Compulsory COVID vaccination is legal – Law Professor Rose-Marie Belle Antoine

11

Prominent Caribbean Law Professor, Rose-Marie Belle Antoine on Thursday said COVID-19 vaccination could be made compulsory without violating human rights, constitution and the law.

“It’s a fairly easy sell for me to accept that mandatory vaccination is constitutionally legitimate and we have good precedent for it since we already have laws mandating vaccines for children’s entry into schools,” said Ms. Belle Antoine, the Dean of the Faculty of Law at the University of the West Indies’ campus in Trinidad.

Delivering a presentation to  a discussion on “Mandatory Vaccination” that was organised by the “Organization of Commonwealth Caribbean Bar Association and the Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States Bar Association, she said “compulsory requirement  for the COVID-19 vaccine is justifiable in law” constitutionally or in the private sector.

At the same time, she said there are social and industrial relations implications which could make compulsory vaccination legal but not desirable. Professor Bell Antoine said the key is to take the route that poses the least hurdle for human rights such as those dealing with socioeconomic considerations, and the right to health, safety and life, based on reasonableness based on the constitution or private action or labour laws as well as proportionality. Significantly, several of the constitutions specify public health… and even going further, infectious diseases as acceptable rationales for limiting rights,” the Law Professor said. In that regard, she believed that employers would be persuaded to follow the constitutional provisions.

Responding to the view in some circles that the law does not provide for mandatory vaccination, Professor Belle Antoine said when the law is silent the assumption is that it is permissible unless the court rules otherwise.

Noting that the right to liberty can be abridged when there is an infectious contagious disease, Professor Belle Antoine said the trend was to lean in favour of ensuring public health rather than prioritise individual rights. She said already rights to free movement had been curtailed by Trinidad and Tobago by preventing citizens from returning home due to the pandemic, states of emergency and the wearing of masks. Professor Belle Antoine recommended that rights be balanced for the greater good by examining. That, she said, could be done by examining the levels of risks facing those who are designated frontline workers compared to those who are not as well as the availability of other methods such as personal protective equipment, social distancing and the wearing of masks. “If science shows that the vaccine is not going to be so effective, then limiting rights may not be justifiable,” she said.

The Law Professor argued that employers could decide on compulsory vaccination based on the risk that workers face at their workplaces because of the need to ensure workers’ health and safety and those of others. “High-risk environment will make it more reasonable to compel vaccines and a low-risk workplace, maybe social distancing and homework and so on will be sufficient and so it will be less reasonable,” she said.

The Professor said although amending the terms and conditions of work should not be encouraged, there are exceptional circumstances such as health and safety that could justify employers making the necessary changes, “I disagree that requiring a vaccine will be an unlawful, unilateral change in terms and conditions of employment because health and safety is also a contractual term and that will trump others and, of course, we know that in exceptional circumstances, you can change employment terms and conditions although we don’t encourage it so in that sense where the employer seeks to honour that duty, it can’t be said that terms and conditions are being altered,” said the Labour Law expert.  Professor Belle Antoine said employers could be held to be “irresponsible or negligent” for failing to take steps to protect the workers.

Another option could be “soft law” and an “illusion of choice” by giving persons the option of, for example, being unable to board flights of they  are not vaccinated against the coronavirus.

Belize lists a number of workers, including teachers, as frontline workers who are encouraged be vaccinated against COVID-19 vaccine or take a weekly test. If they do not, they would not be allowed to work and would be considered absent from duty.

[News784]

CLICK HERE TO JOIN OUR WHATSAPP GROUP

11 COMMENTS

  1. Stay woke ppl they jus said that unvaccinated persons will be able to board the crew ships. They know im America that they can b sued so they have to be very careful how they go about violating the rights of the people. We here need to know our rights and don’t fall victim to their agenda. We have a right to what and how anything enteres our temple. Especially when everyone seems to be have 0 liability at the end of the day.

