Sent 28th September 2021 in response to the current consultation:
I am very opposed to the intended law for mandating what are described as vaccinations for the covid-19 disease.
1. Writing in my capacity of having a human rights concern and being a past member of the Human Rights Commission, it seems to me to be clear that any government authority would be in clear breach of constitutional law were it to impose such a condition on any government employee, under sections 10, 11, 12, 13 and 19 of the Constitution. This seems to me to be so irrefutable that further comment about it is unnecessary. If the new law comes into conflict with the constitution it would, if passed, be deemed by a court to be needing withdrawal or amendment.
2. Writing in my capacity as a teacher of science in the UK, Cayman and Jamaica (also being past President of the Association of Science Teachers of Jamaica) and having an abiding concern and responsibility for the upholding of truth in general, it seems necessary to point out that when data come to conflict with a particular theory or model of operation, it becomes necessary to adjust the model or even change the existing theory entirely in order to accommodate the extant data. It is dismaying to see what appears to be the opposite happening in the suppression and "de-platforming" of data in much of the public media in order to promote theories and models which are shown by the data to be no longer viable. For the Cayman Compass recently to repeat the falsehood that the drug Ivermectin is only a "horse treatment" in spite of its successful deployment in cases of "river blindness" and other human ailments for at least a quarter of a century (not to mention recent clear data on prophylactic and treatment success with covid-19 in many areas, states and countries worldwide) is a clear case of suppression of data, i.e. "misinformation on steroids" in order to preserve a model that actual data prove to be false.
I am reliably informed also that the current protocols for the suppression of the current pandemic are about to change radically in Europe in favour of prophylaxis and treatment. It would be disastrous for the Cayman Islands to have cemented into law a model of operation that has already elsewhere been seen to be damaging to the cause of successfully suppressing the virus, the cause which I must presume to be the intent of the parliamentarians. A court case in Canada also has recently displayed data showing a very poor comparison of countries and states using our current protocols compared with those who focus on immediate treatment. Part of the reason for the relative failure of our current protocol worldwide is that the ability of the virus to replicate itself in increasingly dangerous infective versions from time to time was not taken into account as is seemingly shown in particular by data from Israel.
Let us therefore desist from the temptation of locking the Cayman Islands into a path of failure by codifying these outdated protocols into law, at the same time risking the grave breaches of rights that our Constitution forbids.
Bishop Nicholas JG Sykes
Bishop in George Town, Cayman Islands