It was entirely inappropriate for Ms Gilchrist to take up her position at such late notice and with such a lack of prior knowledge of the matters under consideration, and validated the earlier applications for Mr Shirley's recusal, which had been previously refused by Mr Haines.
Mr Mihaka, and his Maori Agent, both awoke on the 4th feeling generally unwell, with a range of influenza-like symptoms. Mr Mihaka contacted his doctor to arrange an appointment as soon as he could, and notified the Tribunal as soon as he could.'
Following the visit with his doctor, Mr Mihaka forwarded the required medical certificate to the Tribunal in support of the validity of the reason for his absence on the 4th.
Despite providing valid medical certification that he was too unwell to attend the sham hearing on the 4th April, Haines issued the following decision:
The file can also be accessed at this link.
The transcript of the hearing on the 4th begins at page 47 of the transcript.
The transcript is full of factual errors - the paragraph adjacent to the number 20 in the left margin says that Haines would be grateful if counsel for Housing New Zealand were to correct him as ''we'' go through. Mr Mihaka wishes the opportunity to "correct" Mr Haines, who is either seriously mistaken or deliberately dishonest.
The last paragraph of page 47 of the transcript refers to Ms Furfie's "replacement brief of evidence" which was provided the night prior to the hearing on the 4th after Furfie's previous "evidence" was seriously discredited! Filing a replacement brief and finding a replacement member of the Tribunal the night before the hearing is outrageous and unacceptable.
The paragraph adjacent to the number 5 on page 50 of the transcript refers to me as Catherine and is further evidence of the errors made by the Tribunal.
Page 53 discusses Ms Theron's assertion that as McKenzie friend I should have attended and spoken in Mr Mihaka's absence which is ridiculous. The Tribunal then goes on to discuss the issues relating to natural justice.
Page 55 alludes to the plainly evidence inadequacy of the planned matter of disposition of the matter, and confirms that if a medical certificate is provided that is grounds for an adjournment.
Page 57 refers to the risible arguments of Housing New Zealand's counsel regarding their clients' position.
Page 62 states that Mr Mihaka is required to produce a medical certificate from a registered practitioner "setting out the reasons why Mr Miahka has been unable to attend the hearing today. Second, that the certificate set out the length of time for which Mr Mihaka will be medically unfit to participate in the Tribunal hearing." Mr Mihaka's medical practitioners are just that - medical practitioners, not clairvoyants. They don't predict the future, or what Mr Mihaka's health will be like next week or next month, and these demands are a breach of Mr Mihaka's rights and of his privacy.
"At the resumption of the hearing two days is to be set aside" it says on page 62.
Dun provided letters from his medical practitioners regarding several matters involving these proceedings, including this one:
Another recent letter from Dun's registered medical practitioners says:
"This gentleman is seventy four years old and had a number of medical problems.We await the decision of Hardhearted Haines and his peers.
I am unclear of the recent circumstances surrounding the night he spent on a road in his car near National Park village, but regard it as inappropriate that any person of seventy four years old should, of necessity, sleep in a car on that stretch of road at that time of year."
No comments:
Post a Comment