어떻게 호주 법무장관이 사기꾼보다 더 심한 함정을 그것도 공익신고자에게 연속적으로 만드는가? 전쟁에서 대표적인 함정이 위장막과 지뢰이

[정동희]

어떻게 호주 법무장관이 사기꾼보다 더 심한 함정을 그것도 공익신고자에게 연속적으로 만드는가?

어떻게 호주 법무장관이 사기꾼보다 더 심한 함정을 그것도 공익신고자에게 연속적으로 만드는가?

전쟁에서 대표적인 함정이 위장막과 지뢰이다.
camouflage membrane는 자연에서 많이 보이는 풀잎처럼 하여서 인위적인 포나 기관총을 상대방이 잘 식별하게 못하는데 사용한다. 한국에 있는 미군 부대에서 나는 군 생활을 했는데, 팀스프리트 훈련 같은 경우에는 이 위장막을 잘 덮는 게 매우 중요하며 사람의 얼굴에도 검게 일부로 칠하기도 한다.
이러한 위장막은 군 이외의 민간에서도 사용하는데, 위장막을 흔히 볼 수 있는 곳은 자동차 제조공장 주변이 그 예이다. 그 이유는 위장막은 신차를 위해 만들어졌기 때문이다. 위장막 차량이 그런데, 위장막은 신차의 개발 과정 중 도로 주행 테스트에서 신차의 디자인을 감추기 위해 사용된다. 
군에서의 위장막은 상대가 교전하는 적국에게 숨기는 목적이다. 자동차제조회사의 위장막은 부차적으로 언론 등과 소비자들에게 공개 당시의 효과를 극대화하기 위한 목적도 있지만, 1차적으로 경쟁 자동차제조회사에 대하여 그 목적성을 갖고 있다.

모두다 동등한 상대방과의 싸움에서 사용한다. 반면 호주 연방 법무장관은 사기꾼보다 더 심한 함정을 호주 정부에 많은 공헌을 해준 공익신고자에게 지루하게 파고 있다는 측면에서, 그 비열성은 '일방적인 갑질 차원을 뛰어넘는 거의 전쟁범죄 수준 공권력 횡포'인 것이다.

지뢰(地雷, land mine)는 땅에 매설하여 외부의 압력을 받으면 뇌관을 작동하여 폭발시키는 무기다. 화약 발명에 이어 화약을 무기로 만든것인데 중국 15세기때 명나라가 썼다.  유럽에서는 제1차 세계 대전에 보편화되었고 제2차 세계 대전에 대전차무기로 활용도가 높아졌다. 이 또한 방어용의 무기 목적은 동등한 상대방 적국과의 싸움에서 사용되었지 결코 국가가 민간인을 상대로 사용해서는 안되는 무기이다. 왜냐하면 지뢰와 폭발성 잔여물이 시민들의 안전, 건강, 삶을 위협하고 있거나, 국가적이고 지역적인 차원에서 사회적이고 경제적인 발전에 장애가 되기 때문이다.

그럼에도 호주 법무장관과 법무차관 둥(Federal Attorney General Mark Dreyfus
Deputy Attorney General Patrick Gorman and
Head of the Federal Ministry of Justice Special Force within the Office of the Attorney General of Western Australia)은 사기꾼보다 더 심한 함정을 호주 정부에 많은 공헌을 해준 공익신고자에게 지루하게 다음과 같이 파고 있다.

그들이 구사하는 함정의 비열성은 매우 심각할 정도이다.

첫째, 이들의 예측가능성은 제로 수준이다. 지뢰와 함정이 어디에 있는지 모르는 것과 똑같을 정도의 예측가능성을 그들은 스스로 파기한다. 내가 재판종결 제반 비용을 분명히 물었는데, 그 때 호주 법무장관과 호주 관련 정부부서는 대답해놓고 시간이 지나면 딴 말 하며 부정한다.
(24년11월 나는 분명히 재판종결 제반 비용을 호주 법무장관 등에게 물었고 호주 법무장관 등은 대답해서 당시 납부했다. 그 때 The banking supervision bureau는 'remittance fee'란 단어를 사용하여 분명히 답해놓고, 두 달 뒤에 딴 말하며 부정하며 다시 거액청구했다)

둘째, 이 재판은 24년2월 호주 정부가 출자한 은행장의 대규모 부정부패를 내가 최초로 신고해서 시작된 것인데, 24년12월20일 재판 승소자이고 공익신고자인 나에게 이 재판과 전혀 무관한 과거 벌금납부건을 다시 이 재판과 강제로 관련시켜 나에게 모든 걸 동결시키며 국제법에 분명하게 금지되어있는 이중처벌을 더 심하게[ 재판승소자에게 호주 법무장관과  General financial bureau는 강행하며 나를 완전히 파산이라는 늪에 빠뜨렸다.

