Violating the Biosecurity Act 2015

Updated: Nov 14, 2020

The Andrews Government has, under its newly applied emergency powers, locked down Victoria and Melbourne so that movement and travel are restricted, Business, shops, retail, restaurants, department stores, cafes and pubs are forcibly closed and businesses forced out of business, workers forced out of their jobs, all done illegally and somehow got away with it. How? In short they are violating the Biosecurity Act of 2015.





The Biosecurity Act of 2015 specifically outlines what can and should be done in any medical epidemic or state of mass infection. It is a Federal Act that supersedes any State laws in Australia for ANY State.

“The Biosecurity Act of 2015 specifically outlines what can and should be done in any medical epidemic or state of mass infection. It is a Federal Act that supersedes any State laws in Australia for ANY State..”

For example, The act states, and I quote:


BIOSECURITY ACT 2015 - SECT 60

Imposing a human biosecurity control order on an individual

(1) The following officers may impose a human biosecurity control order on an individual:

(a) a chief human biosecurity officer;

(b) a human biosecurity officer;

(c) a biosecurity officer.

Note 1: An officer who intends to impose a human biosecurity control order on an individual has certain powers under sections 68 and 69.

Note 2: Before imposing a human biosecurity control order, an officer must be satisfied of the matters referred to in section 34 (the principles).

Note 3: The Director of Human Biosecurity must be notified of the imposition of a human biosecurity control order (see section 67).

(2) A human biosecurity control order may be imposed on an individual only if the officer is satisfied that:

(a) the individual has one or more signs or symptoms of a listed human disease; or

(b) the individual has been exposed to:

(i) a listed human disease; or

(ii) another individual who has one or more signs or symptoms of a listed human disease; or

(c) the individual has failed to comply with an entry requirement in subsection 44(6) in relation to a listed human disease.

(3) To avoid doubt, an individual may fail to comply with an entry requirement in subsection 44(6) even if the individual is not able to comply with the requirement.

(4) An officer may include one or more biosecurity measures specified in Subdivision B of Division 3 in a human biosecurity control order.

Note: For the biosecurity measures that each kind of officer can impose, see section 82.

Note this Act applies to INDIVIDUALS, not groups or suburbs, towns, or cities or States. The individual MUST be isolated as having the disease or infection in order for this act to apply.

It also States


BIOSECURITY ACT 2015 - SECT 88

Risk minimisation interventions

(1) An individual may be required by a human biosecurity control order to wear either or both specified clothing and equipment that is designed to prevent a disease from emerging, establishing itself or spreading.

(2) The order must specify the following:

(a) the circumstances in which the individual is required to wear the clothing and equipment;

(b) the period during which, or the times at which, the individual is required to wear the clothing and equipment;

(c) instructions for wearing the clothing and equipment.

Something that was NOT being done, and was NOT done during the Hotel Quarantine. It also points out:

BIOSECURITY ACT 2015 - SECT 90

Undergoing an examination

An individual may be required by a human biosecurity control order to undergo, at a specified medical facility, a specified kind of examination relating to determining the presence in the individual of:

(a) the listed human disease specified in the order; and

(b) any other listed human disease.

Note: For the manner in which this biosecurity measure must be carried out, see section 94.


This not being done in Melbourne or Victoria. In fact the illegal ‘mass’ testing of populations with a test that was not designed for isolating COVID-19 is a erroneous and false test that does NOT produce an established certainty of infection.


This all begs the question. WHY? What purpose is served by this lockdown? Even the World Health Organisation have satates that a lock down does more harm than good., Why is Daniel


Andrews so stubborn as to:


1. Violate the Federal Law?

2. Ignore Medical advice to the contrary on the wearing of masks and imposing an illegal lock down.

3. Impose severe financial hardship and penalties for exercising the basic right to work?

If anyone has an answer, I would be interested to hear it.

News 

Business 

Sport 

Subscribe to Our Newsletter 

  • YouTube
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn

© 2020 by SeeTVNews. All rights reserved