Holistic Life: Formal Rejections of The WHO Treaty & UN By Other Member States

	1) Belarus, Bolivia, Cuba, North Korea, Eritrea, Iran, Nicaragua, Russia, Syria, Venezuela, and Zimbabwes reject unilateral coercive measures. Instead of unanimous adoption of the Political Declaration on 26th September 2023, the United Nations General Assembly UNGA just announced after receiving the letter that they would have to approve the Declaration using a vote count instead of a unanimous agreement - Changing their own process. 2) Group of Friends in Defense of the UN Charter: Algeria, Angola, Belarus, Bolivia, Cambodia, China, Cuba, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Iran, the Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Nicaragua, the State of Palestine, the Russian Federation, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Syria, Venezuela, and Zimbabwe. https://www.tasnimnews.com/en/news/2022/11/05/2799414/ group-of-friends-in-defense-of-charter-of-united-nations-releases- statement 3) G77 which is now a group of 134 developing countries who contested the legal standing of the meetings of the SDGs Summit and the High-Level Meeting on Pandemic Prevention. designed to promote its members' collective economic interests and create an enhanced joint negotiating capacity in the United Nation expanded to 134 member countries. G77 4) Netherlands - Medicines Agency early personal liability notice 2021 of vaccine deaths 5) Slovakia - Prime MInister Robert Fico 6) Indonesia - a) Senate b) Precedent 2008 Case c) Dr Widya Murni World Council For Health Vote to Exit The WHO 7) America - Dr Peter McCullogh 8) Fahrie Hassan - Conflict of Interests World and Africa-Specific 1) 17th September Formal Letter confirming there was no consensus and 70 and then 136 countries were being ignored. Then this letter was ignored too. Belarus, Bolivia, Cuba, North Korea, Eritrea, Iran, Nicaragua, Russia, Syria, Venezuela, and Zimbabwe Political Declaration, rejecting the “unilateral coercive measures (UCMs)” . They claimed that their objections had been ignored or set aside at various stages in the
	development of the declarations, contrary to UN procedural rules. https://

healthpolicy-watch.news/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/NV-00492-1.pdf

No. 00492
H.E. Mr. Dennis Francis
President, General Assembly United Nations New York.-
Distinguished President of the General Assembly, New York, 17 September 2023

We have the honor to address you, in our capacity as representatives from the delegations of Belarus, Bolivia, Cuba, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Eritrea, the Islamic Republic of Iran, Nicaragua, the Russian Federation, the Syrian Arab Republic, Venezuela, and Zimbabwe, in relation to the unfortunate situation created around the draft political declarations of the SDG Summit, the High-level meeting on pandemic prevention, preparedness and response, the High-level meeting on universal health coverage, and the High-level meeting on the fight against tuberculosis.

In this regard, it is regrettable that it has not been possible to find a political solution to the current stalemate, created, not only due to the lack of will of some developed countries to engage in true and meaningful negotiations to have balanced and acceptable outcomes for all, but also due to the lack of transparency and poor handling of your predecessor’s team of all these processes.

As you are aware, the issue of the negative impact of unilateral coercive measures (UCMs) is an existential one for our peoples. A third of the world’s population is affected by these illegal measures. There is ample evidence, including from UN sources, of the heavy toll caused by UCMs on targeted countries’ capacities to achieve sustainable development and to make further progress in protecting the right to health of their respective populations. Regardless of these facts, we have engaged in the negotiations of these draft outcomes in good faith, with a spirit of compromise and a constructive approach, in order to reach consensus.

Since the beginning of these processes, we have insisted on the need to include our concerns in these important political documents, on the basis of consensual language, as reflected in paragraph 30 of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. This request has been echoed by a large number of delegations, including from the Group of the 77 and China, and from the Group of Friends in Defense of the UN Charter, among others.

Excellency,
The legitimate concerns of a large number of developing countries have been ignored. Hence, it is our duty to express our strong concerns on the unacceptable way in which this situation unfolded, running in clear contradiction with the spirit of multilateralism and the overall goal of “leaving no one behind”.

First, there has been no real willingness from a small group of developed countries to engage in meaningful negotiations to find compromises, forcing unfair practices which pretend to impose a kind of “veto” on certain issues, and pretending to even prevent their discussion within the framework of intergovernmental negotiations.

Second, in some cases, negotiations were not conducted in a truly inclusive, fair and balanced way. Our delegations had to witness how, in some cases, even single delegations were accommodated a great deal in their concerns, while others’ priorities, including ours, were bluntly neglected. For example, the draft outcome of the High-Level Political Forum on Sustainable Development under the auspices of the General Assembly – SDGs Summit, was reopened with the purpose of exclusively accommodating the priorities of a few delegations from developed countries, while, in this very same process, and in the three (03) health-related negotiations, nothing was done to reflect and accommodate the legitimate concerns of delegations from developing countries that, in addition had broken silence repeatedly, including the Group of 77 and China.

Third, the attempt to ignore formal communications of delegations from developing countries, including from the Group of 77 and China, on behalf of its 134 Member States, indicating strong reservations and objections.
Fourth, the attempt to force consensus by your predecessor’s team, and now by your Office, when it is evident that no consensus has been reached on any of these processes; as well as the lack of transparency, inclusiveness and efficient use of the limited time available then to find compromises.

Excellency,
Our delegations are convinced that this is no way to handle multilateral and intergovernmental negotiations on issues of great relevance for the international community, particularly for developing countries. Thus, we would like to put on record that we do not condone, nor accept, this practice, and that it does not set any precedent for the work of the United Nations and its General Assembly. This is particularly relevant, as we look forward to future negotiation processes on fundamental matters, in which we will continue engaging with great determination, flexibility and constructiveness.

Our delegations would also like to recall the nature and legal standing of the meetings in which the SDGs Summit, the High-Level Meeting on Pandemic Prevention,
Preparedness and Response, the High-Level Meeting on Universal Health Coverage, and the High-Level Meeting on the Fight against Tuberculosis, will take place.

In relation to the High-Level Political Forum (HLPF) on Sustainable Development under the auspices of the General Assembly, SDGs Summit, and in accordance with General Assembly resolution 67/290, in its operative paragraph 9, “all meetings convened under the auspices of the General Assembly shall operate under the rules of procedure of the main committees of the Assembly, as applicable, unless otherwise provided in the present resolution”. Also, operative paragraph 4 of that very same resolution clearly states that the Forum “shall result in a concise negotiated political declaration to be submitted for the consideration of the Assembly”.

Hence, we expect a process to take place at a later stage, where the General Assembly will formally consider the adoption of the draft Political Declaration, under Chapter XII of the Rules of Procedures of the General Assembly.
Similarly, General Assembly resolutions 75/315, 77/274 and 77/275, are clear in

indicating that the political declarations of the three health-related High-Level

Meetings should “be submitted by the President of the General Assembly for adoption by the Assembly”.

In that sense, our delegations oppose any attempt to pretend to formally adopt any of the draft outcome documents in question, during the meetings scheduled for 18, 20, 21 and 22 September 2023, respectively. In addition, we reserve the right to take appropriate action upon the formal consideration of these four (04) draft outcome documents in the coming weeks, after the conclusion of the High-Level Segment of the 78th Session of the General Assembly, when they must all be considered by the General Assembly in accordance with its rules of procedures.

In that spirit and in the interest of transparency, we respectfully request hereby your good offices for circulating as soon as possible this letter as an official document of the General Assembly, under agenda items 19 and 127, entitled “Sustainable development” and “Global health and foreign policy”, respectively.

We take this opportunity, Excellency, to reiterate to you the testimony of our highest and most distinguished consideration.
C.C.:
H.E. Mr. António Guterres

Secretary-General United Nations New York.-

335 East 46th Street. New York, NY 10017 • Teléfono: (212) 557-2055 • Fax: (212) 557-3528 Correo Electrónico: misionvene@venezuelaonu.gob.ve • Página Web: www.venezuelaonu.gob.ve

2) Group of Friends In Defence of the UN Charter: Group of Friends in Defense of the UN Charter: Algeria, Angola, Belarus, Bolivia, Cambodia, China, Cuba, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Iran, the Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Nicaragua, the State of Palestine, the Russian Federation, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Syria, Venezuela, and Zimbabwe.

“We, representatives of Algeria, Angola, Belarus, Bolivia, Cambodia, China, Cuba, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Iran, the Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Nicaragua, the State of Palestine, the Russian Federation, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Syria, Venezuela, and Zimbabwe, in our respective capacities as National Coordinators of the Group of Friends in Defense of the Charter of the United Nations, met at the vice-ministerial level, in Tehran, Islamic Republic of Iran...

We reiterate our serious concern at continued attempts aimed at replacing the tenets enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations – which have been agreed upon by the entire international community for conducting their international relations – with a so-called “rules-based order”, that remains unclear, that has not been discussed or

accepted by the wide UN membership, and that has the potential, among others, to

undermine the rule of law at the international level.

We concur that double-standards, coupled with selective approaches or accommodative interpretations of the provisions of the Charter of the United Nations, aimed at advancing political agendas of dubious nature, in clear contempt for international legality and in disregard for the common good or collective interests of the peoples of the United Nations, represent one of the major threats to the prevalence and validity of that universal and legally binding instrument that constitutes an exceptional achievement for humankind and a true act of faith on the best of humanity.”

“statement during the first meeting of national coordinators of the group that was held in Tehran on Saturday.

The text of the document is as follows:

We, representatives of Algeria, Angola, Belarus, Bolivia, Cambodia, China, Cuba, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Iran, the Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Nicaragua, the State of Palestine, the Russian Federation, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Syria, Venezuela, and Zimbabwe, in our respective capacities as National Coordinators of the Group of Friends in Defense of the Charter of the United Nations, met at the vice-ministerial level, in Tehran, Islamic Republic of Iran, in order to discuss ways and means to advance our common endeavors aimed at preserving, promoting and defending the prevalence and validity of the Charter of the United Nations, both in its letter and spirit, and to further improve our coordination on issues of common concern and interest and on potential ways to move forward.

We recall the political declaration adopted on 22 September 2022, in New York, at the ministerial level, on the margins of the 77th Session of the General Assembly of the United Nations, and reaffirm once again our firm and full commitment to the Charter of the United Nations, including the purposes and principles contained therein, which represent the cornerstone for both preserving and promoting international peace and security, the rule of law, economic development and social progress, as well as human rights for all.

