For those of you who have been following my journey over the past three and half years, some of the information in my response to the Australian Human Rights Commission will come as no surprise.
For those who are new, my termination is only a small part of my fight against Australia’s bureaucracies after being rattled awake from living a relatively normal existence prior to January 2020.
I consider myself to be part of the middle class, I left school after completing Year 10, I did not attend university, but had a strong work ethic and worked hard to provide for my family while living within our means and saving for the occasional family holiday.
I have never claimed to be an expert in anything which I have presented via my publicly available correspondence covering various issues over the past three years, I simply wanted answers to issues that were unfolding in front of me.
Seeing that the Union which I was part of when the so-called pandemic started, were left wanting in response to the mandating of experimental still in trial phase mRNA gene therapy countermeasure to employees, I chose to resign and joined the Red Union, who have been working behind the scenes to get resolutions for many Australians since their inception.
The Australian Human Rights Commission has sought clarification about the claim against my ex-employer. So, as I have done with much of my previous correspondence, I am sharing my response to the Commission below, not to be self-indulgent, but to spark further debate and discussion around how we can do things better into the future.
To this end, before moving on to read my response, I share this recent opinion, which makes sense to me, considering the many failed attempts to date to recompense Australians due to mandates. I do so in the hope that it sparks further discussion, debate, clarification, even rebuttal on how best to approach future nation destroying events.
Thinking about the argument for “bodily autonomy” in the Australian Constitution
The Australian Constitution has no concept of protecting individuals, as in a "bill of rights"
It is a document on the governing a federation of independent colonies, renamed "states", which have their own laws, separately developed, due to the "tyranny of distance", until the telegraph line was completed in 1872. Australia was established in 1900 as a federation of "united states", but without a revolution like America, where slavery and government tyranny gave rise to the idea of individual freedom enshrined in the US Constitution.
As penal colonies from its beginning, the concept of "individual rights" was obviously incompatible in colonial governments; freedom was only granted by the state. The Australian Constitution is essentially a document listing a set of 39 tasks which Federal Government should accomplish, with implied powers to override state laws, where necessary.
Outside the 39 tasks, the Federal Government has no power vested by the Constitution. Australian health is largely a state matter, except when the states come together by agreement.
The Australian Constitution limits the power of the Federal Government over the states, by stating what it can do.
This explains why, on the matter of individual rights in relation to health, the Australian Constitution is useless. Section (xxiiiA) limits the Federal Government from conscripting the services of doctors and dentists. The Federal Government has no power to issue “vaccine” mandates for Australia.
The historical origin and the underlying assumption of Australian laws is that Australians are granted freedom to the extent by the states. There are no innate "individual rights". The bottom line is: Australian colonial history does not help Australian laws in preventing government tyranny. Progress may occur on a state-by-state basis, as in America.
Credit - Dr Wilson Sy
From: erich.neug [email protected]
Date: Saturday, August 19th, 2023 at 5:47 PM
Response to Australian Human Rights Commission
Mark Neugebauer regarding *********REDACTED********* Clarifications.
Firstly, thank you for acknowledging the lodgement of my complaint against *********REDACTED*********, my employer prior to being terminated, for not receiving what is now more aptly referred to as a “Countermeasure” (1)
Below I will elaborate further on my submission, whilst acknowledging this reference from your email: “Please note, this matter has not yet been accepted as a complaint.”
I will premise the remainder of my correspondence to you on these two points. I will assert that as a result of my own independent investigations as presented directly to **REDACTED** in (Annexure 4_COVID_19_Correspondence_Employment termination) (2) and the confirmation by the then Australian Federal Minister of Health, Greg Hunt’s admission “that the world is engaged in the largest clinical trial ever”,
That not just my human rights (4) have been breached, but that my termination also goes against the 10 Points of the Nuremburg Code. (5)
With this reply I declare that my human rights have been breached by **REDACTED** who as an organisation became a tool of the State and Federal Government, as they have provided no evidence to indicate that **REDACTED** sought to legally challenge the State Government of South Australia, namely the Minister for Health Stephen Wade and SA Health under the leadership of the then CMO, Nicola Spurrier, who was also part of National Cabinet, surrounding the validity and legality of the mandates enacted on the Disability Sector for staff to receive the COVID-19 Countermeasures.
