For background info go here
“From Outdoors party press release: “It is arguable that the Crown has acted unlawfully”!
We won because we were right. We lost because the judge is going to let them do it anyway.
The press release says:
*“The High Court has just released its decision on the urgent challenge to the Pfizer vaccine approval and vaccination rollout plan, agreeing with the plaintiff that it was reasonably arguable that the Minister’s approval was unlawful. Her Honour Justice Ellis has agreed that everyone in New Zealand over 16 is not a limited number of patients, and so the decision is arguably ultra vires the requirements of s23 of the Medicines Act, and she has urged the government to reconsider the lawfulness of the provisional consent they granted for the Pfizer vaccine. Her Honour stopped short of ordering the vaccine rollout to stop, out of concern of undermining public confidence in the vaccine and wasting vaccine stock that is already in New Zealand.””
(Above comment by Amanda Vickers at facebook).
Legally, citing Lawyer, Sue Grey’s conclusions:
“..the judge urged the Crown to [re]consider the law carefully… That’s about all she can do due to a law passed in 2016”.
You can hear Sue’s commentary (pre govt’s subsequent announcements) here at this link.
However…. the Crown has now come up with a Plan B, saying they had been going to tweak the provisional law anyway!
“Health Minister Andrew Little says Section 23 has been used over 40 years by successive Governments to grant early access to approved therapeutic substances when it is in the public good.”
(Links to mainstream media’s coverage are below)
Sue comments regarding today’s emergency reform:
“The government has announced an emergency reform of the Medicines Act because they were copped acting unlawfully. But it’s not even on the listed Parliamentary business… They apparently have no respect for any rules, for truth or justice and accordingly no business representing us” (Sue Grey, Lawyer).
FURTHER UPDATE (19/5/21)
“Attorney-General David Parker misleading Parliament. They have made the new amendment “Notwithstanding s22….” Section 22 requires the benefit of a new medicine to exceed the risks. The removal of this criteria is a fundamental and very serious change. Why would anyone who is supposed to represent the public interest approve a new medicine on a provisional or any other basis if the benefit does NOT exceed the risks? This is what happens when the PM and Ministers arrogantly ignore an open letter then rush through law without consultation or social licence.” (Sue Grey, Lawyer)
Read at the mainstream sources below & decide for yourself. Those who wish to take this experimental injection, that is their personal right & choice. And those who do not, likewise. The point of this challenge in court was that the provisional approval was for a limited number of people only, not for all of NZ. However, as we can see here, the Crown will sort that no problem, by tweaking the paperwork. It has been clear from the media spin from way back that it is their intention to have everybody take the experimental injection anyway. After all they have purchased enough supplies to accommodate every Kiwi for two doses. As her Honour Judge Ellis has said yesterday … in spite of the aforementioned cautionary statements, they don’t want to waste that stock or undermine public confidence.
I note the ‘limited number’ concern seems to have now slipped into oblivion.
New Zealand is changing the law TODAY (Robin Westenra @ seemorerocks website)
Info on emergency approval at Pfizer’s source country: https://www.fda.gov/vaccines-blood-biologics/vaccines/emergency-use-authorization-vaccines-explained