path . I know this as at one stage I was suicidal .
My criticism of TINZ has been that you prefer not to know about corruption and appear hell bent on portraying New Zealand as the least corrupt to enhance business interest. When I heard Jose Ugaz speak I was heartened I would never have thought that you belong to the same organisation .
You have no idea how difficult it is to see transparency International run programmes such as WHISTLEBLOWING FOR CHANGE, etc yet be shunned by your local branch .
ON https://www.transparency.org/topic/detail/whistleblowing/ the following appears
This opens up onto https://www.transparency.org/whatwedo/activity/our_work_on_whistleblowing
“ Through our Advocacy and Legal Advice Centres, located in nearly 50 countries, we advise whistleblowers in making their disclosures and work to make sure that their disclosures are duly addressed by appropriate authorities.”
The international body recognises the importance of Whistle-blowers
“ There is growing awareness of the important role whistleblowing plays in stopping corruption. “
yet TINZ say this approach is wrong.”
“We see the global trend towards tip-offs and leaks being more effective than formal whistleblowing.”
I did not wake up one day and decide to become a whistle-blower.
I was a mother had a family of three teenagers thought I was happily married , I helped a lady at Waitakere city council and my whole life changed . this should not happen to any one !
I found something that was very wrong and raised questions with MAF and Waitakere city council which I thought were the appropriate bodies
Rather than checking out my claims they colluded with the perpetrator who then took me to court for defamation, deceived the court and got a judgement against me by denying me the statutory right of defence. That judgement has been waved about ever since to discredit me.
My marriage was simultaneously attacked and my funds were frozen I could not fight back .Lawyers cost money . when My matrimonial property was settles I got a lawyer he happened to be Evgeny orlov who fleeced me and was himself embroiled in matters relating to the panama papers . He had no credibility with the court and was at one stage struck off , just my hard luck that he was my lawyer .
In 2007 Mr Wells wrote to MAF that he intended to bankrupt me . over the years he advised them as to what to and was kept in the loop with every OIA I made and allowed to make comment . see here for another example
The down side of publishing on transparency NZ has been that it allowed Wells and Hoadley to engage a Private investigator who then assisted in muddying the waters. The intention was to deny me my PI licence . five years later they have succeeded putting me out of work at age 64 from a career which is an extension of my police career which commenced when I was 21
I was discredited even to my own children . what I have been fighting for is to get my reputation back
While Neil Wells was portrayed to be good I was made out to be a sinister person
Just prior to his death I found a news item on the law society news Censured lawyer gets name suppression , I recognised the events and from this have speculated that Mr Wells was actually a corrupt barrister . I was charged with alleged breach of a suppression order , the police didn’t need evidence to charge me , it took them 6 weeks to find something that could at a stretch be an order but in reality is vague .
Our biggest issue with corruption in New Zealand is that we thrive on perception , make someone out to be bad and they are bad forever and no one will ever look at the evidence .
Evidence is what Jose Ugaz felt is essential in proving corruption but evidence plays no part in our courts.
Barristers such as Neil Wells and their legal representatives have the ability to influence the court without any evidence this is reflected in a speech made in 2014 by : Justice Helen Winkelmann – Chief High Court Judge of New Zealand (Helen Winkelmann’s 2014 Address).
“There is also another aspect to the adversarial model which depends upon legal representation. It is the reliance that judges place upon counsel to never knowingly mislead the court in matters of fact or law. This duty of counsel enables the system to function efficiently and maintains its integrity. It frees the Judge from having to conduct his or her own inquiries to independently check the veracity of what they are told by counsel. For counsel this duty flows from the fact that counsel are officers of the court. It is also a manifestation of the obligation on all lawyers to uphold the rule of law, an obligation now given statutory recognition in the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006”
David the process of holding lawyers accountable to the rule of law is long and again the lawyers word is preferred over the complainant.
I have lost my PI licence , the matter is still under review by the LCRO, I was accused of harassing a lawyer for telling him that he had an obligation to the rule of law and could not use his office for fraud.
Such is New Zealand today have not even touched on to another raft of issues.
I am sure that we could work well together we would both like to see corruption contained and by providing policies that work much grief can be avoided.
