[ad_1]
Victorian judges and magistrates won’t be forced to get the COVID-19 vaccines under public health directions released overnight.
But the vaccination rate is “extremely high” anyway, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court Anne Ferguson said in a statement a short time ago. Premier Daniel Andrews’ announced last week that the mandate would apply to all Victorians who are authorised workers.
The chief justice said in a statement this afternoon that the directions do not apply to judicial officers, and court and tribunal staff.
“Nevertheless, internal inquiries have already shown that they have extremely high levels of vaccination,” Chief Justice Ferguson said.
The directions state the policy does not apply to Commonwealth employees and people who work in connection with court proceedings, as well as public sector workers employed by Court Services Victoria.
Victorian Treasurer Tim Pallas said the exemption to the mandatory vaccine direction for court staff and judges was due to “a separation of powers issue”. Chief Health Officer Professor Bretton Sutton said the exemption to the mandate was based on advice from the solicitor-general that there were constitutional issues and “other legal protections”.
Court Services Victoria, which employs court staff, is likely to introduce its own policy of requiring staff who attend court to be vaccinated following consultation with staff. But the mandate does apply to legal practitioners. The reasons for the exemptions for certain court staff and judicial officers are not yet known.
Chief Justice Ferguson said each jurisdiction would continue to minimise the number of people who physically attend court buildings by continuing to conduct a large proportion of matters online.
“When the lockdown lifts, the courts and VCAT will continue to operate through a mixture of remote and in person hearings,” she said. “The Courts and VCAT encourage all those attending our locations to be vaccinated.”
Loading
The heads of the courts have been treading carefully in their public statements on the issue because there is a legal challenge to the mandate before the Supreme Court brought by a Victorian relief teacher and her husband.
In a statement last week, Chief Justice Ferguson said of the legal challenges: “Those matters will be heard and determined according to law. The Courts and VCAT will therefore not be making comment or responding to inquiries that go directly or indirectly to questions of legality of the directions.”
Operational changes, she said, “should not be taken as expression of a judicial view about legal issues before the courts.”
Mr Pallas said the same separation of powers issues also applied to members of parliament, meaning politicians also could not be directed under public health requirements to get the vaccine. Nevertheless, parliament would make its own rules to require MPs to get a vaccine, he said.
“We are not applying one rule for Victorians who are mandated to behave in a certain way and not applying the same rigor and responsibility to members of parliament,” he said. “It’s not only fair, it’s a moral imperative that the thing the state is asking of the community, members of parliament apply to themselves.”
[ad_2]
Source link