Principles And Spine

The stories that get told of history are most often stories of those who stood against tyranny. From Schindler to the French Resistance to Tiananmen Square Tank Man to the 1981 Springbok Tour protests over apartheid here in New Zealand. More than 150,000 Kiwis took part in over 200 demonstrations in 28 centres, protesting human rights in South Africa.

This is another pivotal moment in our history for many New Zealanders, vaccinated or not. There is increasing recognition that if we don’t speak up now while we can, we'll come to regret it. This time it's our human rights at stake! New Zealanders are generally known as easy-going and compliant, but all over this country people are taking to the streets once again. Most of these people are first time protesters.  

Twice in a matter of weeks, Sir Russell Coutts has entered the COVID fray lending his voice to growing concerns that as a nation, we're headed in the wrong direction. He states,

The erosion of our freedom of choice, freedom of speech and the loss of precious time with family and friends and all the other negative aspects of a lockdown should be balanced against the health risk of COVID.

It's not the virus we need to worry about, but increasingly authoritarian government seeking to consolidate or extend their powers. In Victoria, Australia, tens of thousands of ordinary citizens have taken to the streets to stop Premier Daniel Andrews' grab for unmitigated power. In Austria, UK, Netherlands, Belgium, Croatia, Italy, France... the list goes on. People are protesting.

In New Zealand there is growing uneasiness that this is about more than getting a jab. We're talking coercion with threats to livelihood and therefore forced vaccination, with the erosion of human rights we once took for granted. New Zealanders’ right to informed consent or informed refusal over medical care is enshrined in our 1990 Bill of Rights. This isn't the current Governments to give, nor take away. It includes the Right to refuse to undergo medical treatment - Everyone has the right to refuse to undergo any medical treatment. To quote Russell Coutts,

The Bill of Rights should protect New Zealanders against such dictatorial actions of governments. I would guess most of us never thought we would ever see this happen in New Zealand.

If the Government can so easily remove the right to medical choice (protected under current laws), what other rights could they remove in the name of an ‘emergency’? Freedom of expression? Freedom of movement? With the prospect of vaccine passports, are we almost there already? Once implemented, could those passports be used like the CCPs Social Credit System, to track our every move or punish dissent?

Russell Coutts isn't alone in speaking out. Amnesty International has raised concerns with Campaigns Director, Lisa Woods, issuing the following statement,

We are deeply concerned to see limited scrutiny of yet another piece of legislation with significant human rights implications.

Amnesty International recognises that the Government does have an obligation to protect health and life. However, Government legislation must meet "the principles of legality, legitimacy, necessity, and proportionality, and non-discrimination. Evidence of this must be transparent and open to the public."

In my post, Hanlon's Razor, I deal with the treatability of COVID, waning vaccine efficacy against Delta and transmissibility, whether vaccinated or not. This seriously calls into question legitimacy, necessity and proportionality of mandates and passports, especially as the virus further mutates and becomes endemic. That leaves legality and non-discrimination.

When asked whether her policy would create a two class society of those with rights and those without, Jacinda Ardern replied, "that is what it is, so yep". She looked almost gleeful, and take a note of her weird hand-rubbing during the interview. So, her intent is to create a society with active discrimination that marginalises a group exercising lawfully given human rights.

I've been told by a recruiter that I wouldn't be able to get another job without getting jabbed, not with big corporations who normally employ someone like myself. In the not-too-distant-future, I'm facing the real prospect that I will go from being a large tax contributor to being unemployed. I've spent decades building my career, but I will give it all away to retain my right to medical and bodily autonomy and the right to disagree. I would gladly tell Jacinda exactly where she can shove it!

If Amnesty International felt the need to intervene over the New Zealand Government ramming through legislation with little scrutiny, then we can conclude the Government is failing miserably on the principle of transparency. This should ring alarm bells for our democracy! I would also question whether policy that doesn't meet legitimacy, necessity, proportionality, transparency, and non-discrimination can still be legal? Russell Coutts made the following observation.

How New Zealand, a country where it's people greatly valued freedom of choice…how we even got to this stage of blindly accepting this sort of unilateral rule, power and dictatorship from our government is deeply troubling indeed.

It's a pity we don’t have more leaders with the courage to stick their neck out and the integrity to do what’s right over something as fundamental as human rights (our Bill of Rights) and personal choice over the medical care we receive. To state the obvious; New Zealand is not Russia, North Korea or even China where leaders must kowtow to 'The Party' for their safety and financial longevity. Surely?

Unfortunately, many large institutions from academe to corporations, are dependent on big Government and big spending on infrastructure. It would be naïve to think that pressure wasn't being applied to the big end of town, with the Government's expectation this would cascade down through the supply chain.

What we're seeing is the emergence of authoritarianism and it's chilling! Last words from Russell Coutts.

 If we believe in the value of freedom, democracy and human rights then the only option is to oppose this.