I wonder if the Joanne Harrison matter could have been prevented if the lessons which could have been learned from AWINZ had been implemented.
No one should have to go through what I have had to endure there is only one way forward and that is by providing transparency .
I would like to join TI NZ we can learn from each other .
Regards
Grace Haden
Phone (09) 520 1815
mobile 027 286 8239
visit us at www.transparency.net.nz
Open letter to David McNeill Director Transparency International New Zealand
I am delighted to see your latest news release in my in box Download Media Release Document
I have been a persecuted whistleblower for the past 11 years . I was heartened by the presentation given by the Transparency international president and I certainly hope that Transparency International New Zealand accepts the importance of whistleblowers .
I was not an employee of the organisation I blew the whistle on but in My line of work as a Private Investigator I discovered that our government had given coercive law enforcement powers to a fictional organisation . I thought it would be simple to bring it to their attention and was not prepared for the onslaught that followed .
For the past 11 years , my family and myself have paid a very high price , I even tried to join transparency International but was rejected by your organisation because ” As noted in previous applications, the TINZ Objectives, Guiding Principles and Rules of TINZ are not compatible with your actions and objectives. We do not undertake investigations on single cases of corruption or expose individual cases”
In desperation I setup my own organisation which now has a massive following I called it transparency New Zealand LTD
The matter which I blew the whistle on was not rocket science. Its basic fraud using a fictional identity
While the country is jumping up and down about an address in Mt Eden used for election purposes and some extra flat mates we are rather ignoring this massive public fraud , how can we make fish of one and fowl of the other.
The origins are with labour and it continued under national . Kennedy Graham once met me and we talked about y issue at length .. he did nothing yet he is miffed with the relatively minor indiscretions of his leader .
The fact that this Fraud has gone on for so long without any one looking at it shows that the fraud situation in NZ is far worse than any one can imagine. This case proves how in reality those in power condone fraud .
I hope that transparency International looks at the issues that whistleblowers face , We don’t expect you to do anything more for us than to look at our cases and see how they impact on the reality of the integrity of the public service.
A public service that ignores and thereby conceals corruption has no integrity
Neil Edward Wells had close ties to MAF ( now MPI ) he met with them regularly and as a member of one of the advisory boards saw an opportunity to write the legislation to update the Animals Protection Act 1960
In writing the bill he saw an opportunity Not only did he write the bill to update legislation he also used it to facilitate his own business plan see here the document drawn up in 1996 clearly shows his intention to make money from this.
He goes on to write the no 1 bill for the new legislation without declaring his conflict of interest.
A second bill is introduced by National .
Both bills go before the select committee and again without declaring his conflict of interest Neil Wells becomes ” independent” adviser to the select committee .
Simultaneously he was paving the way for his business to line up with the legislation which was being passed . Use of confidential information for private use
He set up courses at UNITEC for training the inspectors for the new legislative requirements, a role he was to take on personally for $$$ .
He spoke of an organisation which would have the same powers as the RNZSPCA and he called this AWINZ ( Animal Welfare institute of New Zealand ) .This organisation existed only in his mind.
When the act passed into law he made a fraudulent application in the name of the animal welfare institute of New Zealand see the application here
AWINZ did not exist in any manner or form, there were no trustees , there was no trust deed yet he called himself a trustee and made out through the application that AWINZ existed.
In 2006 I did a Pro bono job for an employee at Waitakere city council , Lyn Macdonald ( the bird lady ) questioned why the buildings and vehicles had been rebranded see here and why she had to ” volunteer” her council paid time to AWINZ and prioritise animal welfare over her council duty;-dog control
Neither MAF nor Waitakere city council had a copy of the alleged trust deed and it was only then that Neil Wells produced one and I suspect that the ink was still drying . He gave me a copy see here and sent a different copy to Maf see here . Note that both are different to the one attached to the application. To me this proves that the man had absolutely no hesitation in forging documents .
I have truckloads of documents and have taken this matter to the Ombudsman, ministers court and have found that I have been under attack because of it.
I have simplified the whole matter and ordinary people get it they understand but those in MPI and in so called positions of accountability don’t look at the facts they look at the reputation of the persons, some I fear are acting in self interest as some where at a previous time they had a finger in the pie and covering up also saves their own necks .
