Statement of Principles concerning congenital cataract Instrument No. 50 of 2007 - Revocation

Administered by Department of Veterans' Affairs

Legislation au F2015L00642 Not in force Legislative Instrument

Legislation content

REPATRIATION MEDICAL AUTHORITY

 

INSTRUMENT NO. 50 of 2007 - Revocation

 

VETERANS’ ENTITLEMENTS ACT 1986

MILITARY REHABILITATION AND COMPENSATION ACT 2004

 

EXPLANATORY NOTES FOR TABLING

 

 

  1. The Repatriation Medical Authority (the Authority) is of the view that congenital cataract does not have any factors which can be "related to service" as defined in the Veterans’ Entitlements Act 1986 (the VEA).  The Authority has therefore determined, under subsection 196B(14) of the VEA and subsection 33(3) of the Acts Interpretation Act 1901, a Statement of Principles, Instrument No. 50 of 2007 – Revocation, concerning congenital cataract.  This Instrument revokes the existing Statement of Principles, Instrument No. 50 of 2007, determined under subsection 196B(3) of the VEA, concerning congenital cataract.
  2. This Instrument also specifies a date of effect for the revocation in accordance with subsection 12(1)(a) of the Legislative Instruments Act 2003.
  3. Prior to determining this Instrument, the Authority advertised its intention to undertake an investigation in relation to congenital cataract in the Government Notices Gazette of 31 October 2012, and circulated a copy of the notice of intention to investigate to a wide range of organisations representing veterans, service personnel and their dependants.  The Authority invited submissions from the Repatriation Commission, organisations and persons referred to in section 196E of the VEA, and any person having expertise in the field.  No submissions were received for consideration by the Authority during the investigation.
  4. On 19 December 2014, the Authority wrote to organisations representing veterans, service personnel and their dependants regarding the proposed Instrument and the medical-scientific material considered by the Authority. This letter emphasised that the Authority is of the view that congenital cataract does not have factors which can be "related to service". The Authority provided an opportunity to the organisations to make representations in relation to the proposed Instrument prior to its determination. No submissions were received for consideration by the Authority.
  5. The determining of this Instrument finalises the investigation in relation to congenital cataract as advertised in the Government Notices Gazette of 31 October 2012.


6.             A list of references relating to the above condition is available to any person or organisation referred to in subsection 196E(1)(a) to (c) of the VEA.  Any such request must be made in writing to the Repatriation Medical Authority at the following address:

The Registrar

Repatriation Medical Authority

GPO Box 1014

BRISBANE    QLD    4001

 


Statement of Compatibility with Human Rights

(Prepared in accordance with Part 3 of the Human Rights (Parliamentary Scrutiny) Act 2011)

 

Instrument No.:  Statement of Principles No. 50 of 2007 - Revocation

Kind of Injury, Disease or Death: Congenital cataract

 

This Legislative Instrument is compatible with the human rights and freedoms recognised or declared in the international instruments listed in section 3 of the Human Rights (Parliamentary Scrutiny) Act 2011.

Overview of the Legislative Instrument

1. This Legislative Instrument is determined pursuant to subsection 196B(14) of the Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986 (the VEA) for the purposes of the VEA and the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004 (the MRCA).

2. This Legislative Instrument:-

  • replaces Instrument No. 50 of 2007; and
  • reflects developments in the available sound medical-scientific evidence concerning congenital cataract which have occurred since that earlier instrument was determined. 

Human Rights Implications

3. This Legislative Instrument does not derogate from any human rights. It promotes the human rights of veterans, current and former Defence Force members as well as other persons such as their dependents, including:

  • the right to social security (Art 9, International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights; Art 26, Convention on the Rights of the Child and Art 28, Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities) by helping to ensure that the qualifying conditions for the benefit are 'reasonable, proportionate and transparent'[1];
  • the right to an adequate standard of living (Art 11, ICSECR; Art 27, CRC and Art 28, CRPD) by facilitating the assessment and determination of social security benefits;
  • the right to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health (Art 12, ICSECR and Art 25, CRPD), by facilitating the assessment and determination of compensation and benefits in relation to the treatment and rehabilitation of veterans and Defence Force members; and
  • the rights of persons with disabilities by facilitating the determination of claims relating to treatment and rehabilitation (Art 26, CRPD).