셋째, 호주 법무장관이라는 자가 스스로 25년1월7일과 25년 3월18일 그리고 25년4월10일에 문서 발행하여 약속하고 제반 호주 정부 기관에도 배포해놓고, 그 약속을 안지킨다. 이에 내가 강력 항의하자, 적반하장 격으로 겁을 준다.
어떻게 국가기관 중에서 가장 모범을 보여야 할 호주 법무장관이 이따위로 자신이 발행한 문서 약속을 무려 4번이나 파기하나? 이는 공익신고자에게 4번 지뢰를 밟게 하는 전쟁범죄 수준의 공권력 만행과 마찬가지이다.

넷째, 호주 법무장관은 병상에서 중병을 앓는 나의 아버지가 직접 물어서 답한 약속도 헌신짝처럼 파기한다. 25년3월21일 나의 아픈 아버지가 Federal Attorney General Mark Dreyfus에게 직접 '이 비용이 마지막이냐?'고 물었고 그는 그렇다고 답했고 이 사건 종결비용도 추가로 더 얹이며 분명히 말해서 납부했다. 그런데 돈 받고 나서 딴 소리를 한다. 이는 제네바협정에서 명확하게 규정하고 있는 '전쟁 당사자 국가가 최소한으로 지켜야 될 도의'조차 안지키며, 공익신고자의 파산으로 아버지도 연달아 파산되고 있는 절박한 85세 노인의 등 뒤에 총을 쏘는 전쟁범죄 수준의 야만적인 행위인 것이다.

전쟁에서 대표적인 함정이 위장막과 지뢰를 호주 정부는 동등한 수준에서 사용해야지, 자국의 국고 수입에 24년6월 USD18M을 기여한 공익신고자 개인에게 '대낮에 술취한 법무장관의 공권력 갈지자 횡보로 만들어지는 예측가능성의 심각한 훼손과 인권유린'을 가하는 것은 국제 사회에서 매우 지탄받아 마땅한 일이다.

나는 호주 Federal Attorney General Mark Dreyfus가 25년4월10일에 발행하여 금융반부패총국 등 관련 정부부서에 배포한 문서에 의하여, 이 모든 게 종결되기를 강력하게 촉구드리는 바이다.

(나와 나의 아픈 아버지는 25년3월18일/25년3월21일 그리고 25년4월10일  Federal Attorney General Mark Dreyfus의 문서 약속이 설사 지뢰이자 함정인지 모르고 이 지뢰들을 밟고 무려 한 달 이상을 꼼짝도 못하고 있다. 국제사회는 이렇게 호주 법무장관이 비열하게 자국의 공익신고자의 등 뒤에 총을 쏘고 특히 25년5월3일 선거 승리 후에는 기관총을 쏘대는 전쟁범죄 수준의 공권력 횡포를 그냥 구경만 할 것입니까? 여러분도 결국은 같은 부류로 결과적으로 되고 싶습니까? the Attorney General of the Commonwealth of Australia, Mark Dreyfus, mark.dreyfus.mp@aph.gov.au, and Deputy Attorney General, Patrick Gorman, Patrick.Gorman.MP@aph.gov.au)

How does the Australian Attorney General create a trap for public interest reporters that is worse than that of a fraudster, and causes us to step on land mines one after another?

Representative traps in war are camouflage screens and mines.

The camouflage membrane resembles a blade of grass, which is commonly seen in nature, and is used to make it difficult for opponents to identify artificial artillery or machine guns. I served in the U.S. military base in Korea, and in cases such as team sprint training, it is very important to cover this camouflage well, and even people's faces are sometimes painted black.

These camouflage membranes are also used in civilian areas other than the military, and an example of a place where camouflage membranes are commonly seen is around automobile manufacturing plants. The reason is that the camouflage membrane was made for new cars. Camouflage vehicles, however, are used to hide the design of a new car during road testing during the development process. 

The purpose of camouflage in the military is to hide one's opponent from the enemy in combat. The purpose of the automobile manufacturer's camouflage is to maximize the effect of disclosure to the media and consumers, but its primary purpose is to target competing automobile manufacturers.