I have been at the receiving end of an 11 years smear campaign while Neil Wells promoted himself as being holier than though . That was until he was proved to be corrupt but he then had the advantage of having his name suppressed.
The fraud in a nutshell
Over the years I have learned to simplify it , I also have more documents available now than I had in the early years but ordinary people get it so why do the ombudsmen lawyers etc not understand that
- The application is fraudulent and resulted in a fictional organisation getting law enforcement powers.
- The applicant AWINZ did not exist … no trust deed had been signed , no persons had ever met to approve this trust deed or had agreed to be trustees to this deed
- The persons who were allegedly trustees had never met never passed a resolution never consented to being a law enforcement authority , never took part in the operations or decision making or application for “ awinz “ to become an approved organisation .
- Neil Wells concocted a trust in 2006 and backdated the trust deeds and signed them claiming that they had gone missing. But the date was out by three months so how could a trust which allegedly formed 1.3.2000 make an application 22.11.1999. as can be seen the deeds are different
- Then he supplied a copy of the deed to Maf except he had to change the details of the deed again and another deed was concocted and sent to them.
With regards to the Waitakere city council
- He made an application for the position of dog and stock control manager see here and effectively contracted to himself for the services of AWINZ See the document MOU Waitakere where Wells signs this On behalf of the fictional Animal welfare institute of New Zealand with Tom Didovich the person whose job he was to take over .
Note: that there is no mention of the conflict of interest in the application for the job , he treats AWINZ as though it is a legal person separate from himself when in reality he is the only person associated with AWINZ and this is in reality a trading name for himself.
- He rebrands the building the Waitakere city council dog control building to appear to be his fictional organisation
- there is of course much more but his will do this relates to the public and public wrong doing
this could have been easily dealt with .
In the first place MAF did not check they assumed and gave law enforcement powers to a fictional organisation .
secondly like the Joanne Harrison matter Maf relied on Neil wells to provide them with information and directions to ward me off .. I have the emails to prove it
Our internal systems for dealing with this type of offence do not exist and every one was quite happy to stand by while I was beaten up from all angles.
No one knew how to investigate the simple questions which should have been asked are
- Did AWINZ exist when it made the application … NO
- What structure was AWINZ.. it was a nothing it was an unsigned deed at best a trading name for person or persons unknown
- Who were the trustees .. there were none there was no trust therefore no trustees.
- But we now have a trust deed dates 1.3.200 .. but that is three months after the application how can a trust make an application before it is formed
- When did that deed first come to light.. 2006
- Were any of the alleged trustees apart from wells involved in the running of the approved organisation.. no
- Did Maf have consent from any one else acting on behalf of AWINZ apart from Neil Wells.. no
- Should MAF have ensured that AWINZ existed legally ..
yes there was a Statutory need for accountability how can there be accountability if the organisation does not exist
122Criteria
(1)The Minister must, before declaring an organisation to be an approved organisation for the purposes of this Act, be satisfied, by the production to the Minister of suitable evidence, that—
(a)one of the purposes or roles of the organisation concerns the welfare of animals or a particular species of animal; and
(b)the accountability arrangements, financial arrangements, and management of the organisation are such that, having regard to the interests of the public, the organisation is suitable to be declared to be an approved organisation;
- How could they do this .. they had no idea about identities even the lawyers did not check .. they took Wells word as a barrister for it
- was the trust deed attached to the application in 1999 and the one provided to Maf in 2006 the same.. no therefore consideration of the unsigned deed by Maf was irrelevant.
- Why did Maf not insist on a deed ..Because Neil Wells misled them and they did not check
- Why were the other alleged trustees not involved ..MAF should have contacted these persons and ensured that they were actively involved
- Why were legal names avoided ? If legal names had been used we would all have known who we were dealing with
With respect to Waitakere city council
- Did tom Didovich have the ability to allow a third party to use his staff for animal welfare purposes … no
- Didovich signed a MOU should this have been brought to the councils attention..Yes
- Wells applied for Didovich’s Job should he have declared the Mou which he had signed .. yes
- Did Neil Wells work in a situation of gross conflict of interest .. YES!!!!!!