  2. Mandatory homes for the homeless ,
    Mandatory jobs for the jobless,
    Mandatory food for the poor and needy since you all care about the well beings of people. Let’s make all these things mandatory also.
    Don’t just show vaccine love, show homeless and jobless love

  3. Professor, climb down from your ivory tower. The rarified air is making you dizzy.

    It appears that Law Professor Rose-Marie Belle Antoine is ignorant of the Nuremberg Code enacted in 1947

    The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential. This means that the person involved should have legal capacity to give consent; should be so situated as to be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, overreaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion; and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved as to enable him to make an understanding and enlightened decision.

    The code spells out 10 principals, the violation of the code is punishable by death. The code stipulates that the experimental drugs must be safe. The experiment should be so conducted as to avoid all unnecessary physical and mental suffering and injury. The degree of risk to be taken should never exceed that determined by the humanitarian importance of the problem to be solved by the experiment. During the course of the experiment the scientist in charge must be prepared to terminate the experiment at any stage, if he has probable cause to believe, in the exercise of the good faith, superior skill and careful judgment required of him, that a continuation of the experiment is likely to result in injury, disability, or death to the experimental subject.

    Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) for the USA alone has recorded over 10,000 deaths from the vaccines with 100’s of thousands of injuries. Therefore the vaccines are not safe.

    Recent scientific evidence from Spain shows that the vaccines contain 99.99% graphene oxide which is a industrial poison.

    There is NO justification to mandate any vaccine when the recovery rate is 99.99% and there are other drugs that prevent and cure covid like Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine.

    • @ CLIMB DOWN . WELL WRITTEN YOU’RE THE NEW PROFESSOR !

      • In My little mind I am trying to figure out how come one of the first moves made when these experimental drugs were introduced, both the manufacturers and organized systems pushing vaccinations was to be exempt from any responsibility for the resulting negative consequences. This coupled with no guarantee that any of the drug would stop one from being infected or transmitting the virus. Covid-19 is unprecedented and may even require amendment to the law, but we should thread carefully how we push the idea of mandatory “vaccinations”, especially in the Caribbean. Many would wish that it’s them living in paradise

    • VAERS website debunked by Snopes because all entries are not medically verified.
      The site is populated by anti-vaxers.

      Please verify your sources before preaching.

      Meantime, FACT over 90% of spiralling upwards UK/USA variant driven hospitalizations are unvaccinated / not fully vaccinated people.

      Mask. Sanitize. Distance.
      Consider vaccination.

      • CDC uses the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) to closely monitor reports of death following COVID-19 vaccination. FDA requires healthcare providers to report any death after COVID-19 vaccination to VAERS. V

        VAERS is a USA voluntary database and if it weren’t for them there would be NO reporting agency on adverse effects of the jab. The UK YELLOW CARD reporting system has even higher numbers then VAERS is reporting for USA.

        As for your ‘claim that it is populated by anti-vaxers, I can’t imagine how you would know that.

        I couldn’t verify your ‘claim’ of fact that 90% variant hospitalizations were unvaccinated.

        There is ZERO scientific peer reviewed data that MASKS, SANITIZE AND DISTANCING even work. That is all worthless nonsense.

      • By now, you’ve hopefully realized that nearly all mainstream news that has to do with safety, health and human rights is fake and sourced by even more fake news. It’s a circle of deception that leads to nowhere, except making all the wrong choices about the important aspects of life. Why is it set up that way? Money. There’s way more money in managing sick Americans than healing them. That’s where Snopes comes in. In order to mislead the masses when they have those moments of second guessing, Snopes is there to reassure you that your biggest mistakes are the right mistakes.

        Snopes is a fake fact checker with one goal – ensuring you only find bad advice online about everything that really matters. Not only is Snopes a source of fake stories now, they were once known as the “Urban Legends” reference pages, spreading myths and rumors and pretending to “debunk” truths all over the internet about healthy eating, effective supplements, and even the evidence-based, clinical research and peer-reviewed science behind nutrition. How did the fake fact checker “legend” start? They were the first to call themselves the “online encyclopedia.” That’s how.

