by Lara Johnstone
In a Notice of Intention: Application for Leave and for Judicial Review, filed with the High Court of South Africa, Western Cape, Capetown, on 22 September 2009, I cited the Minister of Citizenship, Canada, and the Nobel Institute, Norwegian Nobel Committee as Respondents Nine and Ten, requesting them to take notice of the State of Effective Emergency, regarding South Africa's Unrepresented White Refugees.
Other respondents in the matter, include, among others, Respondent Two: The Director of National Prosecutions; Three: Hon. Patricia de Lille; Four: Former President Thabo Mbeki; Five: Former NPA Nat. Director, Mr. Bulelani Ngcuka; Six: Former SAPS Commissoner Jackie Selebi; Seven: Former Min. of Corrections BM Skosana; and Eight: Former President Nelson Mandela.
Specifically, the Notice requests Respondents Nine and Ten, to take particular notice of the White Refugee Issues cited, under the Notice of Intention's points, , ,  and , among others:
 For the Record: State of Effective Emergency: South Africa’s Unrepresented White Refugees: The Tyranny, Disorder, Crime and Corruption of the State, has effectively resulted in a state of anarchy, where fundamental rights of due process, natural law, administrative law, safety and security, etc have been effectively intentionally, deliberately and maliciously suspended, as a result of corruption, incompetence and indifference. South Africa is heading towards a socio-economic, political and military failed state of Zimbabwefication. For example, South African Law Commission Issue Paper Six, alleged the Criminal Justice System to have a severe Legitimacy and Inefficiency Crisis, in that:
- Communities are intimidated by the legal system, and ignorant of how it works.
- Legal representation is inadequate and discriminatory.
- Legal aid has not been able to serve its intended purpose.
- The justice system's inaccessibility means it is perceived as illegitimate, ineffective, unfriendly, resulting in alternative dispute resolution whether legal or illegal.
- Unnecessary complexities brought into access to justice and the mystifying language used.
[10a] Since 18 June 2002, the Applicant has accused Official Legislative, Judicial and Executive Officers of the State that their actions of commission and omission have, and continue to, demonstrate an intentional, deliberate, malicious and hostile indifference and unwillingness to provide for judicial and administrative due process and safety and security protections to the Applicant, and law-abiding, taxpaying ‘White Refugee’ citizens constitutional interests; by implementing policies which negligently, intentionally and deliberately foster and support criminal activity, ethnic and social conflict, tyranny and anarchy.
[10b] The repeated response from these State authorities, to these allegations was simply more actions of commission and omission unwillingness and indifference to its constitutional social contract duties and responsibilities; including repeatedly, by Respondents Two to Eight.
[10c] Foreign Law – the United States Declaration of Independence -- provides for the remedy, that when a government intentionally and repeatedly demonstrates a deliberate, malicious and hostile indifference and unwillingness to act in accordance with its social contract duties and responsibilities, towards its citizens; then such a government is accurately described as tyrannical and corrupt.
[10d] Citizens committed to a healthy social contract with their Government have a duty and a right, when any government becomes tyrannical and corrupt, and acts in destructive breach of the social contract; to alter or abolish such government, and to institute new government.
[10e] In contrast to Respondents Three to Eight’s strategies endorsing and inciting violence, mob justice and ungovernability, in their alleged ‘Anti-Apartheid’ (sic) struggle for a non-racial (sic) South Africa; the Applicant is a citizen committed to non-violent civil-disobedience, and the rule of law. Accordingly the only means the Applicant has of altering and abolishing a corrupt and tyrannical government, and instituting a new healthy social contract government, is to deny such a corrupt and tyrannical government, any respect as a legitimate authority, until it demonstrates that it is committed to upholding its social contract duties and responsibilities, as an impartial, legitimate and procedurally fair authority.
[10f] As of 07 June 2007, the Applicant does not recognize the legitimacy of any South African Official or Office, which is not willing to demonstrate its sincere and serious commitment to upholding its duties and responsibilities to the constitutional Social Contract.