Even though, these entities put in place mechanisms for a mandate, of which the legality based on my opening premise, still have not been properly tested under South Australian and Federal laws, I was not employed by those entities.
But instead, I was employed by **REDACTED** directly, and my contract of employment and position description for the role I was undertaking was with **REDACTED**, which up until the date of my termination did not stipulate that there was a requirement for me to receive an experimental still in trial phase gene therapy countermeasure for me to fulfill my role as an employee with **REDACTED**, and therefore **REDACTED** has breached their duty of care to protect my Human Rights for coercing me to take the countermeasure under threat of termination, which is ultimately what eventuated.
I also declare that there needs to be a further investigation into the breach of my human rights and breaches of the Nuremberg Code by **REDACTED**, and specifically the CEO of **REDACTED** for being involved in openly lobbying for me to receive an experimental still in trial phase gene therapy countermeasure, (6) as part of his position as Board Member for the **REDACTED** (7) Not to mention the further investigations which need to be undertaken into links between the planning at event 201
Of which Australia’s Jane Halton took part, strongly advocating for Australia’s CEO’s to be part of increasing the countermeasure uptake.
Does the Australian Human Rights Commission have the scope to investigate if there were financial incentives for Australian CEO’s and organisations to push the countermeasures, seeing Australian Politicians are so averse to getting to the bottom of these type of questions? (10) I wonder why?
So, moving on, regarding the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
Article 1 (11), states:
“All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.”
I declare that my Human Rights have been breached at Article 1 by **REDACTED**, as I have not been acted towards in a spirit of brotherhood. It has been assumed that I, as a Human being, having been born free and equal in dignity and rights, lack reason in being able to establish through independent research (12) of globally available resources from 2020 to current, that the countermeasures were not required for my employment at **REDACTED**. My research during this time indicated, and continues to show, that the countermeasures were neither safer nor more effective than my natural immunity, they were not effective at stopping transmissibility, nor being able to create less of a viral load than natural infection.
My Human rights in respect to my conscience have also been breached by **REDACTED**, due to the fact that my independent research of globally available resources indicated that the countermeasures, were in fact not as safe or effective as claimed by the manufacturers of the product, and I could not in good conscience receive the countermeasures for myself, nor recommend them for people living with a disability, (13) whom I was responsible for in my positions as team leader and support worker.
Article 3, (14) states:
“Everyone has the right to life, liberty and the security of person.”
The free dictionary defines (15) “PERSONAL SECURITY” as “The legal and uninterrupted enjoyment by a man of his life, his body, his health and his reputation. 1 Bouv. Inst. n. 202.”
I declare that my Human Rights have been breached at Article 3 by **REDACTED** as they enacted coercive pressure on me to take the experimental still in trial phase mRNA gene therapy countermeasure under threat of termination of employment, even though I had not breached my position description or contract of employment. Their coercive actions threatened my Personal Security of uninterrupted enjoyment of my body and my health, including my overall mental health during these times.
Article 19 (16), states:
“Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.”
I declare that my Human Rights have been breached by **REDACTED**, as indicated by the record of conversation completed by the Director of Client Services (2) of **REDACTED** while still employed in the position of Team Leader, there was pressure to censor the ability for me to share evolving research and important information, including from some of the world’s most imminent scientists, doctors, actuaries, statisticians, etc.
