International Criminal Court

I am committed to seeking justice for the second-generation victims of Agent Orange (TCDD) exposure, including myself, my children, and countless others. Despite overwhelming evidence of the intergenerational harm caused by Agent Orange, the Australian, New Zealand, and Canadian governments have failed to acknowledge and address the widespread health impacts.

As a result, I have decided to pursue a case at the International Criminal Court (ICC), holding these governments accountable for their failure to act. This case will focus on the crimes against humanity they have committed by denying recognition and support to those affected by second-generation exposure to TCDD, which is directly linked to numerous serious health conditions, including mine. These violations go against the core principles of international human rights law, and the victims of Agent Orange exposure deserve justice.

The ICC has the authority to prosecute state actors for crimes including genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity. Through this legal process, I aim to bring to light the systemic discrimination and inhumane treatment faced by second-generation victims, and to push for international recognition and support for those affected.

This action is a critical part of my broader advocacy efforts to raise awareness of the ongoing harm caused by Agent Orange exposure and to hold the responsible parties accountable. I am working with international organizations, legal experts, and human rights groups to ensure that the case is heard and to push for justice at the highest international levels.

The pursuit of this case is not just about holding governments accountable, but about ensuring that the children and descendants of Vietnam veterans, and all others harmed by Agent Orange, receive the care, support, and recognition they are rightfully owed. It is a step toward rectifying a long-standing injustice and establishing legal precedents that will protect future generations from similar harm.

I invite all those affected by this issue to join me in seeking justice, and I will continue to update this website with information about the progress of this case and how you can support this fight for justice.

Rome Statute Article 7.

A term used to describe seven deliberately constructed institutional barriers or narratives used by governments to deny, delay, or obscure recognition and accountability for second-generation harm caused by Agent Orange (TCDD) exposure. These artificial constructs are not grounded in science or justice, but serve to:

Control the narrative around chemical exposure.
Suppress emerging intergenerational evidence.
Limit access to healthcare and compensation.
Ignore international precedent or findings.
Withhold data and research from affected populations.
Refuse legal recognition of inherited injury.
Deflect blame across jurisdictions (e.g. AUS vs. NZ vs. US).

The Artificial 7 Framework

Fabrication of Scientific Uncertainty

Deliberate rejection or misrepresentation of international and domestic research linking TCDD to multigenerational harm, despite scientific consensus and WHO classification of TCDD as a human carcinogen and endocrine disruptor.
Suppression of Historical and Medical Records

Destruction, redaction, or withholding of military and medical records (e.g. exposure logs, service history, health outcome studies) that would enable second-generation claimants to establish causality or eligibility.
Fragmentation of Responsibility Across Departments

Systematic deflection of accountability between Veterans’ Affairs, Health, Environment, Defence, and Social Services, ensuring no single department accepts legal or moral responsibility.
Deliberate Legal and Policy Exclusion of Children of Veterans

Laws and compensation schemes are constructed to exclude children of exposed veterans, despite direct scientific evidence and international legal obligations (e.g. CRC, CRPD, ICCPR).
Refusal to Acknowledge Second-Generation Disability and Death

Despite knowledge of severe congenital, neurological, and developmental impacts, governments deny or reclassify second-generation conditions as “genetic” or “coincidental” rather than chemically inherited.
Targeted Retaliation or Discrediting of Whistleblowers and Survivors

Victims and advocates face reputational harm, denial of services, or being labeled as “unsubstantiated” complainants when challenging the state’s narrative.
Failure to Comply with International Obligations Despite Awareness

Governments continue to deny second-generation claims in breach of obligations under the CRC, CRPD, ICESCR, CAT, and the Rome Statute, despite direct notice from advocates, UN bodies, and affected individuals

Crimes Against Humanity in My Case

Widespread or Systematic Attack:

The failure by the Australian, New Zealand, and Canadian governments to acknowledge and address the health impacts of Agent Orange (TCDD) exposure on second-generation victims (including myself and my children) is systematic. This harm is widespread as it affects a broad group of people, specifically children of Vietnam veterans exposed to Agent Orange during the war. These governments’ ongoing refusal to provide care or support for these victims constitutes part of a widespread attack on a civilian population.
Targeting a Civilian Population:

