REPATRIATION MEDICAL AUTHORITY
INSTRUMENT NO. 64 of 2009
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. 64 of 2009 concerning systemic sclerosis and death from systemic sclerosis.
2. The Authority is of the view that there is sound medical-scientific evidence that indicates that systemic sclerosis and death from systemic sclerosis can be related to particular kinds of service. The Authority has therefore determined this Statement of Principles concerning systemic sclerosis 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 systemic sclerosis or death from systemic sclerosis, 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 systemic sclerosis or death from systemic sclerosis that was lodged on or after 1 June 1994 in the case of the VEA, or 1 July 2004 in the case of the MRCA 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 27 August 2008 concerning scleroderma in accordance with section 196G of the VEA. The investigation involved an examination of the sound medical-scientific evidence available to the Authority.
7. Prior to determining this instrument, the Authority advertised its intention to undertake an investigation in relation to scleroderma in the Government Notices Gazette of 27 August 2008, 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 scleroderma as advertised in the Government Notices Gazette of 27 August 2008.
9. 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 Secretariat
GPO Box 1014
BRISBANE QLD 4001
Overview
The Veterans’ Entitlements Act 1986, as amended, and the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004 address the rights and entitlements of veterans and their dependants. The Repatriation Medical Authority Instrument No. 64 of 2009 was enacted to provide clarity and a legal framework for claims relating to systemic sclerosis and its connection to military service. This instrument was created to address the gap in existing legislation by providing specific criteria that must be met for a veteran to claim pension or compensation related to systemic sclerosis. The instrument aims to ensure that claims are substantiated by sound medical-scientific evidence, thereby protecting the integrity of the compensation process while providing necessary support to affected veterans.
Scope and Application
The Repatriation Medical Authority Instrument No. 64 of 2009, concerning systemic sclerosis and death from systemic sclerosis, applies to persons who have rendered particular kinds of service under the Veterans’ Entitlements Act 1986 and the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004. These services include operational, peacekeeping, and hazardous service under the VEA, as well as warlike and non-warlike service under the MRCA. The instrument is designed to establish the minimum factors necessary to connect systemic sclerosis or death from systemic sclerosis with the circumstances of service, thereby affecting the determination of pension or compensation claims. The instrument has a national jurisdictional reach, impacting all relevant claims lodged after the specified dates of 1 June 1994 for the VEA and 1 July 2004 for the MRCA. The Authority has determined that any claim for pension or compensation related to systemic sclerosis or death from systemic sclerosis, lodged after these dates, cannot be accepted unless it is upheld by the Statement of Principles. Additionally, the Authority has examined the available medical-scientific evidence to inform this decision, and the instrument concludes the investigation into scleroderma as advertised in the Government Notices Gazette on 27 August 2008.
Key Provisions
The key operative sections of this legislation are sections 196B(2) and 196G of the Veterans’ Entitlements Act 1986 (VEA), and sections 120A(3) and 338(3) of the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004 (MRCA). Section 196B(2) of the VEA allows the Repatriation Medical Authority (the Authority) to determine Statements of Principles concerning conditions such as systemic sclerosis, which can be linked to certain types of military service. Section 196G of the VEA mandates that the Authority investigate conditions like systemic sclerosis if they are suspected to be related to military service. Section 120A(3) of the VEA and section 338(3) of the MRCA state that claims for pension or compensation related to systemic sclerosis or death from systemic sclerosis cannot be accepted unless supported by a Statement of Principles issued by the Authority.
The obligations imposed on the parties by this legislation are primarily on the Authority, the Repatriation Commission, Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Commission, Veterans’ Review Board, and the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. The Authority is required to determine Statements of Principles based on sound medical-scientific evidence and to investigate conditions suspected of being linked to military service. The Repatriation Commission, Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Commission, Veterans’ Review Board, and Administrative Appeals Tribunal must adhere to the Statements of Principles when assessing claims for pension or compensation related to systemic sclerosis or death from systemic sclerosis. They are mandated to reject any claims that are not supported by an applicable Statement of Principles, particularly for claims lodged after the specified dates.
There are no explicit offences, penalties, or civil/criminal consequences mentioned for breaches of this legislation. However, the legal implications of not adhering to the statutory requirements are significant. If the Authority fails to issue a Statement of Principles based on sound medical-scientific evidence or if the Commissions or Boards do not follow the Statements of Principles when assessing claims, it could lead to invalid claims being processed or legitimate claims being rejected. This could result in veterans or their dependants not receiving the pension or compensation they are entitled to, which could have severe financial and emotional consequences for those affected. The primary recourse for those aggrieved by decisions not in line with the legislative requirements would be through the Administrative Appeals Tribunal or other judicial review mechanisms.