It would be worth an investigation to know whether **REDACTED**, the NDIS, NQSC, SA Health had any part in eventually managing to get my LinkedIn profile shut down altogether, but I’m not holding my breath. And seeing our politicians are averse to a Royal Commission, I doubt our governments involvement in shutting down my free speech (17) on other platforms will ever be fully investigated either. So is it any wonder there is pushback against New ACMA powers to combat misinformation and disinformation (the Communications Legislation Amendment (Combatting Misinformation and Disinformation) Bill 2023, (18) even from Australian Human Rights lawyers.
In context of the above information, my Human Rights claim against *********REDACTED*********, is as follows:
1. The CEO of **REDACTED** actively campaigned via media and in his role as board member for the *********REDACTED********* to mandate an experimental still in trial phase mRNA gene therapy countermeasure to the Disability Workforce? Questions arising from this:
o Was pressure exerted from either the Federal Government, State Government, or via Jane Halton resulting from the Event 201 simulation to push for the mandate in turn violating my human rights?
o Did the Federal Government, State Government, or other corporate institutions provide financial or other personal and organisational benefits to push for the mandate in turn violating my human rights?
2. There was no further investigation on **REDACTED** part to seek and present legal advice as to whether their decision to blindly accept SA Health’s mandating of the experimental still in trial phase mRNA gene therapy countermeasure to workers.
o In fact, It was easier for **REDACTED** at the time to terminate my employment under the direction of the Emergency Management (In-home and Community Aged Care and Disability Support Workers Vaccination) (COVID-19) Direction 2021 (“Direction”), (19) without further consideration that this may actually breach my human rights.
o And of course, why would they, when the CEO was actively campaigning for the workforce to be mandated to receive the experimental still in trial phase mRNA gene therapy countermeasure. (See above claim 1 and questions arising from this)
3. Even though I had proven myself to be an exemplary employee in both my capacity as Team Leader and Disability Support worker, with many transferable skills to take on other roles within the organisation, **REDACTED** found it easier to Terminate my employment as opposed to investigating non client facing positions within **REDACTED**, as per their response to my correspondence.
o As with many Australian organisations, it was easier for **REDACTED** to remove someone who questioned the narrative of mandates and COVID response as quickly as possible, how convenient for them to be provided this opportunity by the state government, and not able to be challenged for doing so.
o So, for the first time in my 38-year working life I was terminated from my employment, and not even as result of anything I had done wrong, but merely for choosing not to submit to an experimental still in trial phase mRNA gene therapy countermeasure. What human rights?
4. I was rewarded for my exemplary service to **REDACTED** by being stood down from paid shifts from 1st December 2021 and provided with my Termination letter on the 7th of December 2021.
o The termination letter stated that I was entitled to 4 weeks’ notice and that my effective termination date was in fact the 4th of January 2022.
o But here is the reward for my diligent service, **REDACTED** claim that I was not entitled to payment for this 4 weeks’ notice because apparently, I was not entitled to work because of the Emergency Management (In-home and Community Aged Care and Disability Support Workers Vaccination) (COVID-19) Direction 2021 (“Direction”) So they were spared my severance pay.
o Add to this, that I was not able to claim unemployment benefits for this time as I was effectively not terminated until the 4th of January 2022. Not really a great display of human rights for an organisation providing disability services.
In closing, I must declare that I have very little faith in my claim with the Australian Human Rights Commission going anywhere regarding the actions **REDACTED** took against me in mandating an experimental still in trial phase mRNA gene therapy countermeasure, and ultimately terminating my employment for choosing not to receive it.
Hence why my redacted correspondence is publicly available for debate and discussion among the broader community, with the hope to find a way forward to secure the inalienable human rights of all Australian’s more effectively.
Because there is ever emerging evidence that unelected global actors have been working on and looking to subvert Australia’s sovereignty and inalienable rights.
And as we have seen, Australians like me have been let down by their constitution, state and federal governments, the media, organisations like the Fair Work Commission, the judiciary, and legal systems, and even the Australian Human Rights Commission.
