Australian Biosecurity Act

Australian Lawyer Serene Teffaha explains the Australian Law (Federal framework) on "Biosecurity Act", with respect to the topics of "forced medical measures & procedures": [291, 326]

The legislative framework doesn't operate on one section. It operates on a framework. It's a series of laws that are meant to be read and understood in context.
The public health risks, specially national public health risks, operates through the "Biosecurity Act 2015". [305] This "Biosecurity Act" sits on top of that framework.
It gives itself the priority, when it comes to health risks.

Section 8 - The Biosecurity Act is the "Boss"

"Section 8" of the "Biosecurity Act" (Chapter 1, Part 1) is clear about how it is intended to apply to its territories. Is a legislation that sets itself up as the "boss". "It does not exclude or limit the operation of the law or state that is capable of operating concurrently with this act". That means, what the states and territories want to do with their laws, cannot be inconsistent with this act.
It gives a specific carve out: when it comes to emergency directions in relation to emergency powers, the Biosecurity Act gives itself the number one priority.

Section 475 - Who Can Declare a State of Emergency

When can a state of emergency be declared? "Part 2, Division 1, Section 475" by the Governor-General. On 18th March 2020, he declared a state of emergency. The states and territories can do so as well, as long as they are acting in accord with the Bisecurity Act.

Section 477 - Requirements for Health Minister

"Part 2, Division 1, Section 477", sets up the requirements for the Federal Health Minister determining emergency requirements during human biosecurity emergency period. Subsection 3, requirements that apply to persons entering or leaving specified places, and places to be evacuated.
Meaning you cannot do things on a particular individual, including:
- diagnosing,
- taking body samples,
- asking people to wear specific clothing or equipment (masks),
- vaccinating,
- medicating,
- testing,
- contact tracing.
Meaning, these things can only be authorised when you can show that you are exposed to a risk of the disease, or that you have signs and symptoms of that disease.
No laws, no policy can require you to be bodily sampled, vaccinated, detained, isolated, clothing (masks). You cannot be required to do those things, unless it is under strict circumstances.
Those circumstances are captured under Sections 60 and 61 ("Chapter 3, Part 3").

Section 60: Requirement to Impose Restrictions

Section 60 of the Biosecurity Act tells you what you need to do before you impose the restrictions on someone, and when you can impose it. Essentially, when "the individual has one or more of the symptoms of a listed human disease, or the individual has been exposed to a listed human disease, or another individual who has one or more signs of a listed human disease, or the individual failed to comply with an entry requirement"
if you are sick on entry to the country, you need to be isolating.
But that is ONLY IF YOU ARE SICK. Only if you show signs and symptoms. Only an authorised officer can impose the restrictions. On the individual.
Section 61 of the Biosecurity Act specifies what has to be in the order that is specified to you, one you have shown that you are at risk, when you have the signs and symptoms. Only under those circumstances.
Perfectly healthy people should not be required to do anything.
Because the presumption under the Biosecurity Act is that YOU ARE HEALTHY UNTIL YOU'RE PROVEN SICK. YOU ARE INNOCENT, UNTIL YOU'RE PROVEN GUILTY. Not the other way around.
"People get enrolled for the sake of everyone". That's not how science works, "for the sake of everyone".
Science works in relation to the identification of risk. When you're at risk, then measures can be taken.
It can't be taken on a group.
This is a framework that has been studied very very careful based on legality and science.
We're not here to pedal DOGMA. We're here to pedal SCIENCE.
And science says that we will ask you to do things, when we determine that you are at risk.
If your employer is saying to you "you need to be vaccinated":
- You cannot require me to do so.
- Are you an authorised officer? No.
- Am I at risk?, And has a medical practitioner assessed my infectious risk status? No.
- Have you issued me a Biosecurity Control Order, specifying the reasons and everything? No.
- Then you cannot require me!
- You can "recommend" it, but you cannot require me to do so, because there is no serious risk that I need to mitigate.
- Employer, do not have the right to make it as policy. Policy has to be lawful, based on the laws. There're laws for that purpose.