The civilian population in this case includes the children and descendants of Vietnam veterans who were exposed to Agent Orange. These individuals, who had no direct involvement in the war, are being disproportionately affected by the consequences of their parents’ exposure to TCDD, making them a targeted group for neglect, discrimination, and denial of justice.
Acts Committed as Part of the Attack:

The acts constituting crimes against humanity in this case would include:
- Persecution: The governments’ deliberate failure to provide recognition or appropriate care for second-generation victims of Agent Orange is a form of systematic discrimination based on the fact that these individuals were born to Vietnam veterans exposed to TCDD. This amounts to persecution under the Rome Statute, as it denies them equal rights to healthcare, support, and compensation.
- Other Inhumane Acts: The denial of necessary medical treatment, healthcare, and support for these individuals, despite clear evidence linking their health conditions to second-generation Agent Orange exposure, constitutes an inhumane act. These actions have resulted in serious physical and mental harm, as well as significant suffering that goes unaddressed.
Knowledge of the Attack:

The governments involved are aware of the harm caused by Agent Orange exposure, as research and evidence have demonstrated its impact on subsequent generations. Despite this, they have systematically failed to recognize the issue or provide compensation and care, even when scientific and medical evidence supports the connection between TCDD exposure and the health conditions of second-generation victims. This failure to act knowingly contributes to the widespread and systematic harm inflicted upon these individuals.

1. Fabrication of Scientific Uncertainty

Governments knowingly distorted or dismissed valid international research proving the multigenerational harm of TCDD (Agent Orange). Despite access to WHO, IARC, and national toxicology data linking TCDD to endocrine, neurological, developmental, and reproductive harm, officials misrepresented findings or claimed there was “insufficient evidence” for second-generation impact.

This constitutes intentional deception, leading to prolonged suffering, denial of care, and avoidable death and disability in children of exposed veterans — and falls under persecution and other inhumane acts (Rome Statute, Article 7(1)(h) & 7(1)(k)).

Australia:

DVA: Repeatedly stated there is “no conclusive evidence” of harm to veterans’ children, despite international studies and public health records showing otherwise.

Key individuals:

– Alison Frame (Secretary of DVA, President of the Repatriation Commission)

– Matt Keogh (Minister for Veterans’ Affairs)

Both were in receipt of global findings and domestic evidence but maintained denial policies.
Australian Government Department of Health: Ignored or failed to act on the 1994 Repatriation Medical Authority’s acknowledgment of dioxin exposure, and failed to update guidelines to reflect scientific advancements.
NHMRC (National Health and Medical Research Council): Did not commission adequate Australian-specific second-generation studies despite long-standing requests from advocates.

Liability: Knowledge of harm + failure to act = wilful denial of care to a vulnerable population. This satisfies the “knowledge and intent” element of Rome Statute Article 30.

New Zealand:

Veterans’ Affairs NZ and NZ Defence Force relied on the McLeod Report (2001), which was widely criticized for being deliberately dismissive of Australian data and used as justification to withhold support.
Chris Penk, Minister for Veterans (2023–), has not acknowledged the need to revisit multigenerational claims despite public pressure and available data.

Liability: The state knowingly relied on a discredited internal report while disregarding WHO/IARC data, fulfilling the “systematic policy of denial” standard under Crimes Against Humanity.

Canada:

Veterans Affairs Canada (VAC) failed to investigate or act on evidence of generational harm despite being notified by veteran families and having internal access to U.S. military exposure records.
Élisabeth Brière (Minister for Veterans Affairs) and Paul Ledwell (Deputy Minister) continue to enforce policies that exclude second-generation claimants from compensation or recognition.

Liability: Continued failure to investigate generational harm with available evidence, despite known health consequences, fulfills both “knowledge” and “reckless disregard” thresholds under ICC law.

This barrier establishes that the denial was not due to lack of evidence, but a deliberate act of misrepresentation and suppression, which meets the legal criteria for persecution and inhumane treatment on discriminatory grounds (birth/lineage).

