Court Of Appeal Rules Against The Rights Of Teachers Who Were Mandated In Nov 2021
After a year-long wait for their decision, the NZ Court of Appeal Fails to Uphold The New Zealand Bill of Rights for Teachers
New Zealand Teachers Speaking Out with Science (NZTSOS) is disappointed that the Courts have again failed in their responsibility to uphold our New Zealand Bill of Rights.
“In our recent history there has never been such an abuse of human rights that has cost so many for the sake of so little,” says NZTSOS spokesperson, Mike Shaw, “This is a loss, not only for the many dedicated education workers whose careers were prematurely terminated, but for all New Zealanders. It affirms that the government can impinge upon basic human rights with little justification.”
The Education Workers mandate originated from discussions between education officials and teacher unions, and was likely a knee-jerk response in an attempt to restore public confidence in schools. “It was a public relations exercise, not a public health exercise,” says NZTSOS chairperson Rachael Mortimer. The public health rationale was belatedly provided four days after the cabinet had already decided to proceed. In their haste, the government gave no consideration to the alternatives that were available, and the exemption criteria were unreasonably narrow.
“The damage to those educators who were forced to leave schools under a black cloud should be acknowledged. The damage to educators with health issues who legitimately could not gain an exemption, but were vilified because of this, should be acknowledged. The damage to all those teachers coerced to do something against their will should be acknowledged. This is why we can not accept this ruling,” says Mortimer.
Teachers were given the ultimatum of taking the vaccine or ending their careers – despite there being uncertainty about the efficacy of the vaccine in reducing transmission and a total absence of long-term safety data. “Many said at the start that this irrational mandate was never going to work. We all now know they were right,” says Mortimer. The resulting consequences of this hasty and ill-conceived action were devastating to individuals and to the education community.
“We’d like to thank our legal team from Frontline Law, members of NZTSOS and all our supporters,” says Shaw. “Now NZTSOS will be seeking advice over the next few weeks to determine if there are grounds to seek leave to appeal to the Supreme Court.
For the sake of future generations, we must do everything we possibly can to ensure that the Bill of Rights is never disregarded so easily by future governments. This is far more important than a few teachers losing their jobs. This is the future of all of our democratic rights being upheld.”
Why does the Court of Appeal have a different outcome to the NZDF ruling that their mandates were unlawful?
On February 14 2024, the Court of Appeal ruled that the NZ Defence Force mandates were unlawful. How does the same court have a different ruling with teachers than it does with Defence Force personnel?
However even with this ruling, mandates for our DF remain in place:
NZTSOS Interview and Update - February 2024
Last month I chatted with Rachael about the teachers long wait, and anticipation of the Court of Appeal’s decision, after the NZ Defence Force ruling. This is a great summary of the situation mandates teachers have faced since 2021:
Source: NZTSOS Media Release 26/03/2024
Please stay in touch!
See more from Penny Marie, including all social media links.
Yes, but my point is that seeking 'justice' from the system cannot work as the system has no connection with justice.
It is purely a commercial operation.
As the Mob says "its not personal, its just business"
Ergo, the only possible justice they can get is to remove themselves from the commercial system completely and then join with the rest of of us in building our own system.
I am happy they are speaking out.
I hope they can learn from their experience.
I hear the phrase 'down the rabbit-hole' quite a bit but it doesn't make a lot of sense to me.
I haven't gone down any rabbit-hole. I am using the legislation, the papers written by the 'players,' dictionaries, videos of interviews of others who have studied same.
Therefore, I don't think it is a personal decision as to how much knowledge, facts, etc people dare to learn, but rather a choice as to whether or not people really want to make a change or just shift the deckchairs a bit.
I think the answers are right on the surface. the issue seems to be the indoctrination that has trained us to alter what we see and hear and make assumptions that are in line with the narrative.