Conclusion

This Legislative Instrument is compatible with human rights as it does not derogate from and promotes a number of human rights.

 

Repatriation Medical Authority

 

 

 

 

 

 

[1] In General Comment No. 19 (The right to social security), the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights said (at paragraph 24) this to be one of the elements of ensuring accessibility to social security.

Overview

The Repatriation Medical Authority Instrument No. 50 of 2007 – Revocation, enacted under the Veterans’ Entitlements Act 1986 and the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004, addresses the issue of congenital cataracts in military personnel. The Authority concluded that congenital cataracts do not have factors that can be related to military service, leading to the revocation of the existing Statement of Principles concerning congenital cataracts. This decision was made after an investigation that began in 2012, with the Authority seeking input from relevant organisations and individuals. The revocation of the previous instrument aims to ensure that the assessment and determination of benefits are reasonable, proportionate, and transparent, promoting human rights such as the right to social security and the right to an adequate standard of living for veterans and their dependents.

Scope and Application

The Repatriation Medical Authority Instrument No. 50 of 2007 - Revocation, concerns congenital cataract and is determined under subsection 196B(14) of the Veterans’ Entitlements Act 1986 and subsection 33(3) of the Acts Interpretation Act 1901. This instrument revokes the existing Statement of Principles, Instrument No. 50 of 2007, concerning congenital cataract. It applies to the Repatriation Medical Authority and individuals who may be affected by the revocation of the instrument, particularly veterans, current and former Defence Force members, and their dependents. The geographic reach of this instrument is within the Commonwealth of Australia. The Authority's decision to revoke the instrument is based on the conclusion that congenital cataract does not have factors which can be "related to service" as defined in the VEA. The Authority conducted an investigation, invited submissions from relevant organisations and individuals, and provided an opportunity for representations before determining this instrument. The instrument is compatible with human rights and promotes the rights of veterans and Defence Force members, including the right to social security, an adequate standard of living, and the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health.

Key Provisions

The main operative sections of this legislative instrument are subsections 196B(14) of the Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986 (VEA) and subsection 33(3) of the Acts Interpretation Act 1901, which empower the Repatriation Medical Authority to determine a Statement of Principles concerning congenital cataract. This Instrument revokes the existing Statement of Principles, Instrument No. 50 of 2007, and replaces it with a new one that reflects the latest sound medical-scientific evidence on congenital cataract. The Authority advertised its intention to undertake an investigation into congenital cataract and invited submissions from relevant organisations and experts. However, no submissions were received, and the Authority proceeded to determine the new Instrument. The obligations imposed by this Act on the parties or entities it governs include the requirement for the Repatriation Medical Authority to review and update the Statement of Principles concerning congenital cataract based on the latest medical-scientific evidence. The Authority is also required to advertise its intention to investigate and invite submissions from relevant organisations and experts. If the Authority receives submissions, it must consider them before determining the new Instrument. The Authority must ensure that the determining of the Instrument is compatible with the human rights and freedoms recognised or declared in the international instruments listed in section 3 of the Human Rights (Parliamentary Scrutiny) Act 2011. There are no specific offences, penalties, or civil/criminal consequences outlined for breach of this legislative instrument. However, the Authority may face legal challenges if it is found to have acted outside its powers or in a manner that is incompatible with human rights. The Authority must ensure that its determinations are based on sound medical-scientific evidence and are compatible with human rights. Failure to do so may result in legal challenges and potential reputational damage. In summary, the Repatriation Medical Authority Instrument No. 50 of 2007 - Revocation is a legislative instrument that revokes the existing Statement of Principles concerning congenital cataract and replaces it with a new one based on the latest medical-scientific evidence. The Authority is required to advertise its intention to investigate and invite submissions from relevant organisations and experts. The Authority must ensure that its determinations are compatible with human rights and based on sound medical-scientific evidence. Failure to do so may result in legal challenges and potential reputational damage.

Legal classification tags

Area of Law
Veterans' Law
Instrument
Legislative Instrument
Concepts
Definitions & Interpretation
Repeal & Amendment
Human Rights Law

Interactions

Authorises

All Versions

Sourced from the Federal Register of Legislation at 26 August 2026. For the latest information on Australian Government law please go to https://www.legislation.gov.au.