2. Suppression of Historical and Medical Records

Governments and key departments withheld, destroyed, or obstructed access to records needed by second-generation survivors to prove exposure, establish causation, or access health and legal remedies. This includes military service records, chemical handling logs, exposure maps, birth and death registries, and health outcome data.

These acts were not accidental — they were systematically applied and maintained over decades to disable intergenerational claims. Under Article 7(1)(k) of the Rome Statute, this constitutes “other inhumane acts” intentionally causing great suffering or serious injury, as well as a form of persecution under Article 7(1)(h) when done on the grounds of birth or status as a child of a veteran.

Australia:

Department of Veterans’ Affairs (DVA) withheld full exposure records and failed to notify children of chemical service histories known to the government.

Alison Frame (Secretary) and Matt Keogh (Minister) continued this practice post-2022, even after complaints and international notices.

Australian War Memorial restricted access to operational logs that detail chemical storage and movement.
Australian Defence Force (ADF) classified or redacted documents detailing dioxin exposure incidents. Many records related to Operation Ranch Hand and Australian involvement in Vietnam were never declassified.
Department of Health and state health archives failed to release health data linked to veterans’ families, especially in relation to birth defects, cancers, and neurological disorders.

Liability: Failure to preserve and disclose evidence amounts to an intentional act of harm, as it deprives survivors of life-saving care and legal redress. This fulfills the criteria for systematic denial of fundamental rights, and state officials had both knowledge and control over the information.

New Zealand:

NZ Defence Force (NZDF) and Archives NZ lost or refused to release full military service files, including medical records and exposure risks for Vietnam veterans.
Ministry of Health failed to initiate or release studies on veterans’ children, despite repeated public requests and evidence of high birth defect rates.
Veterans’ Affairs NZ did not proactively contact children of veterans with known exposure risk, nor did they maintain intergenerational monitoring.

Key Individuals:

– Chris Penk (Veterans Minister)

– Andrew Bridgman (CEO, NZDF, until 2024)

Liability: The conscious failure to record or provide this data to the second generation shows intent to block access to truth and justice, amounting to an inhumane act and discriminatory policy.

Canada:

Veterans Affairs Canada (VAC) did not track or document reproductive harm in veterans, nor did it maintain any central registry of affected children.
DND (Department of National Defence) classified chemical exposure incidents or failed to record them entirely.
Health Canada has never investigated the long-term effects of parental dioxin exposure on children, despite calls from researchers and advocates.

Key Individuals:

– Élisabeth Brière (Minister, VAC)

– Paul Ledwell (Deputy Minister, VAC)

Liability: By refusing to collect, maintain, or release these critical records, Canadian authorities caused foreseeable harm to second-generation survivors, amounting to willful neglect and institutional persecution.

Conclusion:

The suppression of records across these Commonwealth countries was not isolated but part of a coordinated, long-term effort to obstruct legal accountability and healthcare. This meets the “widespread and systematic” threshold under the Rome Statute and constitutes a key pillar in the broader crime against humanity you are documenting.

3. Fragmentation of Responsibility Across Departments

Governments deliberately divided responsibility for veterans’ exposure and intergenerational harm across multiple departments in a way that ensured no single agency would take accountability. This tactic prevented victims from getting answers, blocked coordinated care, and made justice inaccessible.

This institutional buck-passing is not administrative failure — it is a deliberate obstruction tactic that resulted in prolonged suffering, lack of diagnosis, and death in some second-generation victims. This qualifies under Article 7(1)(k) of the Rome Statute as an “other inhumane act” causing great suffering and serious injury, and under Article 7(1)(h) as persecution on the basis of lineage.

Australia:

DVA refers second-generation health claims to Department of Health, which then redirects to state services or refers back to DVA as the responsible body for veterans.
Department of Social Services refuses to recognise inherited disability under its current disability legislation.
NDIS excludes chemical exposure–linked disability from its eligibility pathway.
Department of Defence claims no duty of care to veterans’ children and refuses to participate in reparative policy.
Centrelink demands separate and repeated documentation for each health condition, despite existing confirmation of TCDD-related harm.