We call for the redoubling of efforts towards the democratization of international relations and the strengthening of multilateralism and of a multipolar system, based, among others, on mutual respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of all States, as well as on respect for the principle of equal rights and self- determination of peoples, for the rule of law, diplomacy, political dialogue, tolerance, peaceful coexistence, respect for diversity, inclusiveness, a culture of peace and non- violence, and due consideration for existing differences, all of which are essential for constructively and effectively working together on issues of common interest and concern.

We reaffirm that the United Nations remains a central and indispensable forum for addressing and advancing issues relating to international cooperation for economic development and social progress, peace and security, peaceful settlement of disputes, human rights and the rule of law, on the basis of dialogue, cooperation and consensus-building approaches amongst States, and therefore remain fully committed to both its revitalization and the strengthening of its role, particularly at the current international juncture, in which the world needs much more solidarity and cooperation, as well as the diplomatic tools provided within its very own founding Charter.

We recognize the multifaceted crisis the world is currently facing, particularly its environmental, food, energy, economic and finance dimensions, and emphasize that the solution to it passes through the urgent adoption of collective strategies and decisive measures that must necessarily be rooted on the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations. In this regard, we call on the members of the international community to revive the spirt of unity, solidarity, cooperation, inclusivity, and mutual understanding that prevailed at the San Francisco Conference of 1945, which is needed today the most, in order to overcome threats and challenges that are common to us all alike, especially in the fields of peace, security and development.
We express our concern at the potential impact of ongoing geopolitical tensions on the current global multifaceted crisis, and, therefore, call for the respect to the sovereignty and independence of States, while rejecting any attempt at entrenching a Cold War-era mentality that is based on confrontation, the deepening of divisions and the imposition of disparate visions and agendas, in an attempt to divide our world into blocs. We highlight, in this context, the importance of respecting the decisions of States to abstain from participating in and to remain impartial to conflicts of any sort, in procurement of the best interests of their peoples, confident that such an approach shall, in turn, continue to play an important role in the development of peaceful, friendly and mutually beneficial relations between the countries of the world, as well as in the strengthening of a multilateral system in which diversity is both embraced and respected, while stressing the importance of ensuring that developing countries do not become a new field for geostrategic competition amongst major players.

We call on the Secretariat of the United Nations to strictly adhere to the founding Charter of the Organization, in particular the provisions of Article 100, in the performance of its duties, in accordance with their respective mandate, including when implementing General Assembly and Security Council resolutions.

We acknowledge that humanity lives in an indivisible security community in which

one nation’s security is indivisible from the common security of a given region and

that of the international community as a whole, and that therefore no State can seek its own security at the cost of the security of another State or group of States. We consider, thus, that efforts shall be made towards the promotion of diplomatic endeavors aimed at establishing a fair, equal, sustainable, inclusive and indivisible global security architecture, taking into account the legitimate security concerns of all countries, with a view to preventing the emergence of conflict or crisis situations that may put at risk global peace, security, stability and humankind.

We express our categorical rejection of all unilateral coercive measures, including those applied as tools for political or economic and financial pressure against any country, in particular against developing countries. We further express our serious concern at the continued imposition and expansion of such measures, which, among others, hinder the wellbeing of targeted populations, create obstacles to the full realization of their human rights, including their right to development, jeopardize international cooperation on aviation safety, and exacerbate global food insecurity, particularly at the current juncture, in which we face a multifaceted global crisis, with multiple dimensions, including as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. We reiterate our unwavering support and solidarity with nations and peoples subjected to unilateral and arbitrary approaches that violate both the purposes and principles enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations and the basic norms of international law, especially those that are part of our Group of Friends, and further renew our call for both their complete, immediate and unconditional lifting.

We, in accordance with international law, support any claim of States affected by unilateral coercive measures, including the targeted States, to compensation for the damage incurred as a consequence of the implementation and extraterritorial implications of such measures.

We express our unwavering support for and solidarity with the People and Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran, subjected to unilateral coercive measures, including unilateral sanctions imposed by certain countries, which violate the Charter of the United Nations and the rules and principles of international law, while seriously threatening the full enjoyment of their human rights and the realization of their right to development. We further call for the “lifting of all such unilateral measures against the Islamic Republic of Iran, Iranian nationals and companies”, as recommended by the UN Special Rapporteur on the Negative Impact of Unilateral Coercive Measures on the Enjoyment of Human Rights in her report to the Human Rights Council on 17 August 2022 (A/HRC/51/33/Add.1), pursuant to her official country visit to the Islamic Republic of Iran from 07 through 18 May 2022.

We, in line with our historic and principled positions, express our unwavering solidarity with the people and government of the Republic of Cuba, which has heroically endured the negative impact of the economic, commercial and financial blockade imposed on it by the United States for over sixty years, representing the single major impediment for its full economic and social development, and urge the government of the United States to immediately and unconditionally put an end to the blockade against Cuba. In this context, we welcome the resolution just adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations on 03 November 2022, demanding, for the 30th consecutive occasion, the necessity of ending the blockade imposed by the United States against Cuba.

We renew the concerns previously raised in connection with the lack of compliance

with the “Agreement between the United Nations and the United States of America

regarding the Headquarters of the United Nations”, both in its letter and spirit, particularly with regards to the delays and/or denials of issuance and/or renewal of visas, travel and movement restrictions, banking issues and breaches of inviolability of diplomatic properties, and stress that the privilege of hosting the Headquarters of the United Nations shall not be abused and that bilateral differences shall not be exploited within the context of the implementation of relevant international legally binding obligations.

We express our serious concern at the continued proliferation of disinformation in digital platforms, including on social media, which are created, disseminated and amplified by both State and non-State actors for political, ideological or commercial motivations at an alarmingly growing scale. We stress that such trends not only undermine national sovereignty, in violation of Charter of the United Nations, but also provoke manifestations of hate speech, racism, xenophobia, stigmatization, while inciting all forms of violence, intolerance, discrimination and hostility. We emphasize, in this regard, the responsibility of all States in countering this trend, including the misuse of information and communication technology resources.

We, in line with our principled and historic positions, reaffirm our firm commitment to the just cause of Palestine, as well as our unwavering solidarity with the heroic Palestinian people in their ongoing struggle to achieve their inalienable rights, freedom and justice. We further reaffirm our full and continued support to all efforts aimed at ending the grave injustice inflicted on the Palestinian people since the 1948 Nakba. We also remain committed to strengthening our efforts, including active engagement in international initiatives, aimed at ending the Israeli occupation, which constitutes an illegal colonial occupation and apartheid regime, and at achieving the independence of the State of Palestine, with East Jerusalem as its capital; the realization of the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people, including to self- determination and freedom; and a just and lasting solution to the Question of Palestine in all its aspects, including for the plight of the Palestine refugees, in accordance with international law, the relevant UN resolutions and the Charter of the United Nations. We further reaffirm our support for the long-overdue admission of the State of Palestine as a full Member State of the United Nations, which has been pending before the Security Council since 23 September 2011, and to enable it to take its rightful place among the community of nations.

We recognize that, since its establishment over a year ago, the Group of Friends in Defense of the Charter of the United Nations has made significant progress in advancing its objectives and in implementing its annual Programme of Work and, in this context, express our appreciation to the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela for its leadership and coordination efforts. In this regard, we reiterate our determination to redouble efforts aimed at positioning our Group of Friends as an active and key player at all relevant international forums and intergovernmental processes, including in the context of the General Assembly of the United Nations during its 77th Session, as part of our continued endeavors for ensuring full respect of and adherence to the Charter of the United Nations, in both its letter and spirit.

We reiterate our invitation to those members of the international community that are committed to the purposes and principles enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations, with the values of dialogue, tolerance and solidarity, as well as to an

effective and inclusive multilateralism, in which all regions and all size of States are

equal and engaged alike, to consider joining our Group of Friends and/or endorsing this and previous Political Declarations at their earliest convenience, as part of our collective efforts to advance our shared objectives and to ultimately keep delivering on the promise of the Charter of the United Nations for a more peaceful and prosperous world in which no one is left behind.

We also reaffirm our strong rejection and condemnation of the imposition of illegal sanctions, unilateral coercive measures against the People and Government of Nicaragua, and aggressions that have a negative impact on the development and prosperity of the country. In this sense, we demand the immediate end of such sanctions.

We express our serious concern at the current and growing threats against the Charter of the United Nations, including the implementation of practices that contribute in no way to addressing, through peaceful means and cooperation, the complex, emerging and common challenges faced these days by humanity. Instead, they contribute to an increase in uncertainty, instability and tensions around the world.

We express our grave concern at the instrumentalization of the United Nations, in particular the Security Council, by certain states, to meddle in the internal affairs of a sovereign and full Member State of our Organization, the Islamic Republic of Iran, in violation of the Charter of the United Nations.

We express our appreciation and gratitude to the People and Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran for the excellent organization, hospitality, and hosting of the First Meeting of National Coordinators of the Group of Friends in the Defense of the Charter of the United Nations, on 05 November 2022, in Tehran.

We, at last, renew our firm determination to continue defending the Charter of the United Nations through concerted actions from the Group of Friends in Defense of the Charter of the United Nations and to stand by one another in this noble endeavor.

Tehran, 05 November 2022

3) G77 serious reservations about Treaty ignored . Galtung’s characterization of the system: (1) Interaction between Center (metropole) and Periphery (colonized country) is vertical (2) Interaction between Periphery and Periphery is missing (3) Multilateral interaction involving all three is missing (4) Interaction with the outside world is monopolized by Center (5) Center as well as Periphery interaction with Periphery nations belonging to other Center nations is missing (Galtung 1971: 89) Galtung perceived his rules of interaction as applying not only to economic interaction but also military, communications (information), and cultural including news and technology flows. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/ 329440464_The_NAM_and_the_G77_The_Unexpected_Persistence_of_Tricontinen tal_Multilateralism

Journal of the Group of 77 - Volume 19/1 (2007) (Spring Edition)
G77 AND NAM FAULT ONE-SIZE-FITS-ALL APPROACH TO DEVELOPMENT

UNITED NATIONS, (G77/IPS) - The Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) and the Group

of 77 (G77), the two largest political and economic groups of developing nations,

have expressed reservations on a proposed plan to restructure the U.N.’s operational activities for social and economic development.

