H J AMES J OHNSON

HUMAN RIGHTS § CIVIL RIGHTS § CORRUPTION § MEDIA

D EFA M AT I O N § P R O F E S S I O N A L N E G L I G E N C E L AW
1 S T F L O O R 1 4 1 O S B O R N E S T R E E T S O U T H YA R R A V I C T O R I A 3 1 4 1
TELEPHONE: +613 9279 3932 FA C S I M I L E : + 6 1 3 9 2 7 9 3 9 5 5

Monday 5 October 2009 *** IMPORTANT COMMUNICATION

*** CONFIDENTIAL: MR BROUWER'S EYES ONLY

Mr George Brouwer
Victorian State Ombudsman
Level 9, 459 Collins Street
Melbourne Victoria 3000
By Facsimile: 9614 0246 (...pages)

Dear Mr Brouwer

COMPLAINT AGAINST LAW INSTITUTE OF VICTORIA

1. I wish to make a formal complaint of corruption against the Law Institute of Victoriaa and its Managing
Director and Chief Executive Officer Michael Brett-Young.
2. My complaint includes apprehended and actual bias in decision making, including failure of the Law Institue
(a corporations law entity) to abide by (clause 2 of) its own constitution and its public and contractual duties
owed to me as a member of the public and as a loyal member of 20 years good standing. My complaint
also extends to the witchhunt that the Law Institute executed against me (as delegate of the Legal Services
Board and/or Legal Services Commissioner or both (the correspondence is pretty vague) in April and May
this year (see below).
3. I attach for your information as a preliminary brief, a copy of my facsimile letter earlier today to Mr Brett-
Young (with considerable attachments).
4. Please note that there is an obvious connection with:
a. my complaints to your Office thus far regarding the Legal Services Commissioner (mirroring your
own damning report contained in your 2008-09 Annual Report); and
b. my complaint to your Office dated 25 September 2009 regarding the Victorian Equal Opportunity and
Human Rights Commissioner.
c. my complaint to your Office dated 5 October 2009 regarding Victoria Legal Aid Office.
5. My complaint materials of 25 September 2009 included a copy of my Section 35 Notice under the Victorian
Charter of Human Rights and Responsiblities Act (minus the schedules). I included a full copy of my
Section 35 Notice (including the schedules) with my complaint materials regarding Ms Victoria Marles the
Legal Services Commissioner. Attachments D and F to that Notice included copies of relevant

Page 1 of Many
 correspondences between myself and the Law Institute (the 'witchhunt' aspect of thiis complaint) and
correspondences between Victoria Legal Aid and myself (my complaint para 4(c) above).
6. There is of course a threshhold issue whether the Law Institute of Victoria is a body that is subject to
investigation by your Office. The Law Instiute of Victoria is a corporation with its members liability limited by
guarantee. It is the recipient of substantial Government funding for various purposes, and performs various
statutory functions (including but not limited to being regularly delegated functions by the Legal Services
Board and the Legal Services Commissioner with regard to the regulation of the Australian legal profession).
I submit that the Law Institute most certainly satisfies the concept of a 'public statutory body' in respect of its
professional conduct investigations (eg as delegate of the Legal Services Board and/or Legal Services
Commissioner) and its heavy handed investigation of me, the extreme pre-judgement and bias
demonstrated in the correspondences and
7. If you would be so kind as to confirm jurisdiction to hear this complaint I will be pleased to provide you with
additional briefing materials, including, if need be, a further full copy of my section 35 Notice under the
Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act which I think holds in its attachments all of the
additional documentation to date that would be relevant to your commencing this investigation.
8. My complaints regarding the Law Institute of Victoria are still evolving, so I ask that you assign a senior
investigator to examine my complaint and ask that he / she also sees my complaint materials in the same
dynamic context.

Regards

JAMES JOHNSON

Page 2 of Many