- Wells rebranded the building was the logo animal welfare on the building confusingly similar to the logo of the fictional trust ? definitely
Fraud and corruption Is New Zealand up the creek without a paddle?
When it comes to back ground screening I tell people that the corrupt usually don’t do things by half measures. what is the point of inflating your Cv just a bit when you can be dynamic and give yourself a degree which will take you to the top .
And so it is with perception ratings. If we acknowledge that there is fraud and corruption then the perception of being fraud and corruption free is destroyed .
“Our public-sector agencies have focused successfully on developing processes that prevent corruption and these contribute to New Zealand’s stand-out reputation for a trusted public sector” says Transparency International New Zealand (TINZ) Chair, Suzanne Snively. “New Zealand trades on its low corruption reputation and we are increasingly finding how to transfer these behaviours from our public to our private sector to leverage off this enviable reputation for integrity.”
It is ironic however that Transparency International New Zealand prepares the integrity report with funding from theses very sectors .partners / sponsors
The reality was seen this week when the police acknowledged that
White collar crime ‘rampant’ as nearly 900 fraud complaints go uninvestigated
It appears that the investigation into Joanne Harrison has lifted the lid on corruption in New Zealand. within a few days we got interesting head lines
Fuji Xerox NZ voluntarily suspends competing for government contracts
FujiXerox NZ corruption scandal grows in spite of New Zealand’s silence
Binnie: Bain case tarnished NZ’s reputation
Immigration NZ staff investigated for corruption and fraud after visas issued to family, friends
New Zealand: thousands of bottles of allegedly fraudulent wine exported
Patrick Gower: Metiria Turei’s political fraud is ripping off the New Zealand public
The hypocrisy of NZ’s approach to fraud
“A number of victims of these frauds suffer significant loss. Some of these people would have lost a significant portion of their retirement savings, a lot of these files aren’t minor files.”
And there is another side to it too Victims and whistleblowers are attacked in an effort to ensure that the fraud goes undetected. In my experience it appears that the fraudsters get far more support from the police than the person discovering/ reporting/ victim the crime does. I often wonder how lack of action on fraud impacts on our overly high suicide ratings.
These are true stories I know they are true because they happened to me , I know suicide is a factor because there were times when it appealed to me thanks to neil Wells Wyn Hoadley , graeme Coutts and tom Didovich
I am ex police and found myself working as a private investigator right in the line of fire
Lulled into the false sense of security that NZ has no tolerance for corruption I raised the fraudulent application of AWINZ to be a law enforcement authority with MPI and Waitakere city council . Neil Edward Wells a barrister who is now known to have been corrupt , had written legislation for his own business plan made an application for law enforcement powers for a fictional organisation he then had the council buildings re branded with the name of his fictional organisation and worked in a situation of severe conflict of interest using council resources infrastructure and staff to operate his own business.
11 years later and this still has not been independently investigated by the authorities and in a move akin to Joanne Harrison neil edward Wells was able influence the staff at MPI so that the matter was not investigated. he took me to court for defamation for claiming that the trust was a sham , I was denied a defence of truth and honest opinion , my family was torn apart and now 11 years later I have been taken to court by the police for speculating that Neil Wells was the lawyer in a law society news publication .
Not long after I had raised this issue I assisted a lawyer in locating the director and Liquidator of Fresh prepared Limited
The liquidator and director were both fictional , they had been created by a Hawaiian business man named Terry Hay . I found my self being harassed by him when he posted three advertisements in the mandarin time to ensure that half the chinese population descended up on our house hold to buy a super cheap car, get a great accommodation deal, get a fabulous job .
Simultaneously I had reported fresh prepared to MAF at the time as it was a border control facility and they had now claimed to be a different company . I found myself under investigation by Maf and warned for passing myself off as a Maf officer. I was to learn that this was handy work of Neil Wells.