In a letter to Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, both groups have cautioned him against rushing into any hasty decision leading to the implementation of the proposed plan, which includes a single, unified approach to all U.N. development activities in the field.

“There is no one-size-fits-all (approach),” the joint letter said, warning that there should be no restrictions on the ability and sovereignty of national governments to determine their own development priorities or select their own development partners.

The letter was a strong reaction to a report by a blue-ribbon panel of current and former world leaders who have called for “a unified United Nations” at the country level — with one leader, one programme, one budget, and where appropriate, one office.

Titled the “High-Level Panel on U.N. System-Wide Coherence”, the 15-member panel released a study last November called “Delivering as One” that focused on three areas: development, humanitarian assistance and the environment.

The ultimate aim of the “One-UN” initiative is to reduce duplication and transaction costs so that the United Nations can use resources more effectively to support partner countries to achieve their development goals, according to the panel.

While conceding there are “a number of useful recommendations on the report we can build on”, the NAM/G77 letter warns that the study may have mistakenly touched on “cross cutting issues” — such as human rights, gender and sustainable development — as part of U.N. operational activities for development.

While cross-cutting issues are not confined only to developing countries, the letter says that both the G77 and NAM are concerned “that those issues, as well as humanitarian assistance, might be misused to introduce new conditionalities on international development assistance, which is not acceptable to developing countries.”

Both groups have met the secretary-general and briefed him in greater detail.

Among the other recommendations in the report are: a Sustainable Development Board to oversee the One-UN Country programmes; a new panel consisting of the U.N. Secretary-General, the president of the World Bank and the Executive Director of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) to review, update and conclude formal agreements on their respective roles and relations at the global and country levels.

As part of the “One-U.N.” programme, eight countries have volunteered to be guinea pigs in an experimental exercise meant to reduce duplication and to use resources more effectively.

The programme, which is currently being implemented, will be evaluated over the next 12 months for possible inclusion of additional countries willing to join it.

Urgent Open Letter from Doctors and Scientists to the European Medicines Agency Regarding COVID-19 Vaccine Safety Concerns

Emer Cooke
Executive Director European Medicines Agency Amsterdam
The Netherlands

28 February 2021 Dear Sirs/Mesdames,

FOR THE URGENT PERSONAL ATTENTION OF: EMER COOKE

The eight pilot countries — Albania, Cape Verde, Mozambique, Pakistan, Rwanda, Tanzania, Uruguay and Vietnam — will provide case studies as to how the U.N. family can deliver in a more coordinated manner by pooling funds at the country level.

The G77 and NAM are sceptical of the One-UN approach to operational activities for development.

“The U.N. development system should continue to support development efforts of developing countries principally by assisting in the implementation of nationally determined development plans, strategies and priorities,” the letter said.

Jens Stoltenberg, prime minister of Norway and one of the co-chairs of the panel, told a U.N. press conference last November that the United Nations could save up to 20 percent of its current costs system-wide by eliminating duplication and consolidating certain funds and programmes.

“The whole idea is not to save money for donor countries, but to save money so we can use more money for development, more money for protecting the environment and more money for humanitarian assistance,” he added.

But despite the good intentions of the panel, the successful implementation of its proposals will depend largely on whether or not it receives the necessary support from developing countries, comprising over two-thirds of the 192-member General Assembly and who represent all the members of both NAM and the G77.

The letter to the secretary-general also points out that coherence at the national and international level should also involve the Bretton Woods institutions, namely the World Bank and the IMF, where they exist.

“They should be part of any integrated approach to development cooperation. Bilateral development partners should also be part and parcel of this approach,” it said.

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE EUROPEAN MEDICINES AGENCY BY EMAIL ONLY

As physicians and scientists, we are supportive in principle of the use of new medical interventions which are appropriately developed and deployed, having obtained informed consent from the patient. This stance encompasses vaccines in the same way as therapeutics.

We note that a wide range of side effects is being reported following vaccination of previously healthy younger individuals with the gene-based COVID-19 vaccines. Moreover, there have been numerous media reports from around the world of care homes being struck by COVID-19 within days of vaccination of residents. While we recognise that these occurrences might, every one of them, have been unfortunate coincidences, we are concerned that there has been and there continues to be inadequate scrutiny of the possible causes of illness or death under these circumstances, and especially so in the absence of post-mortems examinations.

In particular, we question whether cardinal issues regarding the safety of the vaccines were adequately addressed prior to their approval by the European Medicines Agency (EMA).

As a matter of great urgency, we herewith request that the EMA provide us with responses to the following issues:

1. Following intramuscular injection, it must be expected that the gene-based vaccines will reach the bloodstream and disseminate throughout the body [1]. We request evidence that this possibility was excluded in pre-clinical animal models with all three vaccines prior to their approval for use in humans by the EMA.

2. If such evidence is not available, it must be expected that the vaccines will remain entrapped in the circulation and be taken up by endothelial cells. There is reason to assume that this will happen particularly at sites of slow blood flow, i.e. in small vessels and capillaries [2]. We request evidence that this probability was excluded in pre-clinical animal models with all three vaccines prior to their approval for use in humans by the EMA.

3. If such evidence is not available, it must be expected that during expression of the vaccines’ nucleic acids, peptides derived from the spike protein will be presented via the MHC I - pathway at the luminal surface of the cells. Many healthy individuals have CD8-lymphocytes that recognize such peptides, which may be due to prior COVID infection, but also to cross-reactions with other types of Coronavirus [3; 4] [5]. We must assume that these lymphocytes will mount an attack on the respective cells. We request evidence that this probability was excluded in pre-clinical animal models with all three vaccines prior to their approval for use in humans by the EMA.

4. If such evidence is not available, it must be expected that endothelial damage with subsequent triggering of blood coagulation via platelet activation will ensue at countless sites throughout the body. We request evidence that this probability was excluded in pre-clinical animal models with all three vaccines prior to their approval

for use in humans by the EMA.

5. If such evidence is not available, it must be expected that this will lead to a drop in platelet counts, appearance of D-dimers in the blood, and to myriad ischaemic lesions throughout the body including in the brain, spinal cord and heart. Bleeding disorders might occur in the wake of this novel type of DIC-syndrome including, amongst other possibilities, profuse bleedings and haemorrhagic stroke. We request evidence that all these possibilities were excluded in pre-clinical animal models with all three vaccines prior to their approval for use in humans by the EMA.

6. The SARS-CoV-2 spike protein binds to the ACE2 receptor on platelets, which results in their activation [6]. Thrombocytopenia has been reported in severe cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection [7]. Thrombocytopenia has also been reported in vaccinated individuals [8]. We request evidence that the potential danger of platelet activation that would also lead to disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC) was excluded with all three vaccines prior to their approval for use in humans by the EMA.

7. The sweeping across the globe of SARS-CoV-2 created a pandemic of illness associated with many deaths. However, by the time of consideration for approval of the vaccines, the health systems of most countries were no longer under imminent threat of being overwhelmed because a growing proportion of the world had already been infected and the worst of the pandemic had already abated. Consequently, we demand conclusive evidence that an actual emergency existed at the time of the EMA granting Conditional Marketing Authorisation to the manufacturers of all three vaccines, to justify their approval for use in humans by the EMA, purportedly because of such an emergency.

Should all such evidence not be available, we demand that approval for use of the gene-based vaccines be withdrawn until all the above issues have been properly addressed by the exercise of due diligence by the EMA.

There are serious concerns, including but not confined to those outlined above, that the approval of the COVID-19 vaccines by the EMA was premature and reckless, and that the administration of the vaccines constituted and still does constitute “human experimentation”, which was and still is in violation of the Nuremberg Code.

In view of the urgency of the situation, we request that you reply to this email within seven days and address all our concerns substantively. Should you choose not to comply with this reasonable request, we will make this letter public.

This email is copied to:
Charles Michel, President of the Council of Europe
Ursula von der Leyen, President of the European Commission.

• References
[1] Hassett, K. J.; Benenato, K. E.; Jacquinet, E.; Lee, A.; Woods, A.; Yuzhakov, O.; Himansu, S.; Deterling, J.; Geilich, B. M.; Ketova, T.; Mihai, C.; Lynn, A.; McFadyen,

I.; Moore, M. J.; Senn, J. J.; Stanton, M. G.; Almarsson, Ö.; Ciaramella, G. and Brito, L. A. (2019). Optimization of Lipid Nanoparticles for Intramuscular Administration of mRNA Vaccines, Molecular therapy. Nucleic acids 15 : 1-11.

[2] Chen, Y. Y.; Syed, A. M.; MacMillan, P.; Rocheleau, J. V. and Chan, W. C. W. (2020). Flow Rate Affects Nanoparticle Uptake into Endothelial Cells, Advanced materials 32 : 1906274.

[3] Grifoni, A.; Weiskopf, D.; Ramirez, S. I.; Mateus, J.; Dan, J. M.; Moderbacher, C. R.; Rawlings, S. A.; Sutherland, A.; Premkumar, L.; Jadi, R. S. and et al. (2020). Targets of T Cell Responses to SARS-CoV-2 Coronavirus in Humans with COVID-19 Disease and Unexposed Individuals, Cell 181 : 1489-1501.e15.

[4] Nelde, A.; Bilich, T.; Heitmann, J. S.; Maringer, Y.; Salih, H. R.; Roerden, M.; Lübke, M.; Bauer, J.; Rieth, J.; Wacker, M.; Peter, A.; Hörber, S.; Traenkle, B.; Kaiser, P. D.; Rothbauer, U.; Becker, M.; Junker, D.; Krause, G.; Strengert, M.; Schneiderhan-Marra, N.; Templin, M. F.; Joos, T. O.; Kowalewski, D. J.; Stos-Zweifel, V.; Fehr, M.; Rabsteyn, A.; Mirakaj, V.; Karbach, J.; Jäger, E.; Graf, M.; Gruber, L.-C.; Rachfalski, D.; Preuß, B.; Hagelstein, I.; Märklin, M.; Bakchoul, T.; Gouttefangeas, C.; Kohlbacher, O.; Klein, R.; Stevanović, S.; Rammensee, H.-G. and Walz, J. S. (2020). SARS-CoV-2-derived peptides define heterologous and COVID-19-induced T cell recognition, Nature immunology.

