Statement of Principles concerning spasmodic torticollis (Reasonable Hypothesis) (No. 63 of 2016)

Administered by Department of Veterans' Affairs

Legislation au F2016L01136 Not in force Legislative Instrument

Legislation content

EXPLANATORY STATEMENT

 

STATEMENT OF PRINCIPLES CONCERNING

SPASMODIC TORTICOLLIS

(REASONABLE HYPOTHESIS) (NO. 63 OF 2016)

 

VETERANS’ ENTITLEMENTS ACT 1986

MILITARY REHABILITATION AND COMPENSATION ACT 2004

 

  1. This is the Explanatory Statement to the Statement of Principles concerning spasmodic torticollis (Reasonable Hypothesis) (No. 63 of 2016).

Background

2.             The Repatriation Medical Authority (the Authority), under subsection 196B(8) of the Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986 (the VEA), revokes Instrument No. 21 of 2008 determined under subsection 196B(2) of the VEA concerning spasmodic torticollis.

3.             The Authority is of the view that there is sound medical-scientific evidence that indicates that spasmodic torticollis and death from spasmodic torticollis can be related to particular kinds of service.  The Authority has therefore determined pursuant to subsection 196B(2) of the VEA a Statement of Principles concerning spasmodic torticollis (Reasonable Hypothesis) (No. 63 of 2016).  This Instrument will in effect replace the revoked Statement of Principles.

Purpose and Operation

4.             The Statement of Principles will be applied in determining claims under the VEA and the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004 (the MRCA).

5.             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;

 British nuclear test defence 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 spasmodic torticollis or death from spasmodic torticollis, with the circumstances of that service.  The Statement of Principles has been determined for the purposes of both the VEA and the MRCA.

6.             This Instrument results from an investigation notified by the Authority in the Government Notices Gazette of 12 May 2015 concerning spasmodic torticollis in accordance with section 196G of the VEA.  The investigation involved an examination of the sound medical-scientific evidence now available to the Authority, including the sound medical-scientific evidence it has previously considered.

7.             The contents of this Instrument are in similar terms as the revoked Instrument.  Comparing this Instrument and the revoked Instrument, the differences include:

  • adopting the latest revised Instrument format, which commenced in 2015;
  • specifying a day of commencement for the Instrument in section 2;
  • revising the definition of 'spasmodic torticollis' in subsection 7(2);
  • revising the reference to 'ICD-10-AM code' in subsection 7(4);
  • new definitions of 'MRCA' and 'VEA' in Schedule 1 - Dictionary; and
  • revising the definition of 'relevant service' in Schedule 1 Dictionary.

Consultation

8.             Prior to determining this Instrument, the Authority advertised its intention to undertake an investigation in relation to spasmodic torticollis in the Government Notices Gazette of 12 May 2015, 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.

Human Rights

9.             This 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.  A Statement of Compatibility with Human Rights follows.

Finalisation of Investigation

10.         The determining of this Instrument finalises the investigation in relation to spasmodic torticollis as advertised in the Government Notices Gazette of 12 May 2015.

References

11.         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. 63 of 2016

Kind of Injury, Disease or Death: Spasmodic torticollis

 

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(8) of the Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986 (the VEA) for the purposes of the VEA and the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004 (the MRCA).  Part XIA of the VEA requires the determination of these instruments outlining the factors linking particular kinds of injury, disease or death with service such being determined solely on the available sound medical-scientific evidence.

2. This Legislative Instrument:-

  • facilitates claimants in making, and the Repatriation Commission in assessing, claims under the VEA and the MRCA respectively, by specifying the circumstances in which medical treatment and compensation can be extended to eligible persons who have spasmodic torticollis;
  • facilitates the review of such decisions by the Veterans' Review Board and the Administrative Appeals Tribunal;
  • outlines the factors which the current sound medical-scientific evidence indicates must as a minimum exist, before it can be said that a reasonable hypothesis has been raised, connecting spasmodic torticollis with the circumstances of eligible service rendered by a person, as set out in clause 5 of the Explanatory Statement;
  • replaces Instrument No. 21 of 2008; and
  • reflects developments in the available sound medical-scientific evidence concerning spasmodic torticollis which have occurred since that earlier instrument was determined. 

3. The Instrument is assessed as being a technical instrument which improves the medico-scientific quality of outcomes under the VEA and the MRCA. 