[10g] While South African Legislative, Judicial and Executive authorities have, and continue to, refuse to confront, enquire into, or acknowledge the reality of the tyrannical Disorder, Crime and Corruption of the Failed State, and its effective nullification of the Truth and Reconciliation Social Contract, which has effectively resulted in a state of anarchy, where fundamental rights of due process, natural law, administrative law, safety and security, etc have been effectively intentionally, deliberately and maliciously suspended; a foreign court/tribunal has finally had the courage to impartially enquire into, and courageously confront, the reality of this evidence.In the State of Ontario, Canada, on 27 August 2009, Board Member William Davis of the Refugee Protection Division of the Immigration and Refugee Board (“RPD”), in file number MA8-04910, found white South African, Brandon Carl Huntley to be a Convention Refugee, as a result of:
- (a) South Africa's serious human rights problems, including police use of excessive force against suspects and detainees, which resulted in death and injuries, vigilante violence and mob justice: violence resulting from social, racial and ethnic tensions;
- (b) Affirmative Action (AA) and Black Economic Empowerment (BEE) law requires employers with 50 or more employees to ensure that previously disadvantaged groups, collectively constituting more than 90 percent of the country's population are represented adequately at all levels of the workplace;
- (c) Affirmative Action that has stripped the country of 75 percent of its skilled population and is responsible for the deprivation of the constitutional and social rights of white South Africans;
- (d) As reported by the SAIRR, over a fifth of white South Africans have emigrated over the past ten years, their main reasons being crime and affirmative action;
- (e) White Poverty is growing, as a result of AA & BEE legislation which reserves 80 percent of new jobs for blacks and favour black-owned companies for tenders;
- (f) Killings and other violent crimes against farmers and their families continue in rural areas; and farmers are concerned that they are being targeted for racial and political reasons;
- (g) Farm Murders: There are 40,000 white farmers in South Africa. Since 1994, over 2,000 farmers have been murdered in thousands of farm attacks, many brutally tortured and slashed or raped. Some victims have been burnt with irons and had boiling water poured over them, or down their throats.
- (h) The Mandela "rainbow" revolution has become a cloud of gloom; where 40 percent of South Africans live below the poverty line, and unemployment is between 23 - 40 percent; violence runs unchecked throughout the country, and a woman is raped approximately every 26 seconds, where less than 1 percent of rape convictions lead to a conviction. Murderers also run free, without about 19,000 murders in 2006, more than 50 per day;
- (i) A report documenting that most of ANC members are racist: this report states that it is time for the ANC to face up to the fact that most of them are racist and marginalized non-supporters and that it is the policy of the ANC and its endemic corruption that has brought South Africa to the brink of civil war;
- (j) Police Corruption: Police Corruption is endemic and the chances of reporting corruption, ever seeing daylight are slim indeed.
- (k) DA Leader, Mr. Tony Leon's accuses the ANC goverment of indifference to the lot of minorities, and hostility to whites;
- (l) All of the above and more, shows a picture of indifference and inability or unwillingness of the goverment and the security forces to protect White South Africans from persecution by African South Africans.
- (m) The objective evidence of living as a white person in South Africa, is that crime and violence resulting from social, racial and ethnic tensions contribute to a socio-political culture with a very significant possibility for white South Africans to be repeat and persistent, and systemic victims of excessive violence during any criminal acts, perpetrated against them by African South Africans; as a result of a socio-political cultural climate where the State is deliberately and intentionally unwilling to protect white South Africans; because they are white South Africans.
[10h] The SA Government (& Respondents Two to Eight)’s Commitment to the Social Contract with White South Africans, ranges from Negligent Indifference to Malicious Contempt to Endorsement of Rape and ‘Kill the Farmer, Kill the Boer’ Torture and Boer Genocide:Former Minister of Safety and Security, Charles Nqakula is by far not the only person who is blatantly indifferent and contemptuous towards whites concern about crime, as he stated in Parliament; that ‘whites who keep complaining about crime, should either just go blue in the face, or leave the country’. In 1998, then President Nelson Mandela (Respondent Eight) said the same thing. He claimed that fear of crime was mainly a white preoccupation fomented by a mainly white-owned press. Of people who left the country because of crime, the then President (Respondent Eight) said, “Good Riddance”.
Some years later the then Minister of Justice, Penuell Maduna, and the then Minister of Safety and Security, Steve Tshwete, scoffed at rape statistics when they said on American television, ‘We’ve been standing here for 26 seconds and nobody has been raped’.