[5] Sekine, T.; Perez-Potti, A.; Rivera-Ballesteros, O.; Strålin, K.; Gorin, J.-B.; Olsson, A.; Llewellyn-Lacey, S.; Kamal, H.; Bogdanovic, G.; Muschiol, S. and et al. (2020). Robust T Cell Immunity in Convalescent Individuals with Asymptomatic or Mild COVID-19, Cell 183 : 158-168.e14.

[6] Zhang, S.; Liu, Y.; Wang, X.; Yang, L.; Li, H.; Wang, Y.; Liu, M.; Zhao, X.; Xie, Y.; Yang, Y.; Zhang, S.; Fan, Z.; Dong, J.; Yuan, Z.; Ding, Z.; Zhang, Y. and Hu, L. (2020). SARS-CoV-2 binds platelet ACE2 to enhance thrombosis in COVID-19, Journal of hematology & oncology 13 : 120.

[7] Lippi, G.; Plebani, M. and Henry, B. M. (2020). Thrombocytopenia is associated with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infections: A meta-analysis, Clin. Chim. Acta 506 : 145-148.

[8] Grady, D. (2021). A Few Covid Vaccine Recipients Developed a Rare Blood Disorder, The New York Times, Feb. 8, 2021.

Yours faithfully,
Professsor Sucharit Bhakdi MD
Professor Emeritus of Medical Microbiology and Immunology Former Chair, Institute of Medical Microbiology and Hygiene, Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz
(Medical Doctor and Scientist) (Germany and Thailand)

Dr Marco Chiesa MD FRCPsych

Consultant Psychiatrist and Visiting Professor, University College London (Medical Doctor) (United Kingdom and Italy)

Dr C Stephen Frost BSc MBChB Specialist in Diagnostic Radiology (Stockholm, Sweden)

(Medical Doctor) (United Kingdom and Sweden)

Dr Margareta Griesz-Brisson MD PhD

Consultant Neurologist and Neurophysiologist (studied Medicine in Freiburg, Germany, speciality training for Neurology at New York University, Fellowship in Neurophysiology at Mount Sinai Medical Centre, New York City; PhD in Pharmacology with special interest in chronic low level neurotoxicology and effects of environmental factors on brain health)

Medical Director
The London Neurology and Pain Clinic
(Medical Doctor and Scientist) (Germany and United Kingdom)
Professor Martin Haditsch MD PhD
Specialist (Austria) in Hygiene and Microbiology
Specialist (Germany) in Microbiology, Virology, Epidemiology/Infectious Diseases Specialist (Austria) in Infectious Diseases and Tropical Medicine
Medical Director, TravelMedCenter, Leonding, Austria
Medical Director, Labor Hannover MVZ GmbH
(Medical Doctor and Scientist) (Austria and Germany)

Professor Stefan Hockertz
Professor of Toxicology and Pharmacology European registered Toxicologist
Specialist in Immunology and Immunotoxicology CEO tpi consult GmbH
(Scientist) (Germany)

Dr Lissa Johnson
BSc BA(Media) MPsych(Clin) PhD
Clinical Psychologist and Behavioural Psychologist
Expertise in the social psychology of torture, atrocity, collective violence and fear

propaganda
Former member Australian Psychological Society Public Interest Advisory Group (Clinical Psychologist and Scientist) (Australia)

Professor Ulrike Kämmerer PhD

Associate Professor of Experimental Reproductive Immunology and Tumor Biology at the Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University Hospital of Würzburg, Germany

Trained molecular virologist (Diploma, PhD-Thesis) and Immunologist (Habilitation) Remains engaged in active laboratory research (Molecular Biology, Cell Biology) (Scientist) (Germany)

Associate Professor Michael Palmer MD

Department of Chemistry (studied Medicine and Medical Microbiology in Germany, has taught Biochemistry since 2001 in present university in Canada; focus on Pharmacology, metabolism, biological membranes, computer programming; experimental research focus on bacterial toxins and antibiotics (Daptomycin); has written a textbook on Biochemical Pharmacology),

University of Waterloo, Ontario, Canada
(Medical Doctor and Scientist) (Canada and Germany)

Professor Karina Reiss PhD
Professor of Biochemistry, Christian Albrecht University of Kiel Expertise in Cell Biology, Biochemistry
(Scientist) (Germany)

Professor Andreas Sönnichsen MD
Professor of General Practice and Family Medicine, Department of General Practice and Family Medicine, Center of Public Health,
Medical University of Vienna,
Vienna
(Medical Doctor) (Austria)

Dr Michael Yeadon BSc (Joint Honours in Biochemistry and Toxicology) PhD (Pharmacology)

Formerly Vice President & Chief Scientific Officer Allergy & Respiratory, Pfizer Global R&D; Co-founder & CEO, Ziarco Pharma Ltd.; Independent Consultant

(Scientist) (United Kingdom)

PERSON RECEIVING NOL:

APPENDIX I

NOTICE OF LIABILITY

_________________________________________ ________________________________________ FIRST NAME, LAST NAME

_________________________________________ ________________________________________ PLACE OF SERVICE

_________________________________________ TIME AND DATE OF SERVICE

PERSON SERVING NOL:

FIRST NAME, LAST NAME

SIGNATURE

This Notice of Liability has been SERVED to you personally.

You may be held personally liable for harm and death caused by implementation of the proposal identified as REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL on a framework for the issuance, verification and acceptance of interoperable certificates on vaccination, testing and recovery to facilitate free movement during the COVID-19 pandemic (Digital Green Certificate), Brussels, 17.3.2021 COM(2021) 130 final 2021/0068 (COD), which is designed to coerce widespread acceptance of experimental vaccination. If you take further action supporting such implementation, and if you take no steps to mitigate your past actions supporting such implementation, you may be held personally liable for resulting harm and death.

Attached as appendices and as integral parts of this Notice of Liability are the documents: Urgent Open Letter from Doctors and Scientists to the European Medicines Agency regarding COVID-19 Vaccine Safety Concerns; Reply from the European Medicines Agency to Doctors for Covid Ethics; Doctors and Scientists Accuse Medical Regulator of Downplaying COVID-19 Vaccine Dangers; Rebuttal Letter to European Medicines Agency from Doctors for Covid Ethics; Doctors for Covid Ethics Signatories.

Furthermore, you may be held personally responsible for supporting CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY, defined as acts that are purposely committed as part of a widespread or systematic policy, directed against civilians, committed in furtherance of state policy.

Please respond to this NOTICE OF LIABILITY within 14 days from the DATE OF

SERVICE, in writing, to the following address:
[ADDRESS OF PERSON SERVING NOL, OR OF THE ORGANIZER]

APPENDIX II
Reply from the European Medicines Agency to Doctors for Covid Ethics

APPENDIX III

Doctors and Scientists Accuse Medical Regulator of Downplaying COVID-19 Vaccine Dangers

PRESS RELEASE - FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Doctors and Scientists Accuse Medical Regulator of Downplaying COVID-19 Vaccine Dangers
The European Medicines Agency is misleading citizens into medical experimentation, experts warn

April 1st 2021
Doctors and scientists from 25 countries have today issued a rebuttal letter to the European Medicines Agency (EMA), following the regulator’s dismissal of their earlier warnings regarding COVID-19 vaccine dangers from clotting and bleeding.
Within days of the EMA receiving the group’s original letter on March 1st, outlining risks of blood disorders from COVID-19 vaccines, over a dozen countries suspended the AstraZeneca vaccine following deaths from clotting and bleeding, as the doctors had warned.
On March 23rd, however, the EMA dismissed the group’s concerns as relating to “minor” and “rare” events, concluding that “a positive benefit-risk balance has been established.”

The doctors and scientists have today hit back, accusing the EMA of misleading the public on the vaccines’ true risk-benefit profile. “Your reply of March 23 is unconvincing and unacceptable,” they wrote, noting that recorded cases of life-threatening cerebral venous thrombosis (CSVT) post- vaccination likely “represent just the tip of a huge iceberg”. Common reactions to vaccination, including headache, nausea, blurred vision and vomiting, they state, are symptoms of CSVT, and should be assessed as such, immediately.

Clotting and bleeding after vaccination can also “be expected to increase with each re-vaccination, and each intervening coronavirus exposure” the group warned. Over time “this renders both repeated vaccination and common coronaviruses dangerous to young and healthy age groups, for whom - in the absence of ‘vaccination’ - COVID-19 poses no substantive risk.
“Such is the real risk-benefit analysis of the COVID-19 ‘vaccines’. Either the EMA lacks the subject- matter expertise to appreciate the molecular science of this reality, or it lacks the medical ethics to act accordingly.”
The group, Doctors for Covid Ethics, which includes professors of immunology and microbiology, described the EMA’s responses to their concerns as “unscientific”, “vague”, and lacking credibility. They have offered to liaise with the agency to mitigate against vaccination risks and ethics violations, including helping the EMA to “craft a focussed pharmacovigilance plan.”
The group warned that continuing to administer inadequately tested gene-based COVID-19 vaccines represents dangerous medical experimentation, whose “true risks far outweigh any theoretical benefits”, reflecting “serious violations of medical ethics and citizens’ medical rights.”
“Misleading populations into accepting investigational agents such as the gene-based COVID-19 ‘vaccines’, or coercing them through ‘vaccine passports’, constitutes clear and egregious violations of the Nuremberg Code”, they caution.
The letter is addressed to Emer Cooke, Executive Director of the EMA, and was copied to the lawyer

Reiner Fuellmich, Charles Michel, President of the Council of Europe, and Ursula von der Leyen, President of the European Commission.

Link to Doctors for Covid Ethics rebuttal letter to EMA (April 1st): https:// doctors4covidethics.medium.com/rebuttal-letter-to-european-medicines-agency-from-doctors-for- covid-ethics-april-1-2021-7d867f0121e

Link to EMA letter to Doctors for Covid Ethics (March 23rd): https://doctors4covidethics.medium.com/ reply-from-the-european-medicines-agency-to-doctors-for-covid-ethics-march-23-2021- d6760984dd06
Doctors for Covid Ethics is a group of over 100 doctors and scientists from 25 countries.

