Peter wrote:
cpt_om_sky is one of many people who join up just to comment on an accident thread and then disappear
Well I for one think any valuable contribution should be welcome herein, in the declared spirit of this forum, as opposed to others, no matter who it is coming from. A possible matter of contentiousness is whether that particular contribution was valuable.
nobody answering re PNR/PPR at LIPV
I never obtained PPR for LIPV, did I miss something?
Snoopy wrote:
I never obtained PPR for LIPV, did I miss something?
LIPV has PNR for customs/immigration.
Airborne_Again wrote:
LIPV has PNR for customs/immigration.
Makes sense..
Archer-181 wrote:
So how does that fit in with those who think the pathway to Freedom is Vaccination?
It is not shut up close enough. If 100% of the actual residents are vaccinated, they still have thousands non-residents in and out every day.
Apart, also vaccinated people can get it, but usually not a problematic case.
Austria now imposes compulsory vaccination from February on (why so late?) . That is a landmark ruling, as I think they are the first to do this in Europe.
I can also imagine that a lot of people who are vaccinated and still need to go back into lockdown (which if it continues will cost a lot of livelyhoods in Austria in the coming skiing season) will have a massive rage against those who have decided not to vaccinate. I also notice that where I live people are getting increasingly frustrated with those people.
Who will be next to make it mandatory ?
This touches on all the 20th century events, and politics in modern Europe.
But does it? We had mandatory vacc for stuff like polio, and that was post-ww2. But that was in a much more deferential era, and with no social media able to spread the cock and bull stories about 5G etc.
We will have to wait how this will play out in the courts. Clearly, the Austrian law will be challenged and I personally give it a slim chance of prevailing in their court system.
It would be the right thing to do, but I doubt it will actually happen.
the intense discussion about the mandatory vaccination was going on here in austria for some days.
there were some experts of constitutional law asked and for certain the government consulted them.
they say, mandatory vaccination has a very good chance to withstand challenges at courts.
but of course it will be challenged. and we will have to wait and see.
I don’t know about Austria but in the UK an Act of Parliament can override anything.
you can challenge an act of parliament at the constitutional court (verfassungsgerichtshof) in austria.
if an act is ruled to not to be conform with the austrian constitution it is no more than some words on paper.
(you could also challenge an austrian law at a court of the european union if you think
the austrian law is contracting eu law.)
(you also would have to make some distinctions here on which level of legislation/execution
the rule of mandatory vaccination is formulated. for example: a law has to be voted thru the austrian houses of parliament. a regulation could be done by the gov alone but must conform to existing law. there are more “courtways” to challenge a regulation).
the mandatory vaccination is at moment nothing more than a public decision/plan by the gov.
a regulation most likely (or a law. improbable if not necessary ) will go into final drafting in the next weeks.
one reason probably that it should start 01 02 2022.
another reason i think is that the gov calculates with a strong motivation,
that many people would vaccinate very soon
because “enforcement would come anyway”
