Written by: Errol Naidoo
Article source: familypolicyinstitute.com

Just before midnight on 4 May, the Minister of Health, Dr Joe Phaahla published amendments to existing regulations in the National Health Act, making permanent the four ‘State of Disaster’ regulations (originally extended for 30 days) that would have expired by 5 May.

Although the ‘State of Disaster’ was terminated on 4 April, government extended indefinitely the four ‘State of Disaster’ regulations that mandate (1) indoor mask wearing, (2) indoor/outdoor gathering limitations, (3) inbound travelers’ PCR/vaccination certificates and (4) Covid-19 relief grant payments. Apparently, ‘State of Disaster’ regulations must not end.

In addition to making the above-mentioned regulations permanent in the National Health Act, the Minister of Health again extended the period for public comment to 5 July on the proposed “Regulations Relating to the Surveillance & Control of Notifiable Medical Conditions: Amendment.” These regulations were originally published on 15 March 2022.

Dr Phaahla did not provide reasons for extending the period for public comments the second time. The first deadline for comments was 16 April, the second 24 April and the third 5 July.

Action4Freedom’s urgent court application challenging the original 30-day public comment period was dismissed by the Cape Town High Court under strange circumstances. The NGO released a media-statement outlining the bizarre circumstances surrounding the case.

Legal commentators agree, making the four (extended) ‘State of Disaster’ regulations permanent by amending the regulations in the National Health Act is unconstitutional. The legislation grants the Minister of Health sole discretion to extend or end these regulations.

SA medical specialists referred to the draft health regulations published on 15 March as “an ill-conceived and misdirected attempt to continue preventing SARS-CoV-2 infections and appear to be oblivious to the new realities of Covid-19, two years into a pandemic.”

Family Policy Institute

The Department of Health has already received over 300,000 public submissions on the proposed “Regulations Relating to the Surveillance & Control of Notifiable Medical Conditions: Amendment.” All of them strongly oppose the proposed draconian measures.

The draft health regulations appear to be drafted by the World Health Organisation (WHO) because it’s oblivious to the living conditions of millions of South African citizens.

For example, citizens suspected of being infected with a “notifiable medical condition must isolate in a well ventilated room and must have access to the internet or a telephone to allow for daily reporting of symptoms and must have access to a personal physician.” 

The South African government’s health policy is directed by the WHO and not local health experts. That’s why the proposed regulations are more about public control, not public health.

Similarly, the SA government’s sexuality education policy is directed and controlled by UNESCO. “Comprehensive Sexuality Education” (CSE) was devised by foreign sexual rights groups to bypass parental authority and indoctrinate children in the education system.

South Africa’s policy on marriage, prostitution, child discipline, LGBTQ and hate crimes are all influenced by UN agencies. We are governed by remote control from the United Nations.

The ANC regime sold out the SA public to the Gupta family, UN agencies, and sexual rights radicals financed by leftist billionaires. SA must now rid itself of the ANC criminal enterprise.

Pray fervently, Act decisively and Speak boldly for righteousness and truth in South Africa.

Click here to KEEP UPDATED on the latest news by subscribing to our FREE weekly newsletter.


Date published: 10/05/2022

DISCLAIMER
JOY! News is a Christian news portal that shares pre-published articles by writers around the world. Each article is sourced and linked to the origin, and each article is credited with the author’s name. Although we do publish many articles that have been written in-house by JOY! journalists, we do not exclusively create our own content. Any views or opinions presented on this website are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the company. 

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here