[10j] The ZimbabweFication Future for Whites in South Africa:Since the Zimbabwe land seizures began a decade ago, some 4,000 owners (virtually all white) of Zimbabwe’s most productive farms have been forced out, along with their 320,000 workers (almost all black) and their families, amounting to 1m-2m people. Although around two-thirds of the land has been allocated to 140,000 poor black families, the rest has gone to Mr Mugabe’s relatives and comrades, most of whom have little or no interest in farming. Vast tracts of fertile farmland now lie fallow; agricultural output has slumped. One of Africa’s biggest food exporters is now one of its main recipients of food aid. Of 6,500 white commercial farmers in 1980, when Mr Mugabe came to power, only about 500 remain.
Last November, in a case brought by Mr Mike Campbell on behalf of 77 other white farmers, a tribunal of the Southern African Development Community (SADC), a 15-member regional group that includes Zimbabwe, ruled that all land seizures since 2000 were discriminatory and violated both domestic and SADC treaty law. Mr Mugabe and his ZANU-PF ministers claim that the tribunal has no legal standing. In a further violation of the tribunal’s ruling, around 170 white farmers are now being prosecuted in Zimbabwe’s courts for refusing to leave their land.
In June the tribunal held Zimbabwe to be in contempt of court for failing to enforce its earlier ruling and asked SADC to take up the matter urgently. But at the group’s summit earlier this month, no mention was made of this or any of the other matters bedevilling Mr Mugabe’s seven-month-old power-sharing arrangement with Mr Tsvangirai. It was a stunning victory for the 85-year-old president. In a speech this week, Mr. Tsvangirai promised to stand by the farmers. Yet he has blown hot and cold on the issue since he became prime minister. At first he said that not a single crime against white farmers would go unpunished, though no prosecutions have ever been brought.
According to exiled Zimbabwean businessman, Mr. Mutumwa Mawere, former CEO of Shabanie Mashaba Mine Holdings (SMMH), Mugabe does not believe that a white person can own land in Zimbabwe. Furthermore, many leaders within the SADC, share Mugabes views that white persons cannot be African and do not have a right to African land. Of legal matters, before Mugabe Judge’s, which involve a white person or farmer: he says “the outcome would be known before trial.” Mr. Mawere states that the biggest mistake that African governments made at independence was the failure to resolve the citizenship issue regarding whites. Finally, Mr. Mawere states that African leaders who fought alongside Mugabe in the 1960s, such as President Jacob Zuma, are no different from Mugabe; “President Jacob Zuma you see today is not different from Zuma the freedom fighter you saw during the liberation struggle and therefore, you should not expect him to support [white farmers] cases at the SADC summit.” For a white person to “trust someone [in Africa], with state power to be good to [them], then you must be living in another world.”
Under Point , the Applicant, submits the Why We Are White Refugees Petition into the court record....
 Nuremberg Principles & Citizens Privilege: Accordingly the Applicant herewith informs the Tyrannical and Corrupt State Officials of South Africa (c/o and via Respondents Two to Eight, witnessed by Respondents Nine & Ten), the Applicant has signed the Why We Are White Refugees Petition (why-we-are-white-refugees.co.nr), herewith requested to be submitted by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, on behalf of all White Refugee Petitioners, to the Minister of Citizenship & Immigration for Canada, to be submitted to the Federal Court of Canada, for their due process consideration, in the matter of Minister of Citizenship and Immigration and Brandon Carl Huntley; Court File No. IMA-4423-09.
[11a] The Applicant, as a Why We Are White Refugees Petitioner, herewith requests the Federal Court of Canada, to take notice of the repeated intentional, deliberate, malicious and hostile indifference and unwillingness of the South African (and African) Government(s), to provide for judicial and administrative due process and safety and security protections to the Applicant, and law-abiding, taxpaying ‘White Refugee’ citizens constitutional interests. If Canada, and other countries do not grant White Refugees convention status, then they will be condemning African White Refugees, to an intolerable situation in Africa, where their basic rights, security and lives, are in danger.
Under Point  and  the Applicant documents the list of documents submitted into the record, the directly relevant White Refugee documents being as follows:
E. Annexure EE: Canada IRB Ruling 27 Aug 2009: The decision of Board Member William Davis of the Canadian Refugee Protection Division of the Immigration and Refugee Board (the “RPD”) dated August 27, 2009, in file number MA8-04910: Brandon Carl Huntley (PDF:21K) (Pages 11-16).