Named individuals complicit in policy or administration:

– Alison Frame (DVA Secretary)

– Matt Keogh (Minister for Veterans’ Affairs)

– Amanda Rishworth (Minister for Social Services)

– Bill Shorten (Minister for NDIS)

– Brendan O’Connor (Minister for Defence Personnel)

Liability: These departments had access to international guidance and health data. Their failure to coordinate is an intentional administrative design to deny care, meeting the ICC’s definition of systematic inhumane treatment.

New Zealand:

Veterans’ Affairs NZ, Ministry of Health, and ACC (Accident Compensation Corporation) each reject responsibility for veteran family health outcomes.
No single authority takes ownership of researching or responding to intergenerational exposure effects.
The Ministry of Social Development rejects disability support applications if causality is linked to TCDD, referring applicants back to healthcare providers with no chemical exposure expertise.

Key officials:

– Chris Penk (Minister for Veterans)

– Willis-Aitken (ACC leadership)

– Andrew Little (Health Minister 2022–23)

Liability: New Zealand’s entire response structure was designed to deflect, not address, claims. This systemic design, despite knowledge of harm, meets the ICC’s standard of structural persecution and inhumane treatment by omission.

Canada:

Veterans Affairs Canada, Health Canada, and Environment Canada all disclaim responsibility for second-generation impacts.
Children of veterans are not recognised as a policy group, nor tracked, nor supported — and attempts to raise their case are lost in a bureaucratic loop with no outcome.
No joint investigations, medical guidelines, or legal recognition have been developed, despite decades of warnings.

Key officials:

– Élisabeth Brière (Minister for Veterans Affairs)

– Mark Holland (Minister of Health)

– Steven Guilbeault (Minister of Environment and Climate Change)

Liability: The government knew the exposure risks and legal obligations, yet created a deliberately fragmented structure to block accountability — fulfilling the “widespread and systematic” elements of persecution.

Conclusion:

By breaking up responsibility across ministries with no central accountability, these governments engineered a denial structure that ensured second-generation victims would fall through every crack. This qualifies under ICC law as an intentional policy of inhumane treatment and persecution based on birth status and political vulnerability.

4. Deliberate Legal and Policy Exclusion of Children of Veterans

Governments in Australia, New Zealand, and Canada intentionally excluded the children of veterans from recognition, health care, disability support, legal protection, and compensation frameworks — despite having knowledge of intergenerational harm caused by TCDD (dioxin) exposure.

This targeted exclusion from legal and policy frameworks, in spite of overwhelming international and domestic evidence, meets the ICC’s definition of persecution under Article 7(1)(h), and constitutes “inhumane acts” under Article 7(1)(k), as it causes serious physical and mental suffering and intentionally deprives a group of fundamental rights based on birth status.

Australia:

No recognition exists under the Veterans’ Entitlements Act or the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act for second-generation harm caused by chemical exposure.
The Department of Social Services and NDIS provide no eligibility pathways or policy frameworks for inherited disabilities caused by military-related toxic exposure.
The Department of Health does not track, study, or acknowledge the long-term reproductive, neurological, or developmental harm to children of veterans.
Centrelink, Medicare, and state disability programs reject support applications that cite inherited chemical exposure, requiring proof that does not exist due to prior suppression of records.

Key individuals responsible:

– Matt Keogh (Minister for Veterans’ Affairs)

– Alison Frame (Secretary, DVA)

– Amanda Rishworth (Minister for Social Services)

– Bill Shorten (NDIS Minister)

– Mark Butler (Health Minister)

Liability: These authorities had the legal and moral obligation to act once harm was known. Their failure constitutes deliberate exclusion and discriminatory policy design, fitting the ICC’s definition of persecution.

New Zealand:

Children of veterans are not recognised under Veterans’ Support Act 2014, despite decades of scientific evidence from the U.S., Australia, and Vietnam.
No inclusion in disability compensation, mental health services, or targeted public health initiatives exists for second-generation survivors.
No state-level health surveillance or acknowledgment of developmental harm to veterans’ children exists.

