TriniTuner.com | Latest Event:
Moderator: 3ne2nr Mods
matr1x wrote:2 of my co workers whose young kids got vaccinated been really sick since getting the shots
redmanjp wrote:16 away from the 4000 milestone
st7 wrote:what the vaccinated chirren have to do with the co-workers who sick?
matr1x wrote:st7 wrote:what the vaccinated chirren have to do with the co-workers who sick?
No their kids have been sick. Body pains, listless. And that's been a weekend ago
sMASH wrote:Thars why u need frequent exposure to keep the latest markers in ur system.
When ur ur system can't recognize a far mutated strain, that's when u'll be in trouble.
Get rid of masks, normalize all protocols, keep ur susceptible out of circulation.
Orr, make available to them the monoclonal antibodies.
paid_influencer wrote:mask is not only for protecting you tho. Your mask is for protecting people older/sicker than you that have no choice but to be in the same shared space.
I get "keep ur susceptible out of circulation," but people with disabilities and weaker immune systems still have to live in society. I not saying mask mandate is appropriate in the middle of stink and dutty, but at most public spaces yes it makes complete sense.
alfa wrote:People still with this dotish mask talk? After two years and counting, personal responsibility and common sense seem to have eluded some. Wear your mask if you feel the need to, double up if your think it'll help more. A co-worker of mine I haven't seen his face since COVID started cuz he mask up all the time and that's cool. But don't insist I have to wear one in order to make yours work better. That's like saying I need to wear a condom to prevent your wife from getting pregnant
hover11 wrote:If I could fete and bar hop maskless, I walking in the Bank, mall and church without a mask, lock meh up. CUZ ALYUH MAKING NOOOOOO SENSE
Privy Council upholds T&T’s Covid regulations
THE Privy Council has upheld the constitutionality of the Government of Trinidad and Tobago’s Covid-19 public health regulations in dismissing two appeals that arose from a previous ban on Hindu open-air cremations.
A release from the Office of the Attorney General yesterday stated that appeals brought by Dominic Suraj and Satyanand Maharaj against the State were dismissed and the Privy Council “has unanimously upheld the management of the Covid-19 pandemic since early 2020 by the Government of Trinidad and Tobago”.
The appellants’ case arose out of some Covid-19 public health regulations, including the ban on open-air cremations, which were in effect up to January 2022 and chiefly affected the Hindu community. The case against the State had also included objections to regulations that affected places of worship, such as a 50 per cent limit on physical attendance, which has since been lifted.
The release from the Office of the AG noted that the “appellants were challenging the constitutionality of the Public Health Regulations passed by the Government to manage the Covid-19 pandemic”.
It also stated, “Specifically, the court found that the public health regulations and guidelines issued by the Minister of Health were appropriately based on sound medical and expert scientific evidence and made in the public interest of protecting the life and health of the population of this republic.
“The Government’s approach to managing the Covid-19 pandemic has therefore been conclusively endorsed by the country’s highest court of law.”
The release added: “This ruling is an important vindication of the Government’s long-standing legislative agenda and use of legislation passed without a super majority. This issue has been the subject of running vocal complaints by members of the Opposition who have baselessly claimed that this approach was contrary to the Constitution. The Privy Council has today decisively rejected that criticism and vindicated both the position of the Government and its legislative agenda.”
The Office of the AG statement said the case was “successfully argued and won by the Attorney General in the High Court and the Court of Appeal prior to his assumption of Office as Attorney General, leading a team of committed and extremely competent attorneys and, the Attorney General takes this opportunity to thank that team and the attorneys appearing before the Privy Council”.
Religion not troubled
The Office of the AG stated, “In particular the Privy Council rejected arguments of unconstitutionality and interference with religious rights.”
The release recalled the case of death row inmate, Jay Chandler, who challenged the State on the constitutionality of the death penalty.
In May 2022, the Privy Council ruled that the mandatory sentence of death for murder in Trinidad and Tobago is constitutional and the law can only be rewritten by Parliament.