Hay was charged by the National enforcement unit and took of to Honolulu he remained there for several years and the 22 charges were dropped
Next up was fraudster Jonathon Mann and his partner Dr Gerald Waters , Jonathon Mann seeks to silence victims
His victims had to set up a blog site to deal with him,but it appears that fraudsters don’t like having potential victims warned
I came under attack by Gerald Waters but eventually he was charged with companies act offences
Then I was approached by a couple , the husband had had a former brief relationship with a Parisa Hamedi . Hamedi had gone to Steven ZINDEL and engaged him on legal aid , after a dozen or so bonks Hamedi thought she was entitled to the mans house . I conducted the investigation and found that she maintained her housing corp home in Nelson where she and her children lived with her former husband.
I committed a terrible crime by suggesting to ZINDEL that he should do some home work on the de facto status as my investigations had proved that they were a long way off the threshold. He came back and suggested that if $50,000 compensation was paid then it would all go away . This wonderful hard working couple spent some 6 years fighting this through court and in the end the verdict was.. wait for it.. there was no de facto relationship . Yet Zindel took me to the Private security licencing authority because i told him to check his facts as he may otherwise be using his office for fraud.
Then there is the on going saga of Muse on allen, where a young immigrant invested money in a restaurant o see it all taken away by Samuel North who then claimed to be the youngest chef to own his own restaurant. this has gone through courts for many years and simply proves that the civil jurisdiction cannot cope with fraud , on top of being ripped off the victim then gets a hiding to nowhere and loses even more funds.
Lawyer David Abricossow was acting for the company and when I told him that he had an obligation to the rule of law and could not use his practice to facilitate fraud he took me to court for harassment and made false claims that I had defamed him, I was beautifully set up and lost my Pi licence because this lawyer was at the start of his career and needed protection .
From what I can see is the Fraud is left un addressed as it is a fabulous meal ticket for lawyers. Brookfields Lawyers certainly clipped the ticket on the AWINZ matter .
If you are defrauded or if you discover fraud the best thing you can do is close your eyes and walk away. make that RUN the courts appear to support fraudsters evidence has no place the ones with the biggest lawyers win and when you have been scalped and the other side has the money you don’t have much of a chance at all .
You have no rights there is no justice and in the civil jurisdiction there is actually not right to a fair trial .
But it all helps in the concealment of fraud , if we do not acknowledge that fraud exists then there is no fraud.
You cant find something that you are not looking for .. see no fraud problem in New Zealand.
Trading in the grey BS names , trading names and fraud condoned
In 2006 I unwittingly became a whistleblower on serious corruption . I discovered that the Animal welfare institute of New Zealand (AWINZ) did not exist in any manner or form . Neil Wells a barrister who is now known to be corrupt wrote the legislation for the animal welfare act to facilitate his own business plan, He made a totally fraudulent application claiming that the application was being made by a trust.
for 11 years the Government ( both National and Labour ) have failed to address she issue of fake identities in trusts . I have long claimed that identity fraud in companies and trusts is the greatest corruption we face in NZ today.
So while all eyes are on Metiria for minor sins in the past the large ones are still going on , this week we learned that life line lost the contract for suicide prevention and that it has gone to Le Va where Bills wife Mary happens to be one of the so called board members of this fictional organisation
Bill English’s wife and her association with the 1,000,000 grant. I’m not saying that there is anything up with what she has done but the “trusts ” she is involved with certainly appears odd.
Le va is a creature of fiction the terms and conditions page states
“These terms apply to the website and social media of www.leva.co.nz which is owned by xxx.“
but in a page dedicated to a board there is just one small clue to be found ” Pacific Inc, trading as Le Va, is an organisation with charitable status governed by a board of trustees ” it just shows how little people know about trusts and companies . Companies have directors and trusts have trustees.
the web site le Va.co.nz is registered to Wise group
Wise Group is a group of charities , which does not have any legal status of its own , its neither a legal person nor a natural person but the incorporated charitable trust wise trust board owns a conglomeration of companies .
While le va does appear to have foundations with a legal company why do we have to use a trading name that is so different to the legal name .
Wells signed agreements in the name of this fictional trust with MAF and with the dog control section of waitakere city council. He applied for the position of Manager without declaring his conflict of interest and got the job effectively then becoming both parties to this mou .
In 11 years I have not been able to get any progress on this matter ,I have truck loads of evidence but this matter has been actively covered up by MPI and the former Waitakere city council and Auckland council. The Police and SFO have played a game of hot potato with the case one saying its too serious the other saying it isn’t serious enough.