Human Rights Implications

4. 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;
  • the rights of persons with disabilities by facilitating the determination of claims relating to treatment and rehabilitation (Art 26, CRPD); and
  • ensuring that those rights "will be exercised without discrimination of any kind as to race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status" (Art 2, ICESCR).

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 Statement of Principles concerning spasmodic torticollis (Reasonable Hypothesis) (No. 63 of 2016) was enacted to provide clarity and updated medical-scientific evidence regarding the relationship between spasmodic torticollis and particular kinds of military service, thereby facilitating claims for benefits under the Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986 (VEA) and the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004 (MRCA). This instrument, determined by the Repatriation Medical Authority under the VEA, revokes the previous Instrument No. 21 of 2008 and establishes new criteria based on the latest sound medical-scientific evidence. It specifies the factors necessary to establish a reasonable hypothesis linking spasmodic torticollis with specific service circumstances, aiding in the assessment and determination of claims by the Repatriation Commission and subsequent review by the Veterans' Review Board and the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. The enactment aims to ensure that the qualifying conditions for benefits are reasonable, proportionate, and transparent, thereby promoting the human rights of veterans, current and former Defence Force members, and their dependents. This Legislative Instrument is compatible with human rights, as it does not derogate from any human rights and promotes several rights, including the right to social security, an adequate standard of living, and the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health. It ensures that these rights are exercised without discrimination, thereby supporting the welfare and rehabilitation of eligible veterans and Defence Force members.

Scope and Application

The Statement of Principles concerning spasmodic torticollis (Reasonable Hypothesis) (No. 63 of 2016) applies to veterans and current or former Defence Force members who may be seeking medical treatment and compensation for spasmodic torticollis under the Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986 (VEA) and the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004 (MRCA). It outlines the factors that must exist to establish a reasonable hypothesis linking the condition to particular kinds of service rendered. The Instrument applies throughout Australia, and its provisions are intended to ensure that claimants and the Repatriation Commission can assess claims based on the latest sound medical-scientific evidence. This Legislative Instrument does not exclude any groups or services, but rather sets out the minimum factors required to establish a connection between the condition and service for the purposes of claims under the VEA and the MRCA. The Authority may extend or restrict the application of the Instrument through subordinate instruments, although no such actions are currently specified.

Key Provisions

The main operative sections of this Statement of Principles concern spasmodic torticollis and its relationship to specific kinds of service as outlined under sections of the Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986 (VEA) and the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004 (MRCA) (sections 2 and 5). This Statement of Principles revokes the previous Instrument No. 21 of 2008 and provides new criteria that must exist to establish a reasonable hypothesis connecting spasmodic torticollis to particular types of service, including operational, peacekeeping, hazardous, and British nuclear test defence service under the VEA, and warlike and non-warlike service under the MRCA. The obligations imposed by this Act on the parties or entities it governs are primarily concerned with the assessment and determination of claims for medical treatment and compensation under the VEA and the MRCA. The Repatriation Medical Authority (the Authority) is required to determine these Statements of Principles based on sound medical-scientific evidence, facilitating both the claimants in making claims and the Repatriation Commission in assessing these claims. This process ensures that claimants who have spasmodic torticollis and can establish the required connection to their service can receive appropriate medical treatment and compensation. The Authority must also ensure that these instruments are compatible with human rights, promoting the rights of veterans, current and former Defence Force members, and their dependents. There are no specific offences outlined in the Explanatory Statement; however, any breach of the provisions of the VEA and MRCA that this Statement of Principles is designed to facilitate could result in civil or criminal consequences. While the Statement of Principles itself does not specify penalties, breaches of the underlying Acts could lead to penalties such as fines or imprisonment depending on the nature and severity of the breach. The maximum penalties for breaches under the VEA and MRCA can vary, but typically include fines and imprisonment terms that reflect the seriousness of the offence. The Authority must ensure that the Statement of Principles is compatible with human rights, as outlined in the Human Rights (Parliamentary Scrutiny) Act 2001. This involves ensuring that the rights of veterans and Defence Force members, including their right to social security, an adequate standard of living, and the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health, are not derogated from and are promoted through the provisions of the Statement of Principles. By facilitating the assessment and determination of claims, the Statement of Principles supports the enjoyment of these rights without discrimination.

Legal classification tags

Area of Law
Veterans' Law
Instrument
Statement of Principles
Concepts
Definitions & Interpretation
Regulatory Standards
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.