Airport Approaches Court to Seek Stoppage of Mandatory Face Mask for Workers, Passengers

2 min read

Management of Canberra International Airport, Australia, has filed a lawsuit against the government for failure to expunge the face mask mandatory rule which requires passengers and workers accessing the airport to firmly mask up.

The Chief Executive, Canberra International Airport, Stephen Byron, said the airport was suing the Australian Capital Territory (ACT) because he believed the compulsory use of face masks breaches the Human Rights Act.

Byron argued that the mandatory face mask for everybody accessing the airport posed a very clear and present danger to the airport business as it had led the general public to believe that “entering the airport to go on holiday is more dangerous than any other social pursuits”

The airport’s Chief Executive, CE, added that the face mask rule is discriminatory and harms business.Byron lamented that “the mandate is appalling, unnecessary, completely discriminatory and not based on any scientific evidence.”

**Mr Stephen Byron, Chief Executive, CE, Canberra International Airport, Australia**

He added, “there is no evidence the airport terminal is any more infectious than going to any nightclub or shopping Centre in Canberra,”

The Canberra Airport CE, Stephen Byron, made the outburst, when the government of the Australian Capital Territory, ACT, extends the review of the public emergency declaration till 11th August. And the Health Minister was bestowed the powers to issue face mask mandates as the case may be.

Castigating the position of the government, Byron described continued observance of the mandatory use of face masks as, “a discrimination with no legal basis, there’s no health basis, there’s no data or evidence that requires this, everyone knows and agrees”, he fumed.

The Canberra International Airport helmsman said the government’s decision to extend the face mask mandate was akin to telling people that “air travel and tourism is more dangerous than going to the shops, footy or the pub,” Byron said.

We look forward to the court decision on this issue that is deep in the public interest but of which public opinion may be of lesser influence because of the health element in the impasse.