I have learned that Wells engaged a private investigator to set me up , I have just discovered that Ron Mc Quilter drafted a witness statement which he then had a witness sign and did what he could to ensure that I would lose my PI licence.
Rons Business partner just happens to be bryan Mogridge of the committee for auckland and previously enterprise waitakere , good reason to see me discredited .
the AWINZ matter has highlighted to me the level at which corruption is condoned in New Zealand . We have a tendency to ignore crime at the top of the scale but pounce on the simple straight forward matters.
This is because or enforcement system is economy based. so its about return of $ for investment. I learned much about false trusts, fake identities, abuse of trading names and was actually on to the panama papers long before the journalists exposed the material . I included all this information as evidence in my petition for a commission against corruption
My petition was thrown out by Mike Sabin .. now no one got to hear about his sins… and he most certainly did not own up to them .
I have seen everything from fake companies fake addresses fake liquidators proxy directors fake directors. all of this is possible and apparently condoned.
On page 65 of my evidence you will see that the crown law office memorandum seeking to have the 22 charges withdrawn for a a well connected american business man Terry Hay , former business partner of David Nathan , for charges relating to company fraud.
so why are we being so tough on Metiria Turei for historic deeds of hers.
The awinz matter has been covered up at 40,000 feet , the fact that it has not been investigated 11 years after reporting it shows that this tactic of using fake names is more common than we think .
Just like the Joanne Harrison matter where she concealed her frauds the same occurred in the MPI . I have evidence of OIA’s being run past Neil Wells, he was consulted and kept in the loop of my questions and contacts with the mpi.
there were people in the auditor generals office who told me that they did not want to touch it as they were too close to retirement and were not wishing to place themselves in such a precarious position .
Many years ago in police College I learned that those who stand by and do nothing are as guilty as the perpetrator of an offence . Those who assisted in concealment of an offence were called accessories to the fact or accessories after the fact .
section 71 of our crimes act reads
71 Accessory after the fact
(1)An accessory after the fact to an offence is one who, knowing any person to have been a party to the offence, receives, comforts, or assists that person or tampers with or actively suppresses any evidence against him or her, in order to enable him or her to escape after arrest or to avoid arrest or conviction.
so while some politicians admit to frauds of the past others stand by and let them happen .
Open letter to José Ugaz Chair of transparency International
The state of corruption In New Zealand
Sir
I am the director of Transparency New Zealand Limited . My company actively exposes corruption In New Zealand . It was formed after Transparency International New Zealand refused me membership because it claims that
“the TINZ Objectives, Guiding Principles and Rules of TINZ are not compatible with your actions and objectives. We do not undertake investigations on single cases of corruption or expose individual cases.”
Unfortunately I believe that by looking at corruption in New Zealand we can learn from it and prevent it from growing.
Ignoring corruption is like ignoring cancer, ignore it long enough and it will kill you
I was very impressed with your presentation at Massey University, Palmerston North .
The views you promoted on Behalf of transparency International resonated with me and I felt sad that Transparency International New Zealand does not hold the same values as the international body .
You regarded whistleblowers as essential to uncovering corruption but the local professor quickly added that whistleblowers are regarded as tell tales and then there were some comments by him abut obtaining information unlawfully.
I can assure you that the truck loads of information I have collated have been acquired lawfully and it sets out a major issue which we have in New Zealand and that is the use of trusts.
We use trusts to the extent that we invent trusts and although the invented trust is totally bogus they appear to be able to act like legal persons , no one checks.
In this example a fictional trust obtained an arrest warrant the full document is here
more about this is found in Anne’s book available for download at Annehunt.co.nz
When fictional ” trusts” have a standing in court and can have an order issued to infringe on the rights of a natural person then there is something seriously out of wack
It shoudl be the lawyer’s responsibility to ensure that such action does not find itself in court and he and he alone should be held accountable to the full force of the law.
In another matter A fictional trust obtained law enforcement powers the fraudulent application is here
This application was made by a corrupt Barrister who has advised Government and was heavily involved in drafting the legislation to facilitate this fraud
He had a business plan see here and wrote the legislation and advised on it to facilitate this plan
He and his corrupt lawyer took action against me for defamation for saying that the trust was a sham. I was denied a defence of truth and honest opinion and through the false allegation that a similarly named ” trusts ” created retrospectively ws one and the same he misled the court and effectively the fiction became reality .
