ALL RISE FOR JUDGE THAWLEY:
Perverting Justice One Unfiled Dismissal at a Time!
A whistleblower’s battle with Australia’s Federal Court exposes a bizarre saga of procedural absurdity — a case “dismissed” before it was even filed — raising alarming questions about transparency, judicial conduct, and the survival of justice.
True News reporting by Adam Greenwood (
@NauseamAdz)
For Colin George Dunstan, a Canberra whistleblower and former public servant, the quest for justice has become a nightmarishly Kafkaesque journey through Australia’s legal system. In a twist that defies common sense, Dunstan watched as the Federal Court of Australia effectively dismissed one of his court filings before it was even filed. It sounds impossible — how can a court throw out a document that hasn’t officially been lodged? — but that’s exactly what happened. This hard-to-believe episode highlights a pattern of institutional failure, opaque procedure, and heavy-handed judicial conduct that’s left a self-represented whistleblower feeling trapped in a legal Twilight Zone.
A “Psychic” Judgment and a System Turning Farce Into Policy
The saga came to a head in July 2025, during one of Dunstan’s ongoing legal battles with government authorities. Dunstan — who was acting without a lawyer — attempted to file an Amended Statement of Claim in an effort to adjust his case. Under the Federal Court’s own rules, he was entitled to amend his claim once without special permission (or “leave”) as long as it was before the pleadings of the case had closed. In other words, by the book, the registry should have accepted his amended claim when he submitted it. But that’s not what happened. Instead, on 16 July 2025, a court registry official emailed Dunstan saying it was “not possible to determine” if his amended claim could be filed at that time, and that the question of accepting it “would be addressed” at a court hearing the following day.
Subscribe –
truenewsweekly.com/subscribe…
This puzzling email left Dunstan in limbo. Essentially, the court’s administrative staff put his new claim on hold, deferring the decision to a judge. Behind the scenes, it appears an instruction was given on 16 July 2025 “to the Registry not to accept” Dunstan’s Amended Statement of Claim. Such an instruction is highly unusual — in fact, the Federal Court Act explicitly states a filing Registrar “is not subject to direction or control” by others in the exercise of their duties. Yet someone with authority seemingly told the registry to stand down, effectively sidelining Dunstan’s filing. Dunstan himself was initially unaware of this legal impropriety. Only later did he discover that this quiet intervention may have violated the law meant to preserve the independence of court officials. It was a procedural roadblock straight out of Kafka: the rules said he could file, but the system said he could not — and no one properly explained why.
Full report –
tinyurl.com/FederalJudgePerv…
Donate –
truenewsweekly.com/donate/
Please support independent journalism.
#WhistleblowerWars,
#FederalCourtFiasco,
#KafkaesqueJustice,
#DismissedBeforeFiled,
#JusticeThawley,
#ProceduralAbsurdity,
#VexatiousLitigant,
#CourtroomTwilightZone,
#AustralianLegalNightmare,
#TransparencyFail,
#JudicialMisconduct,
#WhistleblowerSilenced,
#BureaucraticTrapdoor,
#LegalLimbo,
#PreemptiveDismissal,
#CourtCrystalBall,
#DunstanSaga,
#JusticePerversion,
#OpaqueProcedures,
#SelfRepresentedStruggle,
#FederalCourtFail,
#WhistleblowerBattle,
#InstitutionalFailure,
#RetroactiveRuling,
#LegalMuzzle