Key officials:

– Chris Penk (Minister for Veterans)

– Andrew Little (Health Minister 2022–2023)

– Willis-Aitken (ACC leadership)

Liability: The government has maintained this legal exclusion despite full awareness of international scientific evidence. This is a systematic deprivation of rights based solely on family background.

Canada:

Veterans Affairs Canada provides no policy framework, benefits, or legal pathway for children of veterans harmed by dioxin exposure.
Health Canada and Employment and Social Development Canada (ESDC) do not investigate or respond to inherited toxic harm, leaving second-generation survivors with no support.
Children of veterans are not legally recognised as a vulnerable group, nor are they included in human rights or disability frameworks related to exposure.

Key officials:

– Élisabeth Brière (Minister for Veterans Affairs)

– Mark Holland (Minister of Health)

– Seamus O’Regan, Kent Hehr, Lawrence MacAulay (former Veterans Ministers)

Liability: The failure to legislate protections or provide access to essential services, knowing harm existed, meets the ICC’s threshold for systematic discrimination and inhumane treatment.

Conclusion:

Across all three countries, governments have deliberately excluded second-generation survivors from all formal systems of support, healthcare, justice, and reparation. This was not a passive oversight — it is a widespread and targeted deprivation of rights based on birth, fulfilling the legal definition of persecution and inhumane acts under the Rome Statute.

5. Medical Gaslighting and Institutional Denial of Harm

Governments, health departments, and medical regulators in Australia, New Zealand, and Canada actively participated in the denial of second-generation harm caused by TCDD exposure by:

Suppressing data
Ignoring known international science
Denying credible patient symptoms
Discrediting diagnoses linked to inherited toxic exposure

This widespread practice of medical gaslighting constitutes a systematic campaign to obscure the truth, deny access to care, and obstruct justice. Under the Rome Statute, this falls under Article 7(1)(k) as “other inhumane acts” causing severe mental and physical suffering, and Article 7(1)(h) as persecution based on birth, descent, or political status.

Australia:

Doctors across the public health system routinely dismissed complex, multi-system health issues in children of Vietnam veterans, labelling them as psychosomatic, anxiety-related, or unrelated to family history, despite known patterns consistent with dioxin-linked conditions.
Medicare and public hospitals have no diagnostic code or recognition pathway for inherited chemical damage, meaning doctors often lack both the tools and incentives to investigate.
Medical Boards have discouraged practitioners from linking chronic conditions to TCDD exposure, with some whistleblowers censured.
Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) and NHMRC have failed to update national guidelines or fund research despite decades of evidence from the U.S., Canada, and Vietnam.

Responsible individuals and agencies:

– Professor Steve Robson (President, Australian Medical Association)

– Mark Butler (Minister for Health)

– National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC)

– Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA)

Liability: This amounts to a coordinated denial of the right to health, truth, and justice — meeting the ICC’s criteria for systematic inhumane treatment and state-level persecution.

New Zealand:

Children of Vietnam veterans presenting with complex disabilities were routinely dismissed by public health services as having unexplained or idiopathic conditions, despite strong family histories and known exposure timelines.
ACC (Accident Compensation Corporation) refuses claims for inherited harm from chemical exposure unless the cause is explicitly proven, which is nearly impossible due to state denial of service records and causality.
District Health Boards (DHBs) never implemented policies to track or treat second-generation chemical exposure cases, and no national medical guideline has ever been created.

Responsible entities:

– Ministry of Health

– ACC

– Medical Council of New Zealand

– Associate Minister of Health (Disability Issues)

– Veterans’ Affairs New Zealand

Liability: New Zealand’s silence and gaslighting reflect a systemic pattern of omission and obstruction, fulfilling the ICC’s threshold of deliberate, state-backed inhumane acts.

Canada:

Doctors are discouraged from exploring toxic exposure as a possible cause of multigenerational health conditions, and there is no national education or alert system in place for TCDD-related hereditary disorders.
Veterans Affairs Canada and Health Canada actively deny requests for evaluation, testing, or diagnosis related to intergenerational chemical damage.
Public health institutions deny the validity of U.S. Institute of Medicine findings and refuse to incorporate Agent Orange reproductive harm data into Canadian medical guidelines.

