TEUN VAN SAMBEEK
	14 MARCH 2025

All around the world the veil is lifted from the blatant government corruption, colluding with banks and big business to enrich and protect a tiny group at the expense of the regular guy in the street. There was no time in history, when this criminal behavior was exposed which such speed and clarity. This genie will not go back in the bottle. The big question is however: What do we do next?

First let’s set the stage for administrative transparency. Audi Alteram Partem in Administrative Law embodies the fundamental notion that both sides of a dispute must be heard before a decision is made. It ensures fairness, transparency and the right to a fair hearing in legal proceedings and administrative actions. By granting each party the opportunity to present their case, Audi Alteram Partem upholds the principles of justice, guards against arbitrariness and promotes the rule of law.

The principle of Audi Alteram Partem is a fundamental aspect of natural justice and fair legal proceedings. Its essential elements include:

NOTICE

Notice is a fundamental element of natural justice, ensuring that parties are informed of any action proposed against them. It provides individuals with the opportunity to respond and defend themselves. Without proper notice, any subsequent order or decision is considered void ab initio or void from the beginning.

The right to notice is crucial as it allows individuals to understand the facts and charges against them before a hearing. Notice must include essential details such as the date, time and place of the hearing, as well as the jurisdiction under which the case is filed. Additionally, it should clearly state the charges and proposed actions against the individual. Failure to include any of these details renders the notice invalid.

HEARING

Fair hearing is another crucial aspect of the principle of Audi Alteram Partem, ensuring that parties have the opportunity to present their case and be heard before any decision is made. If an authority passes an order without giving the affected party a fair hearing, the order is considered invalid.

EVIDENCE

Evidence is a critical component of any legal proceeding and it must be presented when both parties are present. The judicial or quasi-judicial authority will base its decision on the evidence presented before it. Any information, such as previous convictions, on which the court may rely without giving the affected party a chance to deny it, should be made known to the party.

CROSS-EXAMINATION

Cross-examination is a vital aspect of the legal process, allowing parties to challenge evidence presented against them.

LEGAL REPRESENTATION

Legal representation, while not always deemed essential for a fair hearing in administrative proceedings, can significantly impact a party’s ability to understand and effectively navigate the legal process. In certain circumstances, the denial of the right to legal representation may constitute a violation of natural justice.

The rule of Audi Alteram Partem in Administrative Law is not universally applicable and may be excluded in certain circumstances where it would not serve a meaningful purpose. This exclusion is not a deviation from the principle of natural justice but rather a recognition that in some situations, the requirement for a formal hearing may be unnecessary or impractical.

STATUTORY EXCLUSION

Statutory exclusion occurs when the governing statute does not explicitly provide for a hearing or does not mention the application of natural justice principles. In such cases, the courts may uphold the exclusion, as long as it does not lead to unfairness or arbitrariness.

However, if the exclusion is arbitrary, unreasonable or unfair, it may be challenged.

LEGISLATIVE FUNCTION

Legislative functions, which involve the enactment of general rules or laws, may not require individual hearings as they are aimed at the general public good rather than specific individuals. Similarly, administrative actions that are authoritative in nature and do not affect individual rights may not necessitate a formal hearing.

However, if the exclusion of natural justice principles results in arbitrary or unfair treatment, the courts may intervene to ensure fairness and justice.

IMPRACTICABILITY

Impracticability is a valid reason for excluding the application of the Audi Alteram Partem in Administrative Law. This means that while the principle of natural justice requires giving the opportunity to be heard, there are situations where it may not be feasible to do so. In such cases, the rule may be excluded.

Audi Alteram Partem, as a principle of natural justice, embodies the essence of fairness and due process in legal proceedings. Its concept revolves around the fundamental idea that all parties should have the opportunity to present their case and respond to allegations before a decision is made.

The essentials of Audi Alteram Partem in Administrative Law include the right to notice, a fair hearing, the presentation of evidence, cross-examination and legal representation. While there are exceptions to its application, such as in cases of impracticability or legislative functions, Audi Alteram Partem remains crucial in upholding justice, preventing arbitrary decisions and ensuring transparency and fairness in legal systems worldwide.

Tampering with evidence is related to Audi Alteram Partem. When an individual or institution alters, conceals, falsifies, or destroys evidence with the intent to interfere with an investigation, it is a criminal offense in many jurisdictions. If withholding information is a ”criminal offense”, then it is now clear without a doubt that almost any government (and especially the governments of the US, England and the EU) are intentionally withholding vital information for the public and act without the consent of the voters.