Web: https://doctors4covidethics.medium.com Twitter: https://twitter.com/Drs4CovidEthics

For comment contact Professor Sucharit Bhakdi MD: sucharit.bhakdi@gmx.de or Associate Professor Michael Palmer MD: mpalmer@uwaterloo.ca

Further resources
Original Doctors for Covid Ethics letter to EMA (Delivered March 1st): https:// doctors4covidethics.medium.com/urgent-open-letter-from-doctors-and-scientists-to-the-european- medicines-agency-regarding-covid-19-f6e17c311595

Video statement (March 11th) by Professor Sucharit Bhakdi, Professor Emeritus of Medical Microbiology and Immunology and Former Chair, Institute of Medical Microbiology and Hygiene: https://lbry.tv/@Doctors4CovidEthics:d/Prof.-Sucharit-Bhakdi-statement-on-EMA-open-letter.ENG:0 Doctors, scientists, lawyers and colleagues in allied disciplines can sign the open letter by sending their name, qualifications, areas of expertise and country of practice to: Doctors4CovidEthics@protonmail.com, with web verification (eg workplace or registration link, not for publication).

END

From Doctors for Covid Ethics

To Emer Cooke
Executive Director European Medicines Agency Amsterdam
The Netherlands

April 1st 2021

Ladies and Gentlemen,

FOR THE URGENT PERSONAL ATTENTION OF: EMER COOKE, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE EUROPEAN MEDICINES AGENCY We acknowledge receipt of your March 23 reply to our letter dated

February 28, seeking reassurance that foreseeable risks of gene-based COVID-19 “vaccines” had been ruled out in animal trials prior to human use. Our concerns arise from multiple lines of evidence, including that

APPENDIX IV
Rebuttal Letter to European Medicines Agency from Doctors for Covid Ethics

the SARS-CoV-2 “spike protein” is not a passive docking protein, but its production is likely to initiate blood coagulation via multiple mechanisms.
Regrettably, your reply of March 23 is unconvincing and unacceptable. We are dismayed that you choose to respond to our request for crucially important information in a dismissive and unscientific manner. Such a cavalier approach to vaccine safety creates the unwelcome impression that the EMA is serving the interests of the very pharmaceutical companies whose products it is your pledged duty to evaluate. The evidence is clear that there are some serious adverse event risks & that a number of people, not at risk from SARS-CoV-2, have died following vaccination.

You concede that the “vaccines”, which are more accurately described as investigational gene-based agents, enter the bloodstream but you can obviously provide no quantitative data. In the absence of the latter, any scientific assessment you purport to have undertaken lacks foundation.
Your statement that non-clinical studies do not indicate any detectable uptake of the vaccines into endothelial cells lacks credibility. We demand to see the scientific evidence. If not available, it must be assumed that endothelial cells are targeted.
Auto-attack could not have been excluded in animals unless they had been immunologically primed beforehand. We demand evidence that such experiments had been performed. Similar experiments have been undertaken before with previous, unsuccessful candidate vaccines, and fatal, antibody-dependent enhancement of disease was observed.
We requested scientific evidence, not a vague description of what was purportedly seen in non-valid animal experiments. Your cursory mention of laboratory findings in humans is cynical. In view of the plausible connection between production of spike protein and the emergence of thromboembolic serious adverse events (SAEs), we demand to see the results of D-dimer determinations. As you are aware, D-dimer is a very good test as an aid to diagnose thrombosis.
After delivery of our letter to you on March 1, events followed that debunk your response to our last three queries to an extent that can only be termed embarrassing. As we feared, severe and fatal coagulopathies occurred in young individuals following “vaccination”, leading 15 countries to suspend their AZ-“vaccination” program. An official investigation by the EMA into the cases of afflicted younger individuals

followed, the results of which were announced by the WHO on March 17, 2021, stating: “At this time, WHO considers that the benefits of the AstraZeneca vaccine outweigh its risks and recommends that vaccinations continue.”

What was this decision based upon? The WHO is not a competent body for formally evaluating drug safety. That is explicitly the role of the agency you lead.
In your press release, you disclosed the following information to support your conclusion. You had scrutinized data on two mortally dangerous conditions that had followed within 14 days of “vaccination”: DIC, disseminated intravascular coagulation; and CSVT, cerebral sinus vein thrombosis. 5 DIC and 18 CSVT were on record, with a total death toll of 9. Most cases were <55 year-old individuals. 5 DIC and 12 CSVT were under 50 years of age. None were reported as having had serious pre- existing illness.

You stated numbers that “normally” would be expected : DIC <1, CSVT 1.3.
Consequently, for these very rare conditions, a link to vaccination could not entirely be dismissed. However, given that 20 million individuals had been “vaccinated”, the benefits were deemed to far outweigh the risks. But in fact, your Press Release rendered it glaringly apparent that the AZ-“vaccine” does have the potential to trigger intravascular coagulation, that the true risks far outweigh any theoretical benefits, and that any authority with the slightest sense of responsibility must suspend its further use.

Regard your incidence numbers for <50 year old individuals in the “vaccinated” versus “normal” population:
CSVT : 12 versus 1.3.
A 9-fold increase is beyond the range of coincidence.
DIC : 5 versus <1.
As we hope you know, DIC never occurs out of the blue in healthy individuals. The incidence should not be stated as <1 when in reality it is ZERO.
ACCORDINGLY, THE DIC CASES REPRESENT CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE THAT THE AZ-VACCINE ALONE CAN TRIGGER INTRAVASCULAR COAGULATION .
Assume that 10 million recipients of the “vaccine” were < 60 yrs and this was followed by 9 deaths due to DIC and SVCT. The

death toll upon 60 million “vaccinations” would be extrapolatable to 54.

The pandemic hit around 60 million individuals < 60 yrs in Germany.
During the first 6 months it reportedly claimed 52 lives of individuals without pre-existing illness. (https://www.rki.de/DE/Content/Gesundheitsmonitoring/JoHM/ 2020/JoHM_Inhalt_20_S11.html)

Because of the unreliability of PCR testing and because of the completely novel way that deaths ‘with covid19’ are determined, the value of 52 is an over-estimate of the real burden of disease, further weakening your already-inadequate claim for risk-benefit.

How, then, can you declare that the benefits of vaccination far outweigh the risks? We demand your reply supported by facts and figures that we will convey to the public.

• Further considerations expose the truly frightful dimensions of your irresponsible assertion.

CSVT, cerebral venous thrombosis, is always a life-threatening condition that demands immediate medical attention. The number of cases you conceded had occurred can represent just the tip of a huge iceberg. As you must know, the most common symptoms of CSVT are piercing headache, blurred vision, nausea and vomiting. In severe cases, stroke-like symptoms occur including impairment of speech, vision and hearing, body numbness, weakness , decreased alertness and loss of motoric control.

Surely, you are not oblivious to the fact that countless individuals suffered from precisely such symptoms directly following “vaccinations” with all the experimental gene-based agents.

Clot formation in deep leg veins can lead to lethal pulmonary embolisms. Surely you must know that peripheral venous thromboses have repeatedly been reported following “vaccinations” with all the experimental gene-based agents

Microthromboses in the lung vasculature can lead to misdiagnosis of pneumonia. In combination with false-positive PCR (with high cycle thresholds), these will then be registered as COVID 19 cases. Surely you must know that this scenario has probably repeatedly taken place following “vaccinations” with all the

experimental gene- based agents.

In all events, extensive thrombi formation can lead to consumption of platelets and coagulation factors, resulting in hemorrhagic diathesis and bleeding at all possible locations. Surely you must know that profuse skin bleedings have repeatedly been observed following “vaccinations” with all the experimental gene-based agents.

Given that there is a mechanistically plausible explanation for these thromboembolic adverse drug reactions (TE ADRs), namely that the gene-based products induce human cells to manufacture potentially pro- thrombotic spike protein, the reasoned & responsible assumption must now be that this may be a class effect. In other words, the dangers must be ruled out for all emergency-authorised gene-based vaccines, not merely the AZ product.

We urge you to adopt this stance unless and until there is data providing high clinical confidence to the contrary. We are very willing to liaise with the Agency in order to help craft a focussed pharmacovigilance plan to accomplish this goal. With the above in mind, we hope you are aware that all thrombotic events can be rapidly diagnosed by measurement of D-Dimers in blood. And that good medical practice imperatively demands that attempts are undertaken to diagnose CSVT in any and every patient, young or old, presenting with the typical signs and symptoms following “vaccination”.

Given the potential for adverse effects, potentially fatal ones, it is completely inappropriate and unacceptable that EMA permits these products, which hold only emergency use authorisations, to be administered to younger (<60y) people who are healthy, as they are at unmeasurable risks from SARS-CoV-2.

Not to make this explicit is, in our view, a reckless stance to have taken in the first place and doubly so now.

Of equal importance, you are bound by duty to investigate whether reasons exist for the waves of deaths that have occurred following “vaccination” of elderly residents in care and senior homes. Or are you asserting that dangers of “vaccine”-derived thrombotic events are limited to younger individuals? If not, restricting their use solely in one age group – as decided upon in Germany – equates with nothing less than monstrous, condoned genocide of the other.

In closing, failure to inform “vaccine” recipients of the risks and negligible benefits outlined here represents serious violations of medical ethics and citizens’ medical rights. Those violations are especially grave as all the

risks we describe can be expected to increase with each re-vaccination, and each intervening coronavirus exposure. This renders both repeated vaccination and common coronaviruses dangerous to young and healthy age groups, for whom - in the absence of “vaccination” - COVID-19 poses no substantive risk.

Such is the real risk-benefit analysis of the COVID-19 “vaccines”. Either the EMA lacks the subject-matter expertise to appreciate the molecular science of this reality, or it lacks the medical ethics to act accordingly.

At best, we regard the EMA’s complacent stance on vaccine dangers to be symptomatic of the fact that, under the prevailing politico-medical response to COVID-19, medical ethics has migrated from the consulting room to a geopolitical stage. Faced with a medical problem, mass- medical intervention has seen the practice of medicine taken from doctors’ hands. In this politicized context, corporate and political actors may consider themselves free from ethical constraints, operating unbound by a medical code of ethics, unlike medical doctors. All actors, however, are bound by the Nuremberg Code.