F. Annexure FF: Why We Are White Refugees: which includes:
[FF.01a] Why We Are White Refugees, Afrikaner Genocide Report (PDF:110K), includes (a) Alphabetical Listing of Farm Murders: A – Z; (b) 2008 Farm Murders in South Africa: Brief Summaries; (c) Genocide Watch 2002 Report on Boer Farm Murders; [FF.01b] FF.01a was submitted to Respondent Eight in June 2009; c/o Respondent Ten, as an attachment to: Nobel Institute: Nobel Peace Prize Committee: Notice of Legal and Political Delivery (PDF:123K).
[FF.02a] Why We Are White Refugees Petition to: Canadian Federal Court (PDF:111K); in the matter of Minister of Citizenship and Immigration v Brandon Carl Huntley; [FF.02b] Murder in South Africa (PDF:159K), by Robert McCafferty; [FF.02c] The South African Police Service: An Organisation on the Brink of Collapse (PDF:198K), by SAPS Specialist Ivan Myers; [FF.02d] Dr. Gregory Stanton: The Eight Stages of Genocide; [FF.02e] Carte Blanche: A Bloody Harvest, Boer Genocide, by Susan Puren; [FF.02f] Minister of Safety & Security : Charles Nqakula: White Complainants about Crime, can Leave the Country; [FF.02g] SA Institute of Race Relations: Governments Disdainful Indifference towards Concern About Crime (PDF:36K); [FF.02h] Democratic Alliance: Auditor-General’s report reveals 79% of emergency [911/10111] calls are abandoned (PDF:36K).
[FF.03a] Letter Mailed to Minister of Citizenship & Immigration, If Canada capitulates to RSA: I herewith request Contact Information: To File Documentation substantiating Huntley’s Refugee Application, of White Persecution Claims (PDF:26K)
[FF.04a] 142 SA Academics Get It Wrong on Crime (PDF:128K); [FF.04b] Brandon Huntley: An Open Letter to Canada (PDF:121K): 142 Academics Denounce Granting of Refugee Status to White South African; [FF.04c] Statistics SA: Victims of Crime Survey (PDF:3930K), 1998; [FF.04d] Democracy SA: Public Opinion on National Priority Issues: Ch. 11: Crime (PDF:31K); [FF.04e] Institute for Security Studies: National Victim of Crime Survey (PDF:57K), SA, 2003; [FF.04f] Paralyzed by Fear: Perceptions of Crime and Violence in South Africa (PDF:89K)
[FF.05] The Great South African Land Scandal, by Dr. Phillip du Toit, which documents the Zimbabwefication of South Africa’s Food Security, and includes Ch. 16: Slaughter -- The Farm Murder Plague (PDF:124K): the murder rate of South African commercial farmers, is highest for a specific group in the world – 313 per 100 000.
The Proof of Service documentation cites that aforementioned White Refugee documentation was submitted to:
the Ninth Respondent (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, Canada), c/o and via the United Nations High Commissoner for Refugees: Mr. Antonio Guterres, whose Head Office is at Case Postale 2500, CH-1211 Geneve 2 Depot, Switzerland; c/o and via the Consul General of Switzerland, Capetown. It was delivered to Ms. Anja Munger, at 11:05 hours, on 22 September 2009, at the Consul General of Switzerland, at No. 1 Thibault Square, 26th Floor, Capetown; for the Consul General of Switzerland to forward the documentation to the United Nations High Commissioner of Refugees.
the Tenth Respondent (Nobel Institute: Norwegian Nobel Committee), c/o and via the Royal Norwegian Consulate, Capetown. It was delivered to Ms. Adele Day, at 10:54 hrs on 22 September 2009, at the Royal Norwegian Consulate, 17th Floor, Southern Life Center, 8 Riebeeck Street, Capetown; for the Royal Norwegian Ambassador, to forward the documentation to the Nobel Institute: Norwegian Nobel Committee.
Any Respondent's who wish to oppose the Application for Leave and Judicial Review, or dispute the State of Effective Emergency of South Africa's Unrepresented White Refugees are to serve such Notice of Intention to Oppose, on the Applicant, and to file it, with proof of service, at the Registrar, within 21 days, of receipt of the Application.
Sources: State v. Johnstone: HC-WC: # 19963/09: Notice of Intention: Application for Leave & For Judicial Review & For the Court Record Notice: SA's Unrepresented White Refugees.. :: PDF:80K (Notice of Intention, Prior to Court Filing, Pages:12) :: PDF:237K (Court Stamped: (i) Notice of Intention Front Page; Court Stamped: Affidavit of Proof of Service to All Respondents, Pages:5)