REPATRIATION MEDICAL AUTHORITY
INSTRUMENT NO. 103 of 2007
VETERANS’ ENTITLEMENTS ACT 1986
MILITARY REHABILITATION AND COMPENSATION ACT 2004
EXPLANATORY NOTES FOR TABLING
- The Repatriation Medical Authority (the Authority) has determined, under subsection 196B(2) of the Veterans’ Entitlements Act 1986 (the VEA), Statement of Principles Instrument No. 103 of 2007 concerning peritoneal adhesions and death from peritoneal adhesions.
2. The Authority is of the view that there is sound medical-scientific evidence that indicates that peritoneal adhesions and death from peritoneal adhesions can be related to particular kinds of service. The Authority has therefore determined this Statement of Principles concerning peritoneal adhesions pursuant to subsection 196B(2) of the VEA.
3. Pursuant to the provisions of the VEA and the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004 (the MRCA), claims for pension under the VEA or compensation under the MRCA are determined by the Repatriation Commission or the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Commission by reference to Statements of Principles issued by the Authority pursuant to the VEA.
4. The Statement of Principles sets out the factors that must as a minimum exist, and which of those factors must be related to the following kinds of service rendered by a person:
operational service under the VEA;
peacekeeping service under the VEA;
hazardous service under the VEA;
warlike service under the MRCA;
non-warlike service under the MRCA,
before it can be said that a reasonable hypothesis has been raised connecting peritoneal adhesions or death from peritoneal adhesions, with the circumstances of that service.
5. The Repatriation Commission, Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Commission, Veterans’ Review Board, or Administrative Appeals Tribunal cannot accept any claim for pension; or a claim for liability or compensation relating to peritoneal adhesions or death from peritoneal adhesions that was lodged on or after 1 June 1994 in the case of VEA, or 1 July 2004 in the case of MCRA respectively, unless this Statement of Principles upholds that claim (subsection 120A(3) of the VEA or subsection 338(3) of the MRCA).
6. This new instrument results from an investigation notified by the Authority in the Government Notices Gazette of 1 March 2006 concerning peritoneal adhesions in accordance with section 196G of the VEA. The investigation involved an examination of the sound medical-scientific evidence now available to the Authority.
7. Prior to determining this instrument, the Authority advertised its intention to undertake an investigation in relation to peritoneal adhesions in the Government Notices Gazette of 1 March 2006, 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. One submission was received for consideration by the Authority during the investigation.
8. The determining of this new instrument finalises the investigation in relation to peritoneal adhesions as advertised in the Government Notices Gazette of 1 March 2006.
9. A list of references relating to the above condition is available, on written request, from the Repatriation Medical Authority Secretariat.
Overview
The Repatriation Medical Authority Instrument No. 103 of 2007, concerning peritoneal adhesions and death from peritoneal adhesions, was enacted in 2007 to address the issue of linking these medical conditions to specific kinds of military service. This instrument was developed under the authority of the Veterans’ Entitlements Act 1986 (VEA) and the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004 (MRCA). The problem this legislation sought to address was the need for clear guidelines on the medical-scientific evidence required to establish a connection between peritoneal adhesions, death from peritoneal adhesions, and certain types of military service. The Repatriation Medical Authority (the Authority) was tasked with determining these connections to facilitate claims for pension or compensation. The Authority's role is to issue Statements of Principles, which outline the factors necessary to establish a link between the medical condition and the service rendered. Claims for pension or compensation are then assessed by the Repatriation Commission, Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Commission, Veterans’ Review Board, or Administrative Appeals Tribunal, based on these Statements of Principles.
Scope and Application
The Repatriation Medical Authority Instrument No. 103 of 2007 pertains to peritoneal adhesions and death from peritoneal adhesions, establishing a Statement of Principles that must be referenced in any claim for pension or compensation under the Veterans’ Entitlements Act 1986 (VEA) or the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004 (MRCA). This legislation applies to individuals who have served in specific capacities, including operational, peacekeeping, and hazardous service under the VEA, as well as warlike and non-warlike service under the MRCA. The instrument outlines the necessary medical-scientific evidence and factors that must be present to substantiate a claim related to peritoneal adhesions, thereby restricting the acceptance of claims to those that meet these outlined criteria. This legislation does not apply to claims lodged before 1 June 1994 under the VEA or 1 July 2004 under the MRCA unless the Statement of Principles supports the claim. The instrument extends its application through the subordinate provisions of the VEA and MRCA, ensuring that all claims for pension or compensation are assessed in accordance with the determined Statement of Principles.
Key Provisions
The main operative sections of this instrument (Instrument No. 103 of 2007) pertain to the determination of a Statement of Principles concerning peritoneal adhesions and death from peritoneal adhesions. Under subsection 196B(2) of the Veterans’ Entitlements Act 1986 (VEA), the Repatriation Medical Authority (the Authority) has established these principles to outline the minimum factors that must exist and be related to specific kinds of service (such as operational, peacekeeping, hazardous, warlike, or non-warlike service) for a reasonable hypothesis to be raised that peritoneal adhesions or death from peritoneal adhesions are connected to the service circumstances. This Statement of Principles is crucial for determining claims for pension under the VEA or compensation under the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004 (MRCA) by the Repatriation Commission or the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Commission.
The Act imposes several obligations on the parties involved. Firstly, the Authority must ensure that any claim for pension or compensation related to peritoneal adhesions or death from peritoneal adhesions is assessed with reference to the Statement of Principles. Claims lodged on or after 1 June 1994 for the VEA and 1 July 2004 for the MRCA must align with these principles to be considered. The Repatriation Commission, Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Commission, Veterans’ Review Board, and Administrative Appeals Tribunal are all precluded from accepting claims that do not uphold these principles (subsection 120A(3) of the VEA and subsection 338(3) of the MRCA). Additionally, the Authority must conduct investigations into conditions such as peritoneal adhesions and publish notices of intent to investigate in the Government Notices Gazette, inviting submissions from relevant organisations and experts.
Under the provisions of the VEA and the MRCA, there are specific consequences for non-compliance with the requirements outlined in the Statement of Principles. Any claim for pension or compensation regarding peritoneal adhesions or death from peritoneal adhesions that does not adhere to these principles will not be accepted by the relevant authorities. This strict adherence ensures that only substantiated claims are processed. The penalties for non-compliance are implicitly related to the denial of benefits to claimants whose cases do not meet the criteria established in the Statement of Principles. The maximum penalties, as stipulated in the legislation, are not explicitly detailed in this explanatory statement, but the overarching consequence is the rejection of non-compliant claims.