The Privy Council decision in the Maharaj/Suraj case “follows almost immediately on the other significant decision in Chandler v The State (delivered on the 16th May, 2022) in which the Privy Council also upheld the Government’s position on the proper interpretation and application of the savings law clause in the Constitution,” the release said.
“These two decisions together set ground-breaking constitutional precedent and affirm the correctness of the Government’s approach to legislative drafting since its assumption of office,” the Office of the AG said.
With regard to the appellants’ claim that some regulations infringed disproportionately on the rights of the population, with regard to religious gatherings, the Privy Council had found that the impact on the appellants’ rights were proportionate and “the rules were promulgated on the basis of expert scientific advice against a background of considerable uncertainty about how the disease was transmitted and how best to counter its spread.
The public interest in issue, the protection of the right to life and the health of the whole population, was an especially important one.
“In the Board’s view, the rules struck a fair balance between the rights of the appellants and the general interest of the community and were plainly a proportionate means of protecting the public interest in the circumstances.”
The appellants had also raised “whether the issue of the regulations by the minister is contrary to sections 1 and/or 2 of the Constitution as being inconsistent with the notions of a sovereign democracy and/or constitutional supremacy”.
The issue referred to the public health ordinances rolled out under Health Minister Terrence Deyalsingh.
Common feature in democracies
The Privy Council noted provisions and balances in the Constitution and stated that, “It is entirely compatible with the notion of a sovereign democracy that powers can be conferred on a minister to make subordinate legislation; that is indeed a common feature in democracies.
“Constitutional supremacy is respected by the checks available to ensure that the Rules are consistent with the provisions of the Constitution,” the ruling stated.
The ruling noted that Maharaj is a Hindu pundit and the head of an ashram, whose August 2020 claim against the State was “partially successful at first instance”.
The High Court had decided that the guidelines were “uncertain and vague” and that, by purporting to criminalise breaches of the guidelines, the Minister of Health “had acted outside the scope of his powers”.
The High Court had dismissed other aspects of Maharaj’s claim, including his argument that the coronavirus regulations infringed rights and freedoms protected by section 4 of the Constitution, including the “right to freedom of conscience and religious belief and observance”.
The Court of Appeal later dismissed Maharaj’s appeal and allowed the Attorney General’s cross-appeal, deciding that the guidelines were “sufficiently clear, that reference to the guidelines in the coronavirus regulations reduced rather than expanded the scope of criminal liability, and that the coronavirus regulations were neither unlawful nor unconstitutional”.
Good for him then. Latest estimates have 1 out of 4 Trinis not being infected or vaccinated and the latest omicron variants more deadly than the last.redmanjp wrote:so from the previous post prior infection alone still gives good protection against severe disease & death. good news for my unvaxxed dad who just recovered then.
adnj wrote:Good for him then. Latest estimates have 1 out of 4 Trinis not being infected or vaccinated and the latest omicron variants more deadly than the last.redmanjp wrote:so from the previous post prior infection alone still gives good protection against severe disease & death. good news for my unvaxxed dad who just recovered then.
Nah,we just got tired explaining the same thing to idiotspaid_influencer wrote:the force vaccine krew dissolve. you'd think they would be interested in defending the mask mandate to protect the vulnerable. but nope, silence from dem. nazi vibes only feeling good when it have popular support.
adnj wrote:Apparently anyone over 18 can now get a Pfizer second booster at the mass vaccination centers. All of Pfizer expires at the end of the month.
donor*matr1x wrote:Pharma companies: you need our vaccine!
Government bodies funded by donar and lobby money from pharma companies: you need to take the vaccine or else
Also governments and pharma: we cannot be held to account if anything goes wrong
That's y Ya need to keep getting the latest, to keep up to date.adnj wrote:Good for him then. Latest estimates have 1 out of 4 Trinis not being infected or vaccinated and the latest omicron variants more deadly than the last.redmanjp wrote:so from the previous post prior infection alone still gives good protection against severe disease & death. good news for my unvaxxed dad who just recovered then.
Return to “Ole talk and more Ole talk”
Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot] and 344 guests
