The importance of doing this is
further necessary as New Zealand's Government and the other 193 nation
states party to the World Health Organisation (WHO) are negotiating toward
endorsing a Pandemic Treaty and amendments to the International Health
Regulations 2005 (IHR). Much has been said about what is in the drafts and the
intent of these instruments. One thing is for sure, the desire of WHO and the
various governments including NZ is to double down on the COVID-19 Pandemic
Response.
As such we must act to inoculate NZ and our population from mass
global overreach and mendacious stupidity.
With that as the ground we are
working with, I dust off my proposal to fix the Bill of Rights. I'll do a
further post on the Pandemic Treaty and amendments to the International Health
Regulations 2005 in the near term, as I have taken an active interest in these
from 2021.
Here's how to fix the Bill of Rights so it protects the life and
security of the person.
Petition of Greg Rzesniowiecki: Amend Section 5 and add a new section 5A to
the NZ Bill of Rights Act 1990
published November 2021 and sponsored to the House in December 2021 by ACT Party
leader David Seymour.
Here's a
link to the evidence I tendered and screen capture of the papers, which includes
the advice from the Ministry of Justice to the Petitions Committee. note the
Ministry of Health did not offer any advice to counter my evidence in respect to
the COVID-19 phenomena or the Government's Response:
https://www.parliament.nz/en/pb/sc/submissions-and-advice/all?custom=PET_117877
A number of Freedom parties have made claims about entrenching BORA and or
making it supreme law.
There is a problem with entrenchment of the Law or
getting rid of Section 5 in the sense that, "which rights are entrenched?"
Section 5 is about justified limitations. Recall we all support, "do no harm."
If there were no justified limitations on freedoms you’d get some absurd and
dangerous results: for example, “freedom of movement” would mean that we
couldn’t jail murderers, “freedom of expression” would mean that there could be
no offence of possessing child pornography. So we need to comprehend justified
limits!
The solution needs to be nuanced and effective.
The solution I proposed was simply to make supreme law or entrench those
sections that protect the life and security of the person sections
8, 9, 10 and 11, which would stop any future mandates if we gained a majority in
the House to make it so!
Matt King has known about this since it was promoted in
2021, so has Bishop Tamaki and Sue Grey and more. I'm not sure about Leighton
Baker, (but he follows me on facebook so must have a clue).
These all know the
problem of entrenchment versus fixing section 5 "Justified Limits." I
promoted the Petition to the House in 2021.
My Petition read; That the House of
Representatives amend Section 5 of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 by
inserting “and subject to section 5A”, and insert a new section 5A: “Unjustified
limitations” to say “None of sections 4, 5, 6 provide any justified limits on
rights and freedoms contained in sections 8, 9, 10 and 11”
Read the Bill of
Rights here particularly sections 8, 9, 10 and 11:
I
provided two initial documents to the Petitions Committee and a request to
present oral evidence in person. They didn't want to let me near them in person.
The Petitions Committee invited advice from the Ministry of Justice (MoJ).
MoJ
provided advice to the Petitions Committee in respect to my petition to fix S 5
of BORA in July 2021:
Which said in part;
Most of the rights cited in the petition either cannot be justifiably
limited, or would be very difficult to justifiably limit, as described in
the next section.
MoJ said in respect to s 11 (the right to refuse medication);
Section 11 protects the ability of individuals to decline to have medical
treatment, safeguarding individual autonomy and dignity. There are a number of
circumstances in which section 11 can be justifiably limited; for example,
medical treatment of children, cases where a power of attorney is activated,
or where persons need emergency medical treatment and are unconscious. Rule
7(4) of the Code of Health and Disability Services Consumers’ Rights permits
treatment without consent in circumstances such as these.
The Ministry of Justice advice did nothing to negate my proposed amendment to
BORA, and in respect to the critique they did offer I propose a solution, see
below.
In August 2021 I provided the Petitions Committee with a response to the
MoJ paper and adjustment to s 11 to accommodate their specific concerns. From
page 7 of my paper.
Without prejudice, MoJ's advice provides for limited derogations and only for
specific circumstances where a person, not a class of persons, might be unable
to provide their consent freely; eg: children and persons unable to make
decisions for themselves.
If the examples provided in the MoJ advice are the
sum total of the NZ Government and Parliament's concern in relation to the
absolutism of the proposed BORA amendment, I imagine a suitable qualifying
addendum might be added to section 11 similar to the caveat in Sec 8; that is,
the right not to be deprived of life except in accordance with fundamental
justice.
Without prejudice, section 11 might state;
Everyone has the right to refuse to undergo any medical treatment; the
caveat being;
informed consent might be provided for children by their guardians, and for
persons unable to make decisions for themselves by lawfully enacted
means.
This elaborates the individual and specific nature of any derogation. The
petitioner looks favourably upon any similar textual solution. Ends.
All this requires reading and study, the links are here.
If we want to fix BORA
this is a potential effective solution.
Then ask why the freedom parties cannot
comprehend the fix?
When I proposed this solution in the petition I concentrated
on Sections 8, 9, 10 and 11. It may be that we could also fix other aspects of
BORA in similar fashion to stop any discrimination based on digital IDs or
health passports.
However, if we fix BORA to protect the life and security of
the person, the rest of the NWO impositions would probably fail as they
undermine the working of this proposed fix.
The key message herein is this
proposed amendment to BORA would effectively entrench freedom from medical
mandate.
I hope this assists the conversation about how to ensure no more health
mandates.