All are used in fights against equal opponents. On the other hand, in the sense that the Australian Federal Attorney General is tirelessly digging a trap worse than that of a fraudster against a public interest reporter who has contributed a lot to the Australian government, the meanness is 'a tyranny of public power that goes beyond unilateral abuse of power and is almost at the level of a war crime.'

A land mine is a weapon that is buried in the ground and explodes by activating a detonator when exposed to external pressure. Following the invention of gunpowder, gunpowder was made into a weapon, and it was used by the Ming Dynasty in China in the 15th century.  In Europe, it became common during World War I, and its use as an anti-tank weapon increased in World War II. The purpose of this defensive weapon is to be used in the fight against an equal enemy nation, and it is a weapon that should never be used by a nation against civilians. This is because landmines and explosive residues threaten the safety, health, and lives of citizens, or are an obstacle to social and economic development at the national and regional levels.

Nevertheless, Australia's Attorney General and Federal Attorney General Mark Dreyfus

Deputy Attorney General Patrick Gorman and

The Head of the Federal Ministry of Justice Special Force within the Office of the Attorney General of Western Australia is tediously digging a trap worse than a scammer for a public interest reporter who has contributed a lot to the Australian government.

The meanness of the traps they use is very serious.

First, their predictability is at zero level. They destroy the same level of predictability as not knowing where mines and traps are. I clearly asked about the costs of concluding the trial, and the Australian Attorney General and relevant Australian government departments gave answers, but as time went by, they denied it by saying something else.

(In November 24, I clearly asked the Australian Attorney General and others about the costs of completing the trial, and the Australian Attorney General and others answered and paid it at the time. At that time, The Banking Supervision Bureau clearly answered using the word 'remittance fee', and two months later, they denied it and claimed a large amount again, saying something different.)

Second, this trial began in February 2024 when I first reported the large-scale corruption of the head of a bank invested by the Australian government. On December 20, 2024, I, the winner of the trial and a public interest reporter, was forcibly linked to this trial with past fine payments that had nothing to do with this trial, freezing everything and subjecting me to double punishment, which is clearly prohibited under international law. I left it out. 

Third, the Australian Attorney General himself promised to issue documents on January 7, 2025, March 18, 2025, and April 10, 2025 and distributed them to various Australian government agencies, but did not keep that promise. When I strongly protested against this, he threatened me as if he were a hostile enemy.

How can the Australian Attorney General, who is supposed to set the best example among government agencies, break the promises he made in documents as many as four times? This is the same as the brutality of public power at the level of a war crime that causes a public interest reporter to step on landmine number 4.

Fourth, the Australian Attorney General broke the promise made directly by my father, who was seriously ill in his hospital bed, as if it were a pledge. On March 21, 2025, my sick father directly asked Federal Attorney General Mark Dreyfus, ‘Is this the last fee?’ He answered yes, and he added the cost of closing this case as well, making it clear that he paid it. But after receiving the money, they say something different. This is a barbaric act at the level of a war crime, which does not even adhere to the 'minimum morals that parties to a war should maintain' clearly stipulated in the Geneva Agreement, and shoots a desperate 85-year-old man in the back whose father is going bankrupt one after another due to the bankruptcy of the public interest reporter.

The Australian government should use camouflage screens and landmines, which are representative vessels in war, at an equal level, but inflicting 'serious damage to predictability and human rights abuses created by a drunken Attorney General's tampering with public power in broad daylight' to an individual public interest reporter who contributed USD 18 million to the country's national treasury in June 2024 is highly deserving of criticism from the international community.

I strongly urge that all of this be brought to an end according to the document issued by Australian Federal Attorney General Mark Dreyfus on April 10, 2025 and distributed to relevant government departments, including the Financial Anti-Corruption Bureau.

(Me and my sick father have been unable to move for more than a month after stepping on these landmines, not knowing that the written promises of Federal Attorney General Mark Dreyfus on March 18, 25, March 21, 25, and April 10, 25 were landmines and traps. The international community has been unable to move for more than a month, with the Australian Attorney General shooting his country's public interest reporter in the back in such a despicable manner, and especially firing a machine gun after winning the election on May 3, 25, that is a war crime. Are you just going to watch the tyranny of public power and eventually end up in the same category? the Attorney General of the Commonwealth of Australia, Mark Dreyfus, mark.dreyfus.mp@aph.gov.au, and Deputy Attorney General, Patrick Gorman, Patrick.Gorman.MP@aph.gov.au)