Please forward this message to all your networks and do not comply any longer.
Craig Kelly and Tony from AFL Solicitors are running a case against the NSW Health Minister and Chief Medical Officer in the NSW Supreme Court to obtain a ruling to declare such vaccine mandates unlawful and in breach of the Australian Constitution section 51(xxiiiA), the Nuremberg Code of which Australia upheld after WWII and is a signatory, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights as well as other federal and state laws including the Federal Bio Security Act which makes any coercion or compulsion of any medical procedure unlawful including expressly “vaccines” without freely given informed consent.
Although it is not feasible to predict what the High Court of Australia—the nation’s apex legal body—would do if it were called upon to consider the constitutionality of vaccine mandates and emergency declaration orders, it is still possible to argue what it should do.
The Australian Constitution must be interpreted in a manner that promotes its purposes, values, and principles, while advancing the “rule of law” and the fundamental rights of the citizen.
The idea of mandatory vaccination—which is now steadily underway in Australia to combat the spread of COVID-19—sits uncomfortably with this jurisprudence.
The Constitution expressly limits the exercise of government power to protect the rule of law. This limitation reduces the incidence of unrestrained power, which is closely connected to achieving human freedom and happiness.
Accordingly, the Constitution allocates legislative power over certain health services to the federal government (or Commonwealth), with these powers being exclusive or concurrent to those wielded by the Australian states.
However, Section 51 (xxiiiA) of the Australian Constitution, which was added following a referendum in 1946, provides that the Commonwealth Parliament can make laws with respect to: “The provision of … pharmaceutical, sickness and hospital benefits, medical and dental services (but not so as to authorize any form of civil conscription), benefits to students and family allowances.”
One of the most remarkable characteristics of the Australian Constitution is its express limitation on governmental powers. In drafting the Constitution, the framers sought to design an instrument of government intended to distribute and limit the powers of the State. This distribution and limitation upon governmental powers was deliberately chosen because of the proper understanding that unrestrained power is always inimical to the achievement of human freedom and happiness. As such, the Constitution allocates the areas of legislative power to the Commonwealth primarily in sections 51 and 52, with these powers being variously exclusive or concurrent with the Australian States.
The Constitution was slightly amended in 1946 by a referendum in order to include section 51 (xxiiiA). This provision determines that the Parliament, inter alia, can make laws with respect to:
The provision of … pharmaceutical, sickness and hospital benefits, medical and dental services (but not so as to authorise any form of civil conscription) benefits to students and family allowances…
In Part One of a 6-part series of interviews with Darren Dixon for the ‘GLOSSA channel’ he explains the good news for Australians. The highest court in the land, the High Court of Australia has already ruled that under law, Australians can refuse all government ‘mandatory’ vaccinations as well as any government medical services.