        A has-been, unpleasant-looking, nerdy ex-couple decided one day in the mid-1990’ to begin making a website that had “answers” to questionable discussions found on line. They even tried to start a TV pilot, but it failed right away. After Snopes failed miserably for several years as the “online encyclopedia,” they hired shills from message boards to help save their website. That must have worked, because a few years later they got bought out by Proper Media, an internet management firm.

        The fake fact checkers began “modernizing” archives (in other words, changing history books to fit a narrative). This was the beginning of “book burning,” but without using fire. Instead you just change what people find online when they search for certain answers, especially that which is already popularly questionable. They even lie about Vietnam. It’s one big disinformation campaign fueled and sourced by more propaganda.

        The end goal is to make money by lying about the most important things people really want to understand in order to be healthy, safe, and independent thinkers.

        Snopes main aim is to “confirm legends” by convincing you vaccines are safe and genetically modified food is healthy. They love to discredit any natural cures and remedies, so that people who are fed up with the failing allopathic (a.k.a. allopathetic) system of slash and burn medical horrors, will turn to the internet to find real answers to their health problems, only to wind up believing Snopes’ lies. It’s a planned vicious cycle, and it’s been around for quite awhile now. Millions of Americans think Snopes gives real advice. Working advice. Not fooling them into being the fools they already are, but forever.

        That’s why millions of Americans can’t figure out how they get cancer, even though they’re eating GMO food at every meal, and then taking experimental chemical concoctions made in laboratories for all their sicknesses (a.k.a. prescription medications).

        Snopes references fake news media giants, and they reference Snopes in return, like one big circle jerk of lying morons. Yes, Snopes loves CNN, the sleazebag NYT, and “orange man bad” MSNBC. That’s really all you need to know to never trust them with anything, ever. The schmuck shyster and con who thought it all up still runs it from his couch. He’s paid by pharma thugs to continue working as a shill for life, pointing millions of sheeple (about 6 million monthly) towards his deadly cliff of “advice.”

        If you want to believe urban legends about vaccines helping people or prescription drugs being the answer to your health problems, just read Snopes fake encyclopedia answers to your friends, family, neighbors and coworkers. Then your “herd immunity” will be realized when you all go off the health cliff together.

        The Snopes repository of garbage and fecal matter online was intended to deliberately mislead people about important subjects. That’s why Snopes is the original internet troll, because T.R.O.L.L. is an acronym for “The Repository of Lost Legends.” The whole project name is like spitting in the face of their own believers. It’s an internet prank.

        In 2009, FactCheck.org (another fake fact checker monolith) likes how good Snopes had become at lying about political issues and began backing their efforts. Snopes is a far-Left political hack outfit that only applies it’s “debunking standards” to truth news and independent media when their real news affects big pharma or biotech profits.

        Snopes accepts funding from known pedophiles (think paranormal-pervert James Randi here) and at least $100,000 from Mark F.B. Satan Zuckerberg, as part of their fake fact-checking “partnership.” Then, Snopes claimed they broke up with Fakebook in February, 2019.

        Maybe one day soon they’ll start a “relationship” with some other fake fact checker like NPR, Politifact, or PBS. But for now, they sell a “premium membership” in fake fact checking for people who absolutely LOVE being lied to daily (without ads popping up for your convenience). Are you too suffering from O.M.B.D. – “Orange Man Bad Disease?” Tune your internet dial to HealthFreedom.news for updates on new vaccines that maim and kill humans while spreading disease, all while fake fact checkers tell you they’re “safe and effective!” Hey Snopes, you are now officially debunked as a fact checker. You’re welcome.

  4. That’s the other issue, a lot of what is given as facts are not. There’s a great need to make a concerted effort to separate the real facts from what is not.

Comments are closed.