Vaccine Mandates: Human Rights Destroyed by Emergency Declarations (Malcolm Roberts)

In light of Professor Brendan Murphy’s, the Secretary Department of Health & Aged Care, evidence during the June estimates that mandates are no longer justifiable, I asked the Human Rights Commissioner, Lorraine Finlay, for their latest guidance on COVID vaccine mandates.

Commissioner Finlay's response was that this advice has not changed throughout the COVID response in terms of general human rights principles. What this means is that although governments can restrict individual human rights in an emergency, those restrictions need to be proportionate, non-discriminatory and targeted to risk.

This goes to the heart of the problem. Decisions were made that put Australia onto an emergency footing in 2020. Yet this has dragged on beyond what is reasonable. The response has not been proportionate to the risk of the COVID infection, which the Chief Medical Officer in March of 2021 admitted was low to moderate.

Discrimination remains to this day against those who exercised their right to say no to injections, despite the coercion. We must have a system in place whereby civil liberties are rightfully returned. The Australian Human Rights Commission should be at the forefront of calling for this, yet they appear to be captured, with the exception of Commissioner Finlay, who has come out strongly in support of human rights principles.

Commissioner Finlay is looking forward to the COVID Inquiry that was recently announced, after the Senate approved my motion to establish an inquiry to recommend and report on the Terms of Reference for a COVID-19 Royal Commission. She sees the need not only to look at the economic and scientific impacts and advice that were given throughout the COVID response, but the human cost too.



The Human Rights Commissioner has it wrong in believing that they can suspend human rights in an emergency when it comes to coercing people into taking an experimental medicine. You can never force people into a medical experiment. It's against International Law (the ICCPR). There is no escape clause when it comes to this matter.

If YOU think such a medication will help you it's your choice to take it provided informed consent is given. However, you cannot force others to do the same.

The reason is simple, aside from it being an assault. If there is a problem with the experimental medicine, then more people could get harmed than helped. 

Moreover, at the time of the jab roll outs we knew that Covid was not a serious threat to healthy individuals from overseas data, and so there was no emergency (except one created in the minds of officials). They wrongly used the excuse of an emergency to illegally abolish your human rights and common sense.

Furthermore, the public was told lies that the jabs were safe and effective, and official bodies such as the TGA still cling to these lies, when we know that neither of these things are true. Proper safety tests were NEVER conducted, with data from the efficacy trials showing clear evidence of harms (that subsequent analysis showed outweighed the claimed benefits). When it came to efficacy the absolute risk reduction, evident in the trials data, showed only a 1 percent benefit. The drug companies mislead the public by using a relative risk reduction method in order to hide the fact their drugs showed no real effects. 

Which ever way you cut it there was no justification to illegally suspend human rights. Anyone in a command authority position that did so committed a very serious crime. 

[Posted at the SpookyWeather2 blog, November 17, 2023.]