20th October 2021
The premier, Daniel Andrews, announced a new law recently – all those on a long list of private and public employees would have to be vaccinated or lose their jobs. The list included those employed in our courts.
Promptly the Chief Justice, Anne Ferguson, announced that judges (among many others) were not bound to obey that law, and the Premier agreed.
The judge’s ruling was not preceded by any complaint, hearing, or other process. It was not a ruling of the Court. So was she saying that judges are above the law? And did Premier Andrews then agree with that?
That would be absurd, of course. It has long been well known that our judges are not above the law. So we are left with the obvious conclusion that Dan Andrews’ “law” is not actually the law at all. He severely overreached himself – and he has agreed. In what other ways has the Premier overreached himself, announcing “laws” on the whim of himself or some faceless fool?
One example may be the curfew that has locked Victorians in their homes, to no apparent good effect (and even while the trains kept on running)! When a legal challenge was mounted the curfew was quietly abandoned, but so far as we know no apology was issued for the poor victims who had been fined in the meantime under the “curfew laws”. Outrageous unlawful “laws” that purportedly have been reinstated at the time of writing.
Much of what the beloved leader has done during this pandemic has been overreach; the deadly “hotel quarantine disaster” of 2019, which led to the deaths of 800 Victorians, reminds us of how the implementation of government policy can sometimes be neither sound nor sensible.
Some policies, becoming de facto “laws”, just go too far to be countenanced. Ask Justice Ferguson.
Mandatory vaccination policies might be seen as just going too far. The Premier’s “laws” have already wreaked economic havoc and saddled us with debts that our great-grandchildren will continue to bear. Deliberately putting even more people out of work to satisfy the drive for uniformity, as opposed to individuality, goes too far to be countenanced.
Ever heard of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights? We Australians have signed up for that; which means we signed up of the right to refuse to undergo medical treatments if we so choose. The writer, along with most of his friends and colleagues, is vaccinated. That was our choice. But we call the mandated vaccination program – and the policy to force people out of work if they choose to not be vaccinated – simply abusive and outrageous overreach.
Everyone writes up that what he’s done is etc etc BUT unfortunately what is being done about it.!!!!!
It doesn’t fix that lots of us are out of a job because we stand for our human rights to chose whether or NOT to be vaccinated.
🤔
I like the question, but what we need is legal experts to give their answers to the question put.
He needs the judges on board with his agenda , its as simple as that . He wants to be the leader of a tyrannical government & implement the social credit system into force .Time to bring back capital punishment , Actually that’s too humane . solitary confinement for all involved . So they can sit & ponder about what misery they’ve created ,while they rot away . . .
Excellent commentary.
The current ongoing exercise of dictatorial government rules must cease.
The unvaccinated can protect themselves any way they wish and their recalcitrance should not be an excuse for the ongoing abuse of the rest of us.
Our premier is obviously on his power trip again and applying his underhand agenda. Common sense has gone by the wayside but that being said you would have to be very irresponsible not to get the injection just to keep everyone safe. To me your rights run a poor second.
I could not agree more. We are creating an apartheid nation, based on vaccination status. Individuals have a human right to decide what goes into their body, and if they want a medical procedure. This is a private choice and no one should be pressured to disclose it, or to be discriminated in life, particularly work and services just because they made the choice not to be vaccinated. It is an abuse of power to be living for years under a state of emergency. It is a proven scientific fact that flu vaccines are useless. You will catch the flu even if you are vaccinated, and unlike any other vaccine, you need to jab every 6 months. Presumably people that are fully vaccinated should have more protection from catching the virus, and then from getting seriously ill. If 80%+ of the population is vaccinated, why do they fear the unvaccinated so much that they need to totally segregate this minority? If anything is the unvaccinated that are bearing the risk of catching infection from the vaccinated. Before C19, you could have had any infectious disease, flu, Ebola, leprosy etc and a doctor would have visited you. Now, you may be covid free, and want to see a doctor for a regular check up, and they refuse to see you based on your vaccination status? This is discrimination, breach of duty of care and negligence. It is not in my contract of work that I must be vaccinated. No gov or employer has a right to impose a medical procedure on the workforce. If they want to ensure workers are covid free, bring the rapid antigen testing and test them every day. But Don treat the unvaccinated as infected and a risk to society to be punished and banned, when they are perfectly healthy.
So the writer etc got vaxxed with an unlicenced, experimental gene therapy spike protein never used on humans before & without any long term safety data?? I’d say the writer etc are all bloody hypocrites!!
Hey Micheal, were the so accused ‘vaccinated’ (I use that term lightly – pls read medical defintion of vaccination) thru informed consent or coercion? Or perhaps, could it be maybe possible that the ‘holy grail of the jab’ might have been subject more spin than efficacy???? Hmmm, it’s a mystery 😛