The Nuremberg Code prohibits human experimentation of the very kind being endorsed and defended by the EMA. Even under the terms of their own original FDA authorization, COVID-19 vaccines are deemed “investigational” and their recipients “human subjects”, who are, by definition, entitled to informed consent. https://www.fda.gov/regulatory- information/search-fda-guidance-documents/emergency-use- investigational-drug-or- biologic#:~:text=Emergency%20use%20is%20defined%20as,21%20CF R%2056.102(d)%5D.

Misleading populations into accepting investigational agents such as the gene-based COVID-19 “vaccines”, or coercing them through “vaccine passports”, constitutes clear and egregious violations of the Nuremberg Code. The Nuremberg Code mandates voluntary informed consent “without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit [or] duress”. https://history.nih.gov/display/history/Nuremberg+Code

In other words, citizens have the right under the Nuremberg Code and related protections not to be subject involuntarily to medical experiments. It is clear that these experimental agents should be CONTRA-INDICATED in individuals not at elevated risk of serious illness & death if infected by SARS-CoV-2. Furthermore, the use of the experimental agents must also be withheld in the elderly population until a risk-benefit assessment has been properly conducted. In any event,

the vaccine label must be revised to reflect the recently emerged serious adverse events addressed here.

We remind the EMA that Nuremberg violations constitute crimes against humanity under the Geneva Convention. Crimes against humanity are deemed “the worst atrocities known to mankind”, and are prosecuted under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. https:// www.un.org/en/chronicle/article/role-international-criminal-court-ending- impunity-and-establishing-rule-law

Given the hundreds of millions and eventually billions of people who may be coerced into accepting these agents, the EMA, in persistently shrinking from open debate and the truth, will be seen by lawyers and historians as having actively assisted in crimes against humanity, with the full weight of the implications to all involved. We demand that you engage openly with us to ensure that the public have an objective understanding of the clinical risk profile of these gene-based interventions.

You understand that coercive pressure is being placed on citizens to receive COVID-19 vaccines, which are experimental medical treatments. Your responsibility to those citizens includes ensuring that they are informed of the adverse event risks of every such treatment. To date you have failed to do so, and have instead misled the public on the reality of the “vaccines’” risk-benefit profile.

If you continue to conceal the truth, efforts will be made to bring this to light and to see that justice is done. For the sake of the injured and the dead, and to protect further lives from similar fates.

NOTICE

For the avoidance of doubt, if your regulatory body does not immediately suspend its "emergency" recommendation of potentially dangerous inadequately tested gene-based "vaccines", while the matters which we have highlighted to you are properly investigated, we hereby put the European Medicines Agency on notice of being complicit in medical experimentation, in violation of the Nuremberg Code, which thereby constitutes the commission of crimes against humanity.

Furthermore, it is your indirigible duty as a regulatory body to ensure that all doctors worldwide are advised that they are taking part in medical experimentation via "vaccination" programmes, whether wittingly or unwittingly, with all the legal and ethical obligations that such

involvement entails.

This email is copied to the lawyer Reiner Fuellmich. It is also copied to Charles Michel, President of the Council of Europe, and to Ursula von der Leyen, President of the European Commission.

Yours faithfully,
Doctors for Covid Ethics

Over 100 doctors and scientists from 25 countries https:// doctors4covidethics.medium.com/urgent-open-letter-from-doctors-and- scientists-to-the-european-medicines-agency-regarding-covid-19- f6e17c311595

APPENDIX V
Doctors for Covid Ethics Signatories

Doctors for Covid Ethics Signatories
Doctors for Covid Ethics has written two open letters to the European Medicines Agency regarding COVID-19 vaccine dangers. In those letters we have insisted upon evidence that risks of clotting, bleeding and platelet abnormalities were appropriately ruled out in legitimate empirical trials prior to human use.
Signatories across the two letters are as follows:

Founding signatories
Professsor Sucharit Bhakdi MD, Professor Emeritus of Medical Microbiology and Immunology, Former Chair, Institute of Medical Microbiology and Hygiene, Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz (Medical Doctor and Scientist) (Germany and Thailand)
Dr Marco Chiesa MD FRCPsych, Consultant Psychiatrist and Visiting Professor, University College London (Medical Doctor) (United Kingdom and Italy)
Dr C Stephen Frost BSc MBChB, Specialist in Diagnostic Radiology, Stockholm, Sweden (Medical Doctor) (United Kingdom and Sweden)
Dr Margareta Griesz-Brisson MD PhD, Consultant Neurologist and Neurophysiologist (studied Medicine in Freiburg, Germany, speciality training for Neurology at New York University, Fellowship in Neurophysiology at Mount Sinai Medical Centre, New York City; PhD in Pharmacology with special interest in chronic low level neurotoxicology and effects of environmental factors on brain health), Medical Director, The London Neurology and Pain Clinic (Medical Doctor and Scientist) (Germany and United Kingdom)
Professor Martin Haditsch MD PhD, Specialist (Austria) in Hygiene and Microbiology, Specialist (Germany) in Microbiology, Virology, Epidemiology/Infectious Diseases, Specialist (Austria) in Infectious Diseases and Tropical Medicine, Medical Director, TravelMedCenter, Leonding, Austria, Medical Director, Labor Hannover MVZ GmbH (Medical Doctor and Scientist) (Austria and Germany)

Professor Stefan Hockertz, Professor of Toxicology and Pharmacology, European registered Toxicologist, Specialist in Immunology and Immunotoxicology, CEO tpi consult GmbH. (Scientist) (Germany)
Dr Lissa Johnson, BSc BA(Media) MPsych(Clin) PhD, Clinical Psychologist and Behavioural Scientist, Expertise in the social psychology of atrocity, torture, collective violence and propaganda, former professional body Public Interest Advisory Group member (Psychologist) (Australia)

Professor Ulrike Kämmerer PhD, Associate Professor of Experimental Reproductive Immunology and Tumor Biology at the Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University Hospital of Würzburg, Germany, Trained molecular virologist (Diploma, PhD- Thesis) and Immunologist (Habilitation), Remains engaged in active laboratory research (Molecular Biology, Cell Biology) (Scientist) (Germany)

Associate Professor Michael Palmer MD, Department of Chemistry (studied Medicine and Medical Microbiology in Germany, has taught Biochemistry since 2001 in present university in Canada); focus on Pharmacology, metabolism, biological membranes, computer programming; experimental research focus on bacterial toxins and antibiotics (Daptomycin); has written a textbook on Biochemical Pharmacology, University of Waterloo, Ontario, Canada (Medical Doctor and Scientist) (Canada and Germany)
Professor Karina Reiss PhD, Professor of Biochemistry, Christian Albrecht University of Kiel, Expertise in Cell Biology, Biochemistry (Scientist) (Germany)
Professor Andreas Sönnichsen MD, Professor of General Practice and Family Medicine, Department of General Practice and Family Medicine, Center of Public Health, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna (Medical Doctor) (Austria)
Dr Wolfgang Wodarg, Specialist in Pulmonary and Bronchial Internal Medicine, Hygiene and Environmental Medicine, Epidemiology, and Public Health; Honorary Member of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe and former Head of the Health Committee of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe; former Member of Parliament, German Bundestag; Initiator and Spokesman for the study commission ‘Ethics and Law in Modern Medicine’; Author and University Lecturer (Medical Doctor) (Germany)
Dr Michael Yeadon BSc (Joint Honours in Biochemistry and Toxicology) PhD (Pharmacology), Formerly Vice President & Chief Scientific Officer Allergy & Respiratory, Pfizer Global R&D; Co-founder & CEO, Ziarco Pharma Ltd.; Independent Consultant (Scientist) (United Kingdom)

Endorsing signatories
Dr Reem Abu-Sbaih, DO, Doctor of Osteopathy, Associate Professor Osteopathic Manipulative Medicine/ Neuromusculoskeletal Medicine (Medical Doctor) (USA)
Dr Adriana Reyes Agudelo, MD, Surgeon (Medical Doctor) (Spain) Dr Véronique Ahari, General Practitioner (Medical Doctor) (France)
Dr Maria José Martínez Albarracín, Bachelor of Medicine and Surgery, Physician and Professor of Clinical Diagnostic Processes, Specialized in Clinical Analysis (Medical Doctor) (Spain)
Dr Alicja Alda, General Practitioner and Ear Nose and Throat specialist (Medical Doctor) (Norway)
Dr Fernando Ania, ND, Naturopathic Doctor (Canada)
Dr Carmen Soler Arnedo, Surgeon, General Medicine (Medical Doctor) (Spain)
Dr Mario Cabrera Avivar, MD, Specialist in Public Health, former Consultant to the Pan American Health Organisation, the World Health Organisation Regional Office