So, seeing our current politicians are averse to enacting a royal commission into the response to COVID and the mandating of an experimental still in trial phase mRNA gene therapy countermeasure, Australians may need to strongly consider putting in motion the drawing up a State or Federal “Bill of Rights” to protect Australians from organisational and government over reach as a result of a “Global” Health Emergency,
or even similar emergencies (22) into the future.
Regards
Mark Neugebauer
Claimant
(1) - Did National Security Imperatives Compromise COVID-19 Vaccine Safety? ‑ https://brownstone.org/articles/did-national-security-imperatives-compromise-covid-19-vaccine-safety/
(2) - Annexure 4 COVID-19 Correspondence - Employment Termination. - https://southausinfocus.locals.com/api/v1/posts/content/document/d_c9fb57d7-903f-4a89-8108-0ca4d261faf9.pdf
(3) - Health minister admits public is being experimented on. - https://rumble.com/viqzcj-health-minister-admits-public-is-being-experimented-on..html
(4) - UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS - https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Universal_Declaration_of_Human_Rights
(5) - The ten points of the Nuremberg Code - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuremberg_Code#The_ten_points_of_the_Nuremberg_Code
(6) - *********REDACTED*********
(7) - *********REDACTED*********
(8) - Event 201-Flooding the Zone with a Plandemic of Lies. Social Media Known as Greatest Threat - https://rumble.com/v1yj3wi-event-201-flooding-the-zone-with-a-plandemic-of-lies.-social-media-known-as.html
(9) - Were Australia's CEO's primed for the Vaccine role out by Event 201, and how much did they know? - https://rumble.com/v21p3vk-were-australias-ceos-primed-for-the-vaccine-role-out-by-event-201-and-how-m.html
(10) - Pandemic response - https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Chamber_documents/Senate_chamber_documents/Divisions/Details?id=2673
(11) – UDoHR Article 1 - https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Universal_Declaration_of_Human_Rights#Article_1
(12) - Annexure 1 – COVID-19 Response Correspondence to Politicians and Bureaucrats. - https://southausinfocus.locals.com/api/v1/posts/content/document/d_73a8aea6-4a51-4456-b03c-ea6c44153408.pdf
(13) – Annexure 2 COVID-19 Correspondence regarding the Disability Sector. - https://southausinfocus.locals.com/api/v1/posts/content/document/d_e25e8898-7c04-4282-9eee-350190fc82fa.pdf
(14) - UDoHR Article 3 - https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Universal_Declaration_of_Human_Rights#Article_3
(15) - Security of person. (n.d.) A Law Dictionary, Adapted to the Constitution and Laws of the United States. By John Bouvier.. (1856). Retrieved August 19 2023 from https://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Security+of+person
(16) - UDoHR Article 19 - https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Universal_Declaration_of_Human_Rights#Article_19
(17) - The Australian Twitter Files Australia's very own health censorship apparatus in full swing - https://southausinfocus.locals.com/post/4053480/the-australian-twitter-files
(18) – MAATS Method, Our Submission regarding the 'Misinformation' Bill - https://www.maatsmethod.com.au/post/our-submission-regarding-the-misinformation-bill
(19) - Emergency Management (In-home and Community Aged Care and Disability Support Workers Vaccination) (COVID-19) Direction 2021 (“Direction”) - https://www.legislation.sa.gov.au/legislation/CV19/passenger-transport-vaccination/ceased-in-home-and-community-aged-care-and-disability-workers-vaccination/Emergency-Management-In-home-and-Community-Aged-Care-and-Disability-Support-Workers-VaccinationCOVID-19-Direction-2021_8.11.2021.pdf
(20) - Senate Speech 30 March 2022 - World Economic Forum - https://youtu.be/zKoXAnqYYCU?si=yaoYLixNswW90taH
(21) - Why is the World Health Organisation pushing for more power? - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QVJyv9hSUxo
(22) - South Australia has joined other governments and jurisdictions around the world in declaring a climate emergency in Parliament today. - https://www.premier.sa.gov.au/media-releases/news-items/climate-emergency-declaration-passes-in-parliament
(END)