Think about the USAID revelations, the dictatorial decisions of the EU to ramp up the war machine to create WWIII (even without properly consulting their US NATO partner) and the involvement of secret agencies in the assassination of many politicians or in the overthrowing of many governments, including Ukraine.

Now it is clear that these governments don’t serve their people, but only serve the interests of the owners of the central banks and related big business (like Big Tech, Big Pharma, the military industrial complex, Big Agriculture to name a few), it is time to demand justice. We need to know how it is possible that all these aforementioned parties allowed and probably colluded in this massive corruption, and how the responsible people should be punished for it.

This should be done in a trial that is comparable to the Corona-Ausschuss of Reiner Fuellmich, but is obviously more fundamental as it demands not only clarity about the pandemic corruption, but addresses general corruption of all these governments and related businesses and organizations.

Before the trials even start, we can already draw some conclusions: Government, Bank an Big Business secrecy is the cloak that allowed the corruption to fester. We should have never allowed governments to hide any evidence.

But also the secrecy of patents (such as Coca Cola or military weapons or evidence of the Kennedy murders or the Epstein list) is a basis for many possible criminal situations that were only possible because the perpetrators were allowed to ”hide evidence”.

In a parallel world, these secrecy regulations should no longer be tolerated. This means - among other things - that all money flows must be transparent to everyone (like as we promote in our 1CoinH project). Next to that, there should no longer be any protection based on patents or other systems that allow any secret technology. Similarly, no foundations with secret beneficiaries should be able to exist. To create transparency also means that every form of censorship must be completely abolished. The only real reason for every form of censorship is always the concealment of (potential) crimes of the people in power. Censorship is the clearest indicator of totalitarianism. People must be protected against censorship and not against nonsensical speech. Proper education is the only protection people need against nonsensical speech and nothing else.

The current tax system is also inherently criminal.

Tax is fine as long as it is a transaction with mutual consent. In a parallel world tax cannot be enforced by force. There is no doubt that people will be glad to pay for initiatives that benefit their community, given the people can provide in their basic needs first.

For tax you can also apply the ”withholding evidence or transparency” philosophy. As long as I cannot see exactly what tax is spent on, it is not possible for me to pay for it. In fact: I want to know exactly where the tax I pay is spent on. So if I do not want new asphalt or an extra Leopard tank, then I want to be sure that my tax money is not spent on that. It is up to my transaction partner (the government in the case of tax) to show me this exactly. If they cannot do that, then there is no payment. Therefore tax can never be collected under threat of police violence.

Governments can only convince with complete openness. With all the blacked-out ”government openness request documents” it is clear that the governments are completely unable to meet their obligation to be transparent. Not to mention the hideous spending on their secret services. Ergo, there are sufficient reasons to stop paying taxes, because our transaction partner hides, changes and destroys evidence how my money is spent, to conceal their massive fraudulent schemes. It is now totally clear that we - the people - never consented to those crimes of our governments.

Even if the majority of my country has of the opinion that it is okay for their government to steal my possessions by force, I am within my rights not to allow that. Habeas Corpus also plays a role there, which is also part of the ”natural laws”. Most important is however that any transaction in life should be with mutual consent. In our current tax system mutual consent is completely absent especially now we know our governments are completely corrupted and are extremely well financed and trained to hide, change and destroy any evidence of their crimes. Having a majority of your population deceived doesn’t make it legal to force anyone to pay anything to a criminal organization.

If ”citizens” say: ”I have nothing to hide for my government or Big-Tech anyway” then the best way to counter that is to reply: “That statement is only valid if you have a government that also cannot hide anything.”.

Actually “real transparency“ is the only way out of all this mess. We can now see that if you allow everyone (including governments) to hide their transactions, then you will indeed end up in the swamp in which we now live: A society where you have to give up all your privacy to governments and banks, while the people that are working for the real owners and the governments they control, will hide everything for you, including real news, real science, real economics and real security.

That has to change. We also have no choice to change this system, because the governments now want us to believe that only WWIII can save us from the boogeyman. Most people don’t buy these lies anymore as it is now clear, that the owners of the system are the only ones that need WWIII to be able to hide their crimes a bit longer. They need some extra time to force us to build our own digital prison. But it is too late. Too many people see through this agenda. That genie won’t go back in the bottle. Too many people will build transparent parallel societies and leave the system of deceit and distortion behind.

Justice will be served. The game is over.

Administrative Law

Tampering with evidence

Corona-Ausschuss of Reiner Fuellmich

Habeas Corpus

14 March 2025

Teun van Sambeek MSc, MRE

Creator of: 1CoinH & Copiania