Section 61 Biosecurity Control Order

Now, what is constituted by a BioSecurity Control Order is this: Section 61, of the Biosecurity Act.
- the ground under which the order is imposed on the individual
- the listed human disease
- any signs or symptoms to be listed
- the prescribed contact information provided by the individual
- a unique identifier code
- each biosecurity measure and an explanation why they are required, in relation to decontamination, examination, body samples, etc
- any information required to be included
- period of enforcement must not be more than 3 months
- and in relation to be issued the appropriate rights of review (very important)
We have "rights of review" in this country, and they don't go away just because government says so.
There is something called "the balance", and we need to be balanced, because we do not have the statistics around us to jump into an unbalanced state.
There are laws. They are trying to provoke us against each other.
You're presumed healthy, before you are sick.
You're not presumed sick, and have to prove your health. This is archaic thinking! This is DOGMA!
What are the Biosecurity measures?
- They cannot require you, no one can require to you, to give contacts, unless they issue a Biosecurity Control Order.
- The health status, unless a Biosecurity Contorl Order.
- Restricting behaviour ... a Biosecurity Control Order.
- Clothing and equipment ... a Biosecurity Control Order.

Section 88 - Clothing

You don't tell healthy people to be masked. That's not how we work in this country. It's not how it works. No. Specially when we have other measures, such as social distancing. Specially when we've got RCTs (Randomised Control Trial experiments) stating that there are issues with those masks.
Science has been thrown out the window.
Section 88 - Risk minimisation interventions (Clothing)
Section 89 - Decontamination
Section 90 - Undergoing Examination
Section 91 - Requiring body samples for diagnosis
Please look it up.

Section 92 - Receiving Vaccination

When your employer or university "requires vaccination":
- they need to issue to the individual a Biosecurity Control Order
- otherwise, it is just a "recommendation"
It is your body, your choice.
Unless you're sick and there is an actual reason to be vaccinated or medicated (Section 93)
Unless you're given your review rights.
Then, NO, IT CANNOT BE DONE.
Section 93 - Receiving medication
Section 94 - Appropriate medical or other standards
Section 95 - No use of force
Section 96 - Traveller movement measures
Section 97 - Isolation measures

How That Sits with the States?

The states are everywhere; their laws are sticky-taped together. There's no consistency with the Biosecurity Act.
In Victoria:
- Section 200, of the "Public Health and Mental Well-being Act". Detainment. Has not been changed since 2008.
- There's legislation to bring it in line with the Biosecurity Act.
- Section 117, and 123 were introduced recently, to bring them in line.
- Section 117 says you need to issue a person a Public Health Order, similar to what a Biosecurity Control Order says.
- Again, YOU ARE HEALTHY, UNTIL PROVING "GUILTY" ... UNTIL PROVEN SICK.
- That's how science works.
- And just because you test positive, it does not mean that you are infectious; so get over it! It is settled!
- The fact that the tests actually do not confirm diagnosis.
- We need to be told how many people have recovered.
- So, what's in a Public Health Order?
  - It must be in writing.
  - It must specify the person the order applies to.
  - It must specify the purpose of the order.
  - It must specify the infectious disease the specified person has been exposed to.
  - It must explain why the chief officer believes the person is infected.
  - It must specify the period.
  - It must specify the person's rights and entitlements under the Act.
  - It must specify the purpose for making application for review.
  - It must contain a statement for the person to seek legal advice.
  - It must explain if the person does not comply to the order, and what penalty applies.
  - It goes on to explain the things the person shouldn't do, including:
    - the places that you cannot visit,
    - residing at a specified place,
    - refraining from specified forms of behaviour,
    - submitting for supervision by a person nominated, including attending meetings, receiving meetings, etc
    - receiving a prophylaxis, including specified vaccination,
    - undergoing specified pharmacological treatment.
- There are contradictions within Victoria's legislation: section 117 is contradicting section 200. You just don't go around willy-nilly detaining everyone as you see fit.
- Enforcement orders. There are laws about that as well.

Conclusion

So these are the laws, this is how they apply.
We say that the States and Territories legislation have to run concurrently with the biosecurity act. And when they are in conflict, when there is inconsistency, clearly the Biosecurity Act takes precedence.
When you are asked to do something, or when you're required to do something, ask if you had been issued the right documentation.
Has my infection disease status been ruled as having a risk? Only then, I can be ordered to do certain things.
There is a legislative framework for dealing with that, and I suggest that you look at it closely.
We will be issuing information closely in terms of a class action, and we look forward to most Australians signing up for common sense.
There are certain things that we should not be fear-mongering here; Daniel Andrews, COVID is not a "bushfire". How dare you say that? Half a billion animals died in the bushfire. Thousands of people were impacted.
And now we're creating impacts that are not necessary.
Manage thoughtfully, in accordance to our legislation, the associated risks, without going mad.
Watch out space carefully. More information is coming soon.