A petition for a temporary injunction in a pending lawsuit prohibiting discrimination between the vaccinated and non-vaccinated was filed before the Nicosia District Court by approximately 100 citizens[/b] through the law firm of G. Georgiades & Associates DEPA.
The court today ordered that the petition be served on the Attorney General and the Minister of Health and immediately set the case for a hearing on January 3, 2022.
Specifically, the petitioners who chose not to be vaccinated are asking the court for a temporary order suspending the recent decision of the Minister of Health which prohibits them from entering various venues such as eating places, cafeterias, recreational centers, weddings, baptisms, sports venues, etc. until the main case is heard.
According to the lawyer representing them, Yannos Georgiadis, "the Minister's decision greatly limits the social life of our clients and in general a large part of the population who exercised their right not to be vaccinated. The drastic nature of these measures has made vaccination compulsory, contrary to current legislation. It is clear that the separation between vaccinated and unvaccinated was not introduced to protect public health but to force people to be vaccinated. The measures have no scientific or legal basis and are not in line with common sense. They are manifestly disproportionate and ineffective. They violate fundamental human rights," he said.
"They also constitute discrimination in violation of Article 28 of the Constitution, international conventions on the protection of human rights, the relevant European Convention on Human Rights and the European Convention on Human Rights. Regulation 2021/953 which is directly applicable in the Republic of Cyprus and is not in line with the recent relevant resolutions of the Council of Europe as well as contrary to the relevant opinion of the Cyprus Bioethics Committee" as stated by Mr Georgiades.
According to Mr Georgiades, "it is unthinkable for the state to impose on citizens the antigen test for Covid-19 every 48 hours and to consider a negative result as valid proof that one is not a carrier of the virus for the purposes of its free circulation and entry into airports and supermarkets, shopping centres, churches, bakeries, etc. where citizens, vaccinated and unvaccinated, mix with each other and, on the other hand, to prohibit their entry despite their possession of a valid negative antigen test that they are not carriers of the virus in restaurants, kebab shops, cafes, leisure centres, weddings, baptisms, etc. The paradox is that at the same time vaccinated people who are admitted by all to be both sick and transmitting the virus are given the privilege of moving freely everywhere without being tested.
As he points out, "it is also puzzling how it is that persons who are exempted from vaccination for medical reasons are entitled on the basis of the Minister's order to move around without being vaccinated when they have a negative test of one week and not 48 hours."
"Further how is it explained that unvaccinated children ages 13 -17 are allowed to enter all areas where unvaccinated children are prohibited from entering meaning they have a negative antigen test and are accompanied by at least one vaccinated parent. How is it considered safe for public health for unvaccinated children of 17 years of age to enter a catering establishment because of the mere presence of their vaccinated parent and what are the risks of spreading the virus when the same unvaccinated children of the same age enter catering establishments with their friends without being accompanied by vaccinated parents? Also what is the difference between unvaccinated up to 17 years old and those who are over 17" he asks.
The American example
Mr Georgiades noted that in support of his positions for a temporary order he will rely on two recent American decisions where a similar temporary order was issued on 30 November 2021 suspending mandatory vaccination for health workers. As he explained, the criteria for issuing such orders in Cyprus are identical to those of America and England.
"In this case it was considered unjustified to impose compulsory vaccination at a time when there were alternative measures such as the use of masks, conducting tests as evidence of health which have been used for two years and not only the vaccination of individuals."
"In this case it was considered unjustified to impose compulsory vaccination when there were alternative measures such as the use of masks, conducting tests as evidence of health which have been used for two years and not only the vaccination of individuals. The court also criticized the effectiveness of vaccinations based on scientific evidence saying that "if booster doses are necessary six months after completion of the vaccination regimen then how effective are vaccines against Covid-19 and why is it necessary to make them mandatory."
"The court in its decision to issue the preliminary injunction in America took seriously the fact that violation of constitutional freedoms even for a short period of time due to its nature is an inappropriate The American court also took into account that 30 days notice had not been given to the competent authority for comments as required by law i.e. something similar to what happened in Cyprus where the restrictions were not placed before Parliament for interrogation as provided for in Article 3(1) of Law 99/89.The judge also pointed out that the approval of the legislature must be obtained for such drastic measures and even noted that he doubted whether such a thing would be considered Constitutional even if it was still approved by Parliament" he points out.
The court, as Mr Georgiades said, concluded that "the issuance of the decree suspending mandatory vaccination serves the public interest as long as the constitutional rights and freedoms of citizens who do not wish to receive the COVID-19 vaccine are safeguarded. The need to protect these rights trumps any interest of the State. The court also referred to the need to protect the separation of powers as an important condition for preserving democracy and avoiding abuses by state officials."
As she states, "the above principles are also applicable in Cyprus as well as provided for in European Regulation 2021/953 which has direct effect in Cyprus , in two resolutions of the Council of Europe and the relevant provisions of international conventions on the protection of human rights which are binding on Cyprus,
Specifically, Ms Lottidou stated inter alia that:
"With regard in particular to the respect[/i]of the principle of non-discrimination towards persons who choose not to be vaccinated against Covid I share the position expressed by theParliamentary Assembly of the CoE, that when: "the consequences of refusing vaccination[/i][/i][/i] including continuing restrictions on the enjoyment of freedoms...[/i][/i]are so severe as to remove the element of choice for decision (then) vaccination effectively becomes compulsory ... (and this) ... may lead to a violation of protected rights or even introduce discrimination." In addition, however, it makes reference to "In this regard, although[/i]vaccination according to the WHO and the scientific community, which should be respected ,is a one-way street in terms of immunity and eradication of the pandemic, however the way to convince of the benefits should be on the basis of arguments and incentives and not on the basis of blackmail[...]". Also significant is the point in her report that "Under no circumstances should there be a general exclusion of unvaccinated persons from access to education and/or employment on the grounds that they have not been vaccinated because of their beliefs,at a time when there are alternative and safe ways of certifying good health that are accepted by the State."
Mr Georgiades argues that "the decision of the Minister of Health to exclude the unvaccinated, especially during this holiday season, from a large part of their social life ,despite the fact that they are in possession of health certificates even without justified scientific support , constitutes such serious restrictions on the enjoyment of the freedoms of unvaccinated citizens in such a way that they are deprived of the element of choice for decision making, with the result that vaccination is made compulsory which undoubtedly
Contents of this article including associated images are belongs to Cyprus Times
Views & opinions expressed are those of the author and/or Cyprus Times
Source