Responsible institutions and individuals:

– Canadian Medical Association

– Health Canada

– Veterans Affairs Canada

– Élisabeth Brière (Minister for Veterans Affairs)

– Mark Holland (Minister of Health)

Liability: Canadian authorities’ failure to educate, acknowledge, or diagnose harm constitutes wilful blindness and deliberate medical neglect — a crime of persecution through denial of care and truth.

Conclusion:

The coordinated denial of medical legitimacy to second-generation harm is not an isolated error. It reflects a state-sanctioned pattern of abuse that denies victims their right to diagnosis, health, and legal recourse. This meets the definition of persecution and inhumane acts under international criminal law.

6. Retaliation Against Survivors and Whistleblowers

Governments in Australia, New Zealand, and Canada have actively retaliated against children of Vietnam veterans, whistleblowers, and advocates who attempted to expose the truth about second-generation TCDD harm. This retaliation includes:

Denial of benefits or services
Threats or coercion for speaking out
Professional sabotage of whistleblower clinicians
Blacklisting, surveillance, and targeted bureaucratic obstruction
Systematic rejection of complaints, reports, or evidence

This conduct satisfies Article 7(1)(h) (persecution) and Article 7(1)(k) (inhumane acts) of the Rome Statute. It represents a deliberate state practice of silencing victims, covering up crimes, and deterring future complaints, especially when directed at a vulnerable group defined by birth.

Australia:

Children of veterans who reported inherited conditions linked to Agent Orange were systematically denied services from Centrelink, the NDIS, and health services. Some faced accusations of malingering, mental illness, or fabrication.
Those who raised concerns with DVA, Human Services, or state health ombudsmen often faced delays, denials, or complete dismissal of evidence.
Advocates and professionals who tried to speak up about second-generation TCDD harm were discredited, pressured into silence, or pushed out of public roles.
Several departments (DVA, Services Australia, NDIS, Health) shared or blocked files across systems to obstruct and discredit applicants.

Named officials and agencies:

– Matt Keogh (Minister for Veterans’ Affairs)

– Amanda Rishworth (Minister for Social Services)

– Bill Shorten (NDIS Minister)

– Mark Butler (Health Minister)

– Department of Health & Aged Care

– Services Australia

Liability: Retaliatory denial of services and the targeting of complainants is persecution — especially when it is based on their birth to Vietnam veterans, a protected group under international law.

New Zealand:

Children of veterans who attempted to have their complex conditions formally linked to Vietnam War chemical exposure were shut down, with claims rejected by ACC or ignored by Veterans’ Affairs.
Those who attempted to access medical records, exposure documents, or raise systemic issues often faced stonewalling or had their cases marked as “complex” and buried in bureaucracy.
Whistleblowers in medicine or veteran services who acknowledged second-generation effects were often ignored, sidelined, or pressured to withdraw their views.

Institutions involved:

– ACC

– Veterans’ Affairs NZ

– Ministry of Health

– Medical Council of New Zealand

Liability: New Zealand’s refusal to protect those reporting systemic harm — and its silencing of professionals trying to expose the truth — fits the ICC definition of state-sponsored retaliation and persecution.

Canada:

Second-generation survivors in Canada have been repeatedly denied access to medical evaluations, disability pensions, or legal support after raising inherited Agent Orange claims.
Whistleblowers inside Veterans Affairs Canada and Health Canada who attempted to raise concerns have faced internal pressure, censorship, or career repercussions.
Advocacy groups trying to represent second-generation victims have received no recognition, funding, or legal standing, and their work has been systematically ignored or excluded from policy conversations.

Agencies responsible:

– Veterans Affairs Canada

– Health Canada

– Canadian Human Rights Commission

– Provincial disability programs

Liability: These actions violate international norms protecting the rights of victims and human rights defenders. Canada’s refusal to investigate complaints and the targeting of survivors and advocates constitutes deliberate suppression — a form of persecution and inhumane treatment.