for the Americas (OPS/OMS) (Medical Doctor) (Uruguay)
Rena Bartolettti, Pharmacist, previously of the General Pharmacy Inspectorate, Registration Service Medicines, Federal Public Health and Safety Authority (Pharmacist) (Belgium)
Dr Gabriela Bachmann, General Medicine, Specialising in children and young people (Medical Doctor) (Austria)
Dr. Elizabeth Bastian, BSc (Genetics and Microbiology), MDCM, Family Medicine, General Practitioner in Oncology, sub specialty trained in Palliative Care (Medical Doctor) (Canada)
Dr Pedro López Bastido, Stomatologist (Medical Doctor) (Spain)
Dr Michael D Bell, MB, ChB (1978 Edinburgh) MRCGP (1989), General Practitioner (Medical Doctor) (United Kingdom)
Rev. Reuben P. Bell, DO, MS, MDiv, PhD, Osteopathic family physician since 1982, Bachelors and Masters degrees in Zoology, formerly Professor of Biology (including Molecular Genetics and Developmental Biology), M.Div. and Ph.D. in theological studies, with attention to issues of science and religion (Medical Doctor and Scientist) (USA)
Dr Francisco Lacruz Bescos, MD, PhD, Consultant Neurologist with special training and dedication to Neuroimmunology and Multiple Sclerosis (Retired) (Medical Doctor) (Spain)
Dr Thomas Binder, MD, specialised in Cardiology and Internal Medicine, thesis in Immunology and Virology, with 32 years experience in diagnosis and treatment of Acute Respiratory Illness (Medical Doctor) (Switzerland)
Sarah Binns, MA VetMB, MS, MRCVS, MSc, PhD, DipLSHTM, Former Veterinary Infectious Disease Epidemiologist (United Kingdom)
Dr Rainer Bliefert, Dentist (Switzerland)
Dr Michael Brandner, Dr. Med. (Medical Doctor) (Germay)
Dr Rachel Brown, MBChB, LLM (Medical Law & Ethics), MRCPsych CFMP, Consultant Psychiatrist (Medical Doctor) (United Kingdom)
Dr Roxana Bruno, PhD in Immunology, Researcher in Biochemistry, Immunology, Neuroinmunology and Genetics (Scientist) (Argentina)
Dr Elizabeth Burton, MBChB, General Medical Practitioner (Retired)(Medical
Doctor) (United Kingdom)
Dr Natalia Prego Cancelo, MD, Community and Family Medicine Specialist,
founder of “Médicos por la Verdad” (Doctors for the Truth) worldwide, platform of doctors in more than 17 countries (Medical Doctor) (Spain)
Dr Ronald S. Carlson, AB Chem/Bio, DDS, Dentist (USA)
Dr Rafael Reinoso Casado, Family and Community Medicine (Medical Doctor) (Spain)
Dr Vernon Coleman, MB, ChB, General Practice Principal (Retired) (Medical
Doctor) (United Kingdom)
Isabella Cooper, BSc (Hons) Biochemistry, AFHEA, AMRSB, AfENDO, Doctoral Researcher, Areas of expertise: hyperinsulinaemia, disseminated intravascular coagulability, mitochondrial molecular biology and cancer metabolism (Scientist) (United Kingdom)
Dr Johan Corthouts, General Practitioner (Medical Doctor) (Belgium)
Jonathan Jay Couey, Assistant Professor of Research, Pitt School of Medicine Research Faculty, Department of Neurobiology, examining cortical and
subcortical microcircuits using promotor/enhancer driven gene expression
(Scientist) (USA)

Dr David Critchley, BSc, PhD, Clinical Research Scientist with more than 30 years experience, including projects in Virology and Immunology (Scientist) (United Kingdom)
Professor Barbara A Crothers, DO, Associate Professor, Pathology, Gynecologic, Breast and Cytopathology (USA)

Dr Rita Darby, General Practitioner (Medical Doctor) (Wales)
Dr. Daniel de la Torre Llorente, Biology Professor, Biotechnology-Plant Biology Department, Agronomic, Food and Biosystems Engineering School (ETSIAAB) Universidad Politécnica de Madrid (Scientist) (Spain)
Dr John Day, MD, Family Medicine (Board certified since 1990) (Medical Doctor) (USA) Dr Hilde De Smet, General Practitioner (Medical Doctor) (Belgium)
Dr Johan Denis, General Practitioner (Medical Doctor) (Belgium)
Dr Steven Depicker, General Practitioner (Medical Doctor) (Belgium)
Dr M. Doesburg-van Kleffens, MSc, PhD, Specialist in Laboratory Medicine (Clinical Chemistry), of Stichting Artsen Covid Collectief, an independent Dutch Collective of Medical Professionals (Scientist) (The Netherlands)
Dr Geanina Dragnea, Obstetrician-Gynecologist (Medical Doctor) (Romania)
Dr Nyjon Eccles, BSc, MBBS, MRCP, PhD, Specialist in Functional & Environmental Medicine (Medical Doctor) (United Kingdom)
Dr Karin Eisfeld, Molecular Biologist, Senior Regulatory Affairs Manager in the approval of new drugs and medical devices (Scientist) (Germany)
Dr Blanca Assumption Lario Elboj, Specialsit in Ophthalmology (Medical Doctor) (Spain)
Dr Kjetil H. Elvevold, Senior Scientist, worked as Senior Scientist in a Contract Research Organization (CRO) in Norway that performed pre-clinical experiments for the pharmaceutical industry (Scientist) (Norway)
Dr Andreas Emmert, Specialist in Microbiology, Head Physician at Østfold Regional Hospital, Norway (Medical Doctor) (Norway)
Merit Enckell, Civ. Ing, PhD, Independent researcher, Structural Health Monitoring and Emerging Technologies, Formerly of KTH Royal Institute of Technology (Scientist) (Sweden)
Dr Sonia Andrés Espallardo, Psychiatrist (Medical Doctor) (Spain)
Dr Radimé Farhumand, Specialist in Anesthesia (Medical Doctor) (Germany)
Dr Thomas Faulkner, MChiro, DC, Managing Director and Chiropractor (United Kingdom)
Dr Susan Flett, Specialist in Psychiatry, Child Psychiatry and Psychotherapy (Semi- retired) (Medical Doctor) (United Kingdom)
Dr Konstantinos Fountzoulas, MD, PGDiP Orth Eng., FEBOT, FRCS (Tr & Orth), Consultant Trauma and Orthopaedic Surgeon (Medical Doctor) (England and Italy)
Dr Paul Christian Friedl, Ophthalmologist (Medical Doctor) (Austria)
Dr Carrie Ganek, MD, Adult Psychiatry (Medical Doctor) (USA)
Dr Martin E Ganek, MD, Board Certified Paediatrician (Medical Doctor) (USA)
Dr Emanuel E. Garcia, MD (University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, 1986), Psychiatrist (Medical Doctor) (USA)
Dr Parisi Giovanni, Specialist in Ophthalmology and Sports Medicine (Medical Doctor) (Italy)
Dr Hartmut Glossmann, Professor Emeritus, Doctor of Medicine and Specialist in Pharmacology / Clinical Pharmacology, Institute for Biochemical Pharmacology, Innsbruck (Medical Doctor and Scientist) (Germany)

Amparo de Luque González, Dentist (Spain)
Dr Céline Guérin, PhD in Neurosciences, Master in Microbiology and Genetics (Scientist- Practitioner) (France)
Dr. Olga Petrovna Guzova, Pediatrician, Dermatologist and Dermatopathologist (Medical Doctor) (Panama)
Dr Hans-Michael Hackenberg, Family Doctor and Sports Medicine Specialist (Retired) (Medical Doctor) (Germany)
Dr Roman Häussler, General Medicine (Austria)
Dr Jutta Heinrich-Nols, Doctor and Clinical Pharmacologist (Medical Doctor and Scientist) (Germany)
Julie Henrotte, Quality System Expert, 12+ years in GSK Pharma (Scientist) (France)
Dr Angel Ruiz-Valdepeñas Herreros, Bachelor of Medicine, Licenciado en Medicina por la Universidad de Murcia, Specialist in Family and Community Medicine, co-founder of “Médicos por la Verdad” (Doctors for the Truth) worldwide, platform of doctors in more than 17 countries (Medical Doctor) (Spain)
Dr Birgit Hörger, Resident Doctor, Specialist in General Medicine (Medical Doctor) (Germany)
Dr April M. Hurley, MD, Family Physician for 35 years (Medical Doctor) (USA) William Ip, BSc. MIBMS, Former NHS Biomedical Scientist (Specialist in Microbiology), for over 30 years (Sicentist) (United Kingdom)
Dr Hervé Janecek, Veterinarian (France)
Jerzy Jaskowski, MD, PhD, MS, Specialties in General Surgery, Environmental Medicine, Physics and Biophysics (Retired)(Medical Doctor and Scientist) (Poland)
Dr. Elisabeth Jenik, General Medicine, Occupational Medicine and Psychosomatic Medicine (Medical Doctor) (Austria)
Dr Alain Joseph, General Medicine Specialist (Retired) (Medical Doctor) (France)
Dr Konstantinos Kakleas, MD, MRCPCH, MSc, PhD, Paediatric Allergy Consultant, Leicester Royal Infirmary Hospital (Medical Doctor) (United Kingdom)
Dr Hootan Kazemi, BDS Dental Surgeon, MSc(Distinc.) Clinical Biochemistry, BSc(Hons) Physiology (General Dental Practitioner) (United Kingdom)
Dr Ingrid Kiesel, Specialist in Psychiatry, Psychotherapy and General Medicine (Medical Doctor) (Germany)
Dr Alina Kislich, General Practitioner, Graduated from the Medical University of Vienna (Medical Doctor) (Austria)
Dr Wiltrud Kling, Specialist in General Medicine (Medical Doctor) (Germany)
Dr Ewa Konik, MD, Heart Transplant Cardiologist (Medical Doctor) (USA)
Dr Doris Krien, Assistant Doctor, Günzburg District Hospital (Medical Doctor) (Germany)
Brigitte Lacroix, clinical PKPD and PBPK modeler (Pharma industry), PhD in Pharmacy (Paris XI University), PhD in Pharmacometrics (Uppsala University) (Scientist) (France, Sweden)
Dr Andreas Lang, MD (Medical Doctor) (Germany)
Dr Paul Laursen, PhD, Adjunct Professor, AUT University (Scientist) (New Zealand and Canada)
Dr Michael S Lavender, Consultant Anaesthetist (Medical Doctor) (Australia)

Dr Tess Lawrie, MBBCh, PhD, Guideline methodologist and evidence synthesis expert, Director of The Evidence Based Medicine Consultancy Ltd, Bath UK. Honorary Researcher at the Royal United Hospital, Bath UK (Medical Doctor and Scientist) (United Kingdom)

Dr Bronia Lee, MBBCh, MRCGP, Retired General Practitioner (Medical Doctor) (United Kingdom)
Dr Katrina Lewis, MD, BSc in Immunology and Physiological Chemistry, triple Board certified ( USA) in Anesthesiology, Pain Medicine and Functional Medicine (Medical Doctor) (South Africa, USA)

Dr Derek Lohan, Consultant Radiologist and Director, Helix Radiology (Medical doctor) (Ireland)
Dr Ricardo Arriola López, General Medicine, (Medical Doctor) (Spain) Dr. Adele Lorigan, BSC (Chiro), Chiropractor (Australia)

