DISCRIMINATION
Human Rights - the Right to be recognised everywhere as a person before the law.
WHEREAS, Article 6 of the UDHR states:"Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law."
Refusing to recognise an individual's fundamental, inalienable human rights, whether set out
in the UDHR or in other laws, is a prima facie breach of Article 6 of the UDHR; andWHEREAS, Article 6 of the UDHR is enshrined in Article 16 of the ICCPR, which states:"Everyone shall have the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law.";
andHuman Rights - the Right to Equal Protection of the law against any discrimination inviolation of international law.
WHEREAS, Article 7 of the UDHR states:"All are equal before the law and are entitled without discrimination to equal
protection of the law. All are entitled to equal protection against any discriminationin violation of this Declaration and against any incitement to such discrimination."
This Article enshrines the legal maxim that "all are equal before the law" and no one is above
the Rule of law. As such, discrimination - including incitement to discrimination - in violationof the UDHR, is a prima facie breach of Article 7 ; andWHEREAS, Article 7 of the UDHR is enshrined in Part II of the ICCPR, which states:"Part II
1.

Each State Party to the present Convention undertakes to respect and toensure to all individuals within its territory and subject to its jurisdiction therights recognized in the present Covenant, without distinction of any kind suchas race, colour, sex, language, religious, political or other opinions, national orsocial origin, property, birth or other status."

Article 7 of the UDHR is also enshrined in Article 3 of the ICCPR, which states:"Article 3.
"The States Parties to the present Covenant undertake to ensure the equal
right of men and women to the enjoyment of all civil and political rights set
forth in the present Covenant.";
andWHEREAS, Article 7 of the UDHR is enshrined in Article 26 of the ICCPR, which states:"Article 26.
"All persons are equal before the law and entitled without any
discrimination to the equal protection of the law.
In this respect, the law shall prohibit any discrimination andguarantee to all persons equal and effective protection against
discrimination on any ground such as race, colour, sex,language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social
origin, property, birth or other status."; andHuman Rights - the Right of the Child not to be discriminated against.
WHEREAS, Article 7 of the UDHR is enshrined in Article 24 of the ICCPR, which states:"Article 24.
1.

"Every child shall have, without any discrimination as to race, colour, sex,language, religion, national or social origin, property or birth right to suchmeasures of protection as are required by his status as a minor, on the part ofhis family, society and the State."; andWHEREAS, Article 7 of the UDHR is enshrined in the ECHR in Article 14. the "Prohibition ofdiscrimination":"Article 14.
The enjoyment of the rights and freedoms set forth in this Convention shallbe secured without discrimination on any ground such as sex, race, colour,language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin,association with a national minority, property, birth or other status."
Discriminating against an individual on the basis that they cannot or will not wear a mask,take a test or take an experimental COVID-19 vaccine by treating them differently to those
who do wear a mask, take a test or take an experimental COVID-19 vaccine, is a prima facie
breach of Article 14 of the ECHR in addition to Article 7 of the UDHR. Any form of medical
apartheid is in prima facie breach of these Articles.; andWHEREAS, the Fair Work Commission in Australia in the case of Kimber v Sapphire CoastCommunity Aged Care Ltd (C2021/2676), stated that all Australians should "vigorously
oppose the introduction of a system of medical apartheid and segregation in Australia", andheld it to be an "abhorrent concept" which is "morally and ethically wrong" and that such asystem of medical apartheid is an "antithesis of our democratic way of life and everything wevalue.", inter alia:

[182] All Australians should vigorously oppose the introduction of a system of medical
apartheid and segregation in Australia. It is an abhorrent concept and is morally and ethicallywrong, and the antithesis of our democratic way of life and everything we value."
Kimber v Sapphire Coast Community Aged Care Ltd (C2021/2676) Australian Fair Work
Commission, Sydney, 27th September 2021; andHuman Rights - the Right to a Social and International Order in which their Rights andFreedoms can be fully realized.
WHEREAS, Article 28 of the UDHR states:"Everyone is entitled to a social and international order in which
the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration can be fully
realized."
A failure to provide a social order in which the rights and freedoms set forth in the UDHR, will
be a prima facie breach of Article 28 of the UDHR. ; andHuman Rights - the Right to Exercise Rights and Freedoms - subject only to such limitations
as are determined by law.
WHEREAS, Article 29 of the UDHR states:"(1)

Everyone has duties to the community in which alone the freeand full development of his personality is possible.

(2)

In the exercise of his rights and freedoms, everyone shall be subject only tosuch limitations as are determined by law solely for the purpose of securing
due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and ofmeeting the just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare
in a democratic society.".

The limitations do NOT include a right for anyone else to harm another or to breach another'shuman rights, other than in accordance with the law. Any limitations/restrictions to the rights
of individuals set out in the UDHR, can only be imposed if they are "determined by law" andSOLELY for the purpose of "securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedomsof others" AND of meeting the "just requirements" of "morality", "public order" AND the"general welfare" in a "democratic society". In other words, the limitations must be lawful,legal, moral and SOLELY for the purposes set out. It is not legal, lawful or moral to limit anindividual's human rights other than as prescribed. Any limitation/restriction that is not inaccordance with these provisions, is a prima facie breach of the UDHR; and