Conclusion:

The widespread and systemic retaliation against survivors and whistleblowers across multiple Commonwealth states is not incidental. It forms a deliberate policy of concealment, punishment, and exclusion, aimed at denying justice and avoiding accountability for mass harm. This satisfies the ICC criteria for crimes against humanity.

7. Blocking of Legal Remedies and International Justice Access

The governments of Australia, New Zealand, and Canada have deliberately and systematically prevented second-generation victims of TCDD (Agent Orange) exposure from pursuing justice through:

Omitting second-generation harm from legislation, legal definitions, and policy
Denying access to courts, tribunals, and review bodies by excluding relevant categories or dismissing jurisdiction
Failing to provide effective remedies or investigations, even after formal complaints
Ignoring obligations under international human rights treaties, including the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD), and Universal Periodic Review (UPR) mechanisms
Blocking access to records, evidence, and exposure data, undermining victims’ legal standing and the right to truth

This barrier violates Rome Statute Article 7(1)(h) (persecution) and 7(1)(k) (inhumane acts), as it denies individuals legal identity, protection, and remedy based on their birth status — targeting them because they are children of Vietnam veterans exposed to dioxin.

Australia:

No legal pathway exists to file claims based on second-generation dioxin harm under the Veterans’ Entitlements Act, Social Security Act, or National Disability Insurance Scheme Act.
Tribunals and courts reject cases involving second-generation TCDD harm as “out of scope,” with no mechanism to challenge this exclusion.
The Office of the Australian Information Commissioner, NDIS Appeals, and Administrative Appeals Tribunal routinely dismiss or delay second-generation cases.
Despite being party to the CRC, CRPD, ICCPR, and CAT, Australia has never implemented these treaties domestically for children of veterans — creating a legal vacuum.

Agencies and officials responsible:

– Attorney-General’s Department

– Matt Keogh (Veterans’ Affairs)

– Bill Shorten (NDIS)

– Amanda Rishworth (Social Services)

– Administrative Appeals Tribunal

– Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC)

Liability: The creation of a deliberate legal dead-end for an entire group of victims constitutes persecution through denial of justice, violating fundamental rights under both domestic and international law.

New Zealand:

ACC law and Veterans’ Support Act contain no provisions for inherited chemical damage, and complaints under these acts are consistently rejected.
Human Rights Commission of NZ fails to investigate structural discrimination or second-generation harm complaints under the Human Rights Act or Disability Convention.
Survivors face years of procedural delays, or are told no relevant law exists, effectively blocking any access to remedy.
Despite international obligations, the government has made no effort to comply with CRPD recommendations or the UN’s Special Rapporteur reports on toxic exposures.

Liability: Blocking legal standing for a vulnerable group constitutes state-enabled impunity and systemic persecution under ICC definitions.

Canada:

Canada refuses to provide any legal route for children of veterans to bring claims related to inherited harm from dioxins, despite known history of spraying and exposure on Canadian bases and among deployed soldiers.
Veterans Affairs Canada and federal disability systems deny second-generation claims as unsupported, even when international science and U.S. precedent are available.
The Canadian Human Rights Tribunal and relevant ombudsmen decline jurisdiction or refer to ministries that also deny legal basis — resulting in total denial of remedy.

Responsible parties:

– Veterans Affairs Canada

– Minister of Justice

– Health Canada

– Canadian Human Rights Tribunal

– Provincial Disability Services

Liability: These are deliberate legal blockades, not accidental oversights. They demonstrate state coordination to deny justice to a birth-based class — clearly falling under Rome Statute Articles 7(1)(h) and (k).

Conclusion:

The structural, deliberate denial of legal pathways for second-generation TCDD survivors constitutes a final layer of persecution and cruelty, ensuring victims are silenced, excluded, and erased. Blocking access to justice — especially when governments know the harm and refuse to allow redress — satisfies the ICC’s definitions of persecution, inhumane acts, and denial of fundamental rights under crimes against humanity.

Contact

I'm always looking for new and exciting opportunities. Let's connect.

info@mysite.com

123-456-7890