Dr Antje Lueg, Specialist in Ophthalmology (Medical Doctor) (Germany)
Dr. Thomas Ly, MD, Infectologist and Paediatrician, Specialized in Tropical Medicine, Head of MedicalQM, a think tank on medical quality management and patient safety, Founder of the upcoming International Institute for Human Pathogenic Infectious Diseases “InfectCore” (Medical Doctor) (Germany and Thailand)
Dr Kulvinder S. Manik, MBChB, MA, LLM, MRCGP, GP (Medical Doctor) (England)
Dr. Rosemarie Mayr, Specialist in Psychiatry and Psychotherapeutic Medicine and Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, ÖÄK Diploma for Homeopathy (Retired) (Medical Doctor) (Germany)
Dr Nathi Mdladla, Associate Professor and Chief of ICU, Dr George Mukhari Academic Hospital and Sefako Makgatho University (Medical Doctor) (South Africa)
Dr Janet Menage, MA, MB, ChB, General Medical Practitioner (Retired) Qualified Psychological Counsellor (Medical Doctor) (United Kingdom)
Dr Niall McCrae, PhD, MSc, RMN, Mental health researcher, Psychiatric Nurse (United Kingdom)
Professor Nathalie McDonell, MD, PhD (human genetics), Professor of Molecular and Cell Biology (Medical Doctor and Scientist) (France)
Dr Ciaran Montague, MVB, MRCVS, Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons certified veterinary dermatologist with 25 years general and referral practice (Veterinarian) (N. Ireland)
Dr Sabine de Monvallier, General Practitoner (Medical Doctor) (France) Dr Amir Mortasawi, Physician and author (Germany)
Dr Jens Münch, Neurologist, Psychoanalyst and Specialist in Psychosomatic Medicine and Trauma (Medical Doctor) (France)
Dr. Graeme Munro-Hall, BDS, Dentist (retired), pioneered the use of glutathione with vitamin C, awarded a Fellowship of the International Academy of Oral Medicine and Toxicology in 1996 (Dentist) (United Kingdom)
Dr Souha Nasreddine, MD, Ob/Gyn, Graduated from the Free University of Brussels Belgium, Holistic Gynecology (Lebanon)
Dr Terezia Novotna, General Practitioner, Emergency Doctor, and Anesthesiologist in Training (Medical Doctor) (Austria)
Akhmetzhanova Tamara Nikolaevna, Therapist and Cardiologist, the Republican Medical Genetic Center, Ufa (Medical Doctor) (Russia)
Ole C G Olesen, Double specialist in General Surgery, as well as Orthopedic

Surgery and Trauma (Medical Doctor) (Denmark, Norway, Sweden and United Kingdom)
Dr Fatma Özguler, Specialist in Internal Medicine, General Medicine and Emergency Medicine (Medical Doctor) (Germany)

Dr Waltraud Parta-Kehry, Biologist and Doctor for Gynaecology and Reproductive Medicine (Medical Doctor) (Germany)
Dr Arun Kumar Patel, MBBS, MPH, MRCPH, FFPH, Medical Public Health Specialist (Retired), NHS (Medical Doctor) (United Kingdom)
Dr E. Peeters, MD, Internal Medicine Specialist, Endocrinology, of Stichting Artsen Covid Collectief, an independent Dutch Collective of Medical Professionals (Medical Doctor) (The Netherlands)
Dr. Cristina Pinho, MD, Gastroenterologist (Medical Doctor) (Portugal)
Dr Hélène Potrich, General Practitioner (Medical Doctor) (France) Panagiotis Papaspyrou, Specialist in Orthopedics (Germany)
Dr Fabio Quirici, Swiss Medical Association (Medical Doctor) (Switzerland) Professor Denis Rancourt, PhD, Researcher, Ontario Civil Liberties Association, Member scientist, PANDA (Pandemics Data & Analysis), Retired former Full Professor of Physics, University of Ottawa, with expertise in environmental nanoparticles, molecular science, molecular dynamics, statistical analysis methods and mathematical and epidemiological modelling (Scientist) (Canada) Dr Rafael Reinoso, Family and Community Medicine (Medical Doctor) (Spain) Dr Nicola Reiser, Anaesthetist and Intensive Care Physician, Senior Physician at the University Clinic UMEÅ (Medical Doctor) (Sweden)
Claudia Riempp, Psychologist and psychotherapist, expert in health education (Germany)
Dr Tred J Rissacher, DC, Chiropractor specialising in obesity and diabetes (USA)
Pablo Enrique Palomo Robles, Pharmaceutical Chemist, Ministry of Public Health and Social Assistance (Scientist) (Guatemala)
Rhys Rogers, BSc, Physiotherapy, 12 years experience as a frontline Physiotherapist (United Kingdom)
Dr Tamara Roycroft, BMBS, BSc (Hons) Nutrition, AIT RCGP, Doctor, Nutritionist and Former Research Scientist/Research Physician in the pharmaceutical industry, and Co- Investigator on vaccine trials (Medical Doctor and Scientist) (United Kingdom)
Professor Simon Ruijsenaars, Professor in Mathematical Physics, School of Mathematics, University of Leeds (Scientist) (United Kingdom)
Dr Sam Saidi, MB, ChB, BSc, FRCOG, PhD, University of Sydney (Medical Doctor and Scientist) (Australia)
Dr Claudia Schoene,Veterinarian with specialisation in Veterinary Epidemiology and Tropical Veterinary Medicine, Animal Health Management and Wildlife management, Formerly Scientific Researcher at the Institute for Epidemiology of the German Friedrich-Loeffler-Institut, Federal Research Institute for Animal Health, and the Information Centre for Biological Security of the Robert-Koch Institute (Veterinarian and Scientist) (Germany)
Dr Pamela Shervanick, DO, Medical doctor and Doctor of Osteopathic Medicine, with specialization in Psychiatry (Medical Doctor) (USA)
Dr Guido Spanoghe, Gastroenterologist (Medical Doctor) (Belgium)
Dr Paul Steven Spradbery, Forensic and Research Biologist, Foundation for Science and Technology, Lisbon, Intertek Life Sciences, London (Scientist)

(United Kingdom)
Dr Duncan Syme, MBBS, FRACGP, Dip Prac Derm University of Cardiff, Graduate Monash University 1987, General Practitioner (Medical Doctor) (Australia)
Dr Carol Taccetta, MD, FCAP (Fellow of the College of American Pathologists), Pharmaceutical Physician for over 25 years, specializing in drug safety (Medical Doctor) (USA)
Dr Noel Thomas, MA, MB, ChB, DCH, DObsRCOG, DTM&H, MFHom. Semi retired NHS GP and homeopath (Medical Doctor) (United Kingdom)
Dr Corinne Tilloy, General Practitioner, (Medical Doctor) (France)
Dr Gilbert Tominez, General Practitioner (Retired) (Medical Doctor) (France)
Dr M. Tóth, MD, Psychiatrist, of Stichting Artsen Covid Collectief, an independent Dutch Collective of Medical Professionals (Medical Doctor) (The Netherlands)
Dr Julio Trindade, Masters in Epidemiology, Doctor of Veterinary Medicine, Masters in Strategy (Veterinarian & Epidemiologist) (Uruguay)
Dr Georgy Urushadze, Naturopathic Doctor, Paediatrician (Pirogov Russian National Medical University), Emergency Doctor, Physiotherapist, Researcher (Russia)
Dr Francisco J. Llull Vera, Dental Medicine Doctor, graduated from the Dental Medicine School (University of Puerto Rico, Puerto Rico), Postdoctoral Studies in Infectious Diseases (Harvard University, MA), Postdoctoral Studies in Dental Implantology and Oral Surgery (NYU Dental Medicine School, NY), Former President Puerto Rico College of Surgeons Dentists, South Region (Dentist) (Puerto Rico)
Dr H. Visser, MD, Internal Medicine Specialist and Infectologist, of Stichting Artsen Covid Collectief, an independent Dutch Collective of Medical Professionals (Medical Doctor) (The Netherlands)
Dr Jasmina Vucic-Peev, PhD, studied in Freiburg, Germany, training in Psychiatry in Switzerland (Medical Doctor) (Germany, Switzerland, Portugal)
Dr Jo Waller, UK State registered Biomedical Scientist since 1990 (Scientist) (United Kingdom)
Dr Maja Waibel, Dermatologist with specialty in Melanoma prevention (Medical Doctor) (Germany)
Dr Gerard A Waters, Mb, Bch, BAO, MICGP, General Practitioner (Medical Doctor) (Ireland)
Dr Markus Wegscheider, General Practitioner (Austrla)
Dr Ronald Weikl, Gynecologist and General Practitioner (Medical Doctor) (Germany)
Dr Helen Westwood MBChB (Hons), MRCGP, DCH, DRCOG, GP (Medical Doctor) (United Kingdom)
Dr R Matison White, MD, Family Practice Physician of 49 years (Medical Doctor) (USA)
Dr Madhu Wickremaratchi, MBChB, MRCP, Acute and General Medicine (United Kingdom)
Dr Anna Maria Wiedemann, General Practitioner, Specialist in General Medicine (Medical Doctor) (Sweden and Germany)
Dr Clive Wilder-Smith, FRCP, AGAF, MD, Consultant Gastroenterologst, Director of Research (Medical Doctor) (Switzerland)
Thomas Robin Wilks, MA, BSc(Hons) FHEA, CPhys, MInstP, University Science

Lecturer, Maths, Mathematical Modelling and Physics, Open University (Scientist) (United Kingdom)
Dr Christopher Wood, MBBS, Retired General Practitioner (Medical Doctor) (United Kingdom)
Dr Olga Sergeevna Yakimanskaya, General Practitioner, Polyclinic Physician (Medical doctor) (Russia)

Signatures of Colleagues in Allied Disciplines relating to Ethics,

Health and Human Rights
Reece Francis Allawatt, Registered Nurse, Specialty in Psychiatry and Mental Health (USA)
Sue Cook, BSc (Hons) Lic LCCH, Neurodevelopment Specialist (United Kingdom)
Professor Peter Gichure, Associate Professor of Theology and Peace Studies, Catholic University of Eastern Africa, Director of Graduate Studies, with special interest in ethics (Kenya)
Shabnam Palesa Mohamed, Journalist, Activist