Privy Council option to be discussed as Gov’t wins vaccine mandate case

By Admin. Updated 12:31 p.m., Wednesday, February 12, 2025, Atlantic Standard Time (GMT-4). 

One of the lawyers representing public sector workers affected by the 2021 vaccine mandate stated that options, including an appeal to the Privy Council, will be explored following the government’s victory in the Court of Appeal.

The London-based Privy Council is the final appellate court in our jurisprudence. 

Lawyer Jomo Thomas noted that the Court of Appeal issued a 2:1 majority decision today, allowing the government’s appeal in the vaccine case concerning Saint Vincent and the Grenadines.

“A powerful dissent was written by Justice Wallbank, who maintained that the Government’s decision to impose a vaccine mandate on certain public officers was unlawful and unconstitutional,” Mr. Thomas said. 

“The Prime Minister and Minister of Health changed the definition of ‘abandonment’ when they made regulations which prohibited unvaccinated persons from entering the workplace and which deemed them to have abandoned their jobs thus affecting their pension rights,” Mr. Thomas said.

The lawyer representing the affected workers said, “The legal team for the dismissed workers is disappointed in the majority decision delivered by Justices of Appeal Ventose and Webster. We believe that Justice Wallbank was correct in his dissent and that the High Court decision issued by Justice Henry was strongly grounded in a correct interpretation of the law”.

“We will read and study the judgment to gain a better appreciation of all of the views expressed in the decision. Thereafter, we will discuss with our clients all available options, including an appeal to the Privy Council, and will take the necessary action,” he added. 

During the COVID-19 pandemic, the Government of Saint Vincent and the Grenadines under its Statutory Rules & Order (SR&O) No. 28 of 2021, as a public health measure, required that some categories of public workers take a COVID-19 vaccine in order to continue working.

It meant that those who failed to take the vaccine within the requisite timeframe were not allowed to be at their workplaces and were deemed to have abandoned their jobs.

The decision, for some, was seen as a very high-handed measure by the government for a virus that the World Health Organisation repeatedly said only produced mild to moderate symptoms in most people who recover without treatment. For others, they believed the government’s argument that the move was in the best interest of protecting public health against the impact of the novel coronavirus.

Several individuals challenged the decision in court.

In a March 13, 2023, judgement, High Court judge – Justice Esco Henry had ruled, among other things, that the decisions of the Public Service Commission, the Police Service Commission, and the Commissioner of Police under the government’s Statutory Rules and Orders No. 28 of 2021 (known as the vaccine mandate) were a breach of natural justice, unlawful, procedurally improper, and void.

Scores of public sector workers had lost their jobs for failing to take a Covid-19 vaccine which the government had argued was a necessary step during the 2021 Covid-19 pandemic to protect public health and safety among certain categories of workers it had deemed to be frontline workers.

Part of the March 13, 2023, High Court ruling by Justice Esco Henry stated that none of the claimants ceased to hold the public offices to which they had been appointed and held at the relevant times, and they remain entitled to all their full pay and benefits due and payable to them, including pensions.

After her March 13, 2023 ruling several workers affected by the SR&O No. 28 of 2021, known as the vaccine mandate showed up for work.
But the government appealed the ruling and applied for a stay of the execution of the order of the High Court so as to wait until the decision of the Court of Appeal is made before any action on the judgement could be taken.

The application for a stay was made jointly on behalf of the appellants – The Minister of Health and the Environment, The Public Service Commission, The Commissioner of Police, and Attorney General, and the Police Service Commission.

The April 18, 2023 High Court Ruling:
On April 18, the Court of Appeal ordered that application for a stay of the High Court’s judgement be granted, pending the hearing and determination of the appeal.

After the application for stay was ruled upon, the Court of Appeal heard the vaccine mandate case, but reserved its ruling.

The ruling will now be handed down on February 12, 2025.