Senior Counsel Anthony Astaphan stated earlier this week that a higher court’s opinion is necessary in the ‘Vaccine Mandate’ case so that governments know what to do when faced with crisis scenarios like as the COVID-19 epidemic.
On March 13, Judge Esco Henry declared that the government’s vaccination requirement is “unlawful, unconstitutional, extra vires, excessive, and contaminated by procedural impropriety”.
Astaphan stated that the defendants’ attorneys have warned the government that there is significant grounds in appealing the March 13 ruling in the COVID-19 vaccination requirement case.
“The appeal is required in the public interest for the very simple reason that the government needs to know and have the guidance of a higher court about what needs to be done or ought not to be done when the Executive branch of the government and the Cabinet are confronted with a crisis such as an infectious disease that kills and hospitalizes its citizens, to put it mildly.”
While the defendants accept the Supreme Court’s authority to render a verdict, Astaphan believes they have a duty, if not an obligation, to evaluate the grounds provided by the judge and advise the government if an appeal has substance or whether the public interest requires an appeal.
“The critical constitutional and legal issues that arose for determination and that will inevitably resurface whenever one of these countries, including St. Vincent and the Grenadines, is confronted by another crisis such as the COVID-19 crisis that we have been experiencing for the last two or three years,”
Astaphan stated that they recommended the government that an appeal is warranted, and that the Prime Minister accepted their opinion and directed them to continue.
The senior attorney cautioned the public not to lose sight of the case’s background.
He reminded the audience that the case occurred because the government of St. Vincent and the Grenadines took measures to protect the health of public officials based on the Chief Medical Officer’s (CMO) medical opinion, which was not contested during the trial.
He stated that the government, the people of St. Vincent and the Grenadines, and the Caribbean as a whole need to know whether the judge was accurate.
