Featuring the Photography of John Napper.

Another in a queue of court cases against vaccine mandates has failed; leading critics to emphasise the urgent need for an Australian Bill of Rights.

Here renowned Australian photographer John Napper, who is presently documenting the Canberra Convoy and the astounding events in Australia’s national capital, reports on the demonstrations outside the High Court.

Suzanne Priddle of The Youth Advocate lobby group records: “the Youth Advocate have filed an application for an Interlocutory Injunction in the High Court – Sydney Registry against the continued administration of the COVID-19 vaccine on the 0-19 age group, whose numbers are estimated in 2021 to be of 6,248,927 Australians.


“The TGA – COVID-19 vaccine weekly safety report dated 14.10.2021 (figures as of 10.10.2021) identify that in Australia “The youngest case classified as ‘likely myocarditis’ to date was 12 years.” With 20 cases in individuals 15-17 years. “Our analysis of the likely myocarditis cases suggests they are reported more frequently in teenage boys, particularly after the second dose.” The TGA records 898 adverse events in the 0-19 age group.”

Youth Advocate argues: “The TGA confirms ONLY persons in the 0-19 age group who have NOT previously been diagnosed positive with the CORONAVIRUS within the past 6 months are eligible to receive the COVID-19 vaccine. ALL 898 adverse events in the 0-19 age group are reported by previously healthy NON-CORONAVIRUS infected young persons. The adverse events recorded by the TGA identify the ONLY harm to the 0-19 age group is from the injection of the COVID-19 vaccine.

“For this reason the Youth Advocate is asking ALL people of Australia to support the 0-19 age group who make up 6,248,927 of Australians – not just to have the right to a voice, but to ensure they have those voices are heard – very loud and very clear.”

The High Court judgement can be found here.

It reads as follows:

In the matter of an application by The Youth Advocate Inc. (NFP) for leave to appeal [2022] HCASL 4 (10 February 2022).

1 The applicant has filed an application seeking expedition of the determination of the applicant’s application seeking leave to appeal from a decision of a single Justice of the High Court of Australia (Keane J). Justice Keane had refused the applicant’s application for leave to issue or file an application for a constitutional or other writ, which was necessary by reason of the direction of Gageler J on 7 October 2021 pursuant to r 6.07.2 of the High Court Rules 2004 (Cth). Justice Keane found that the application did not articulate, in reasonably comprehensible terms, the basis on which the applicant sought the orders sought and was frivolous and vexatious. It is appropriate to consider both the application for expedition and the application for leave together.

2 There is no reason to doubt the correctness of the decision of the single Justice to refuse the applicant’s application for leave. The application otherwise has no prospect of success and raises no question of principle. Leave should be refused. Accordingly, it would be futile to grant the order for expedition.

3 Pursuant to r 41.08.1 of the High Court Rules 2004 (Cth), we direct the Registrar to draw up, sign and seal an order dismissing the application.

Photographer John Napper said a large crowd gathered to hear the judgement. There was stunned silence initially, followed by gasps of disbelief when the judgement of vexatious and frivolous was handed down.

That was quickly followed by an outburst of anger and shouts of “Save Our Kids, Save Our Kids.”

The crowd then dispersed to head to Government House to further voice their grievances.

Below are further images from the demonstration.