I see the courts reliance on the word of lawyers as the single largest contributor to corruption in New Zealand . Things are sanitised and legitimised through the courts by misleading the court .. no evidence is ever required.
Trusts in New Zealand are therefore the no 1 vehicle of choice for fraud and money laundering , if our courts and lawyers don’t check to see if a trust exists then its open slather . In the case of animal welfare Institute of New Zealand (AWINZ) I asked the solicitor general to investigate the trust and the various trusts that have been set up to jump through time and vacuums to give the illusion of reality.
If a trust does not have to have a legal structure which commences and continues in any verifiable form then we are dealing with fiction .
New Zealand is very much a Victorian colony which is coming of age through the use of computers . that is why whistleblowers are silenced here.
You raised a question with regards to John Key and asked why had no one investigated him. The answer is simple you just need to look at what I have suffered and you soon realise that if you even ask one question out of place you will be discredited and your life will be in tatters . Your comment and my research on Key since leaving the meeting has made me realise why no action has ever been taken with regards to AWINZ, for 11 years I have said it is a blue print and sure enough it has been . If a fictional trust can be a law enforcement authority then it can be anything.
In 2014 , Andrew Little presented my petition for a commission against corruption to Parliament , I was the lead petitioner . I was asked to present evidence as to why we needed such a commission and I supplied my evidence it is at this link you will see that I touched on panama, I was taken to court with regards to my discoveries of these panamanian companies and Hungarian alcoholic directors , I was silenced .
I provided evidence of fake liquidators fake directors and showed that the crown solicitor’s dropped 22 charges of fraud of Terry Hay a well connected american for fraud under the companies act
items 56 in that report relate to TINZ role in corruption today
Transparency International New Zealand in my opinion serves only to ensure that New Zealand status as least corrupt is preserved. To do this they actively ignore corruption and pretend that it does not occur.
Transparency International New Zealand gets funding from the key public service agencies to do the integrity reports on the public sector.
Quite personally I think that that is a conflict of interest and corrupt .
The reality is that New Zealand is in my experience rotten to the core we have cheated on our exam cards ( the perception index) and that makes us among the most corrupt of them all .
When simple corruption is covered up at high levels and they have to go as far as to discredit you then you know that the corruption is deeper than any one imagined.
I look forward to a response from you and look forward to being able to work with transparency International to address corruption in New Zealand and not be part of the problem by concealing it.
- items on John Keys trust Panama papers John Doe statement
Of course, those are hardly the only issues that need fixing. Prime Minister John Key of New Zealand has been curiously quiet about his country’s role in enabling the financial fraud Mecca that is the Cook Islands.
7 May 2016 Why was John Key singled out by Panama Papers hacker?
7 May 2016 Panama Papers whistleblower confused – John Key
8 May 2016 Taxing times: The ghosts of wineboxes past
5 october 2016 John Key keeps lid on hidden billions
21 march 2014 John Key dismisses rumours surrounding resignation
READ MORE:
* Panama Papers source breaks silence, denies being a spy
* The Panama Papers New Zealand link revealed
* New measures to combat cybercrime outlined by Government
* Prime Minister John Key’s lawyer asked about foreign trusts
* NZ trusts at the centre of Malta money scandal
* Government now says NZ trust examination likely
* More NZ links to Panama Papers to come
* Q&A: Panama Papers’ fallout has only just begun
Documents obtained by the Australian Financial Review show:
- Juan Armando Hinojosa Cantu, who built his fortune from billions of dollars in Mexican government contracts, was investigated for lavish housing deals with Mexican political figures.
- On July 1 last year, Cantu’s Miami lawyer said his client had “circa $US100 million” to put into three New Zealand trusts.
- Maltese investors who had been turned away from nine banks in the Caribbean, Miami and Panama eventually found a home for their money in New Zealand trusts.
- Demand for New Zealand trusts went into overdrive late last year with Mossack Fonseca staff in Panama urging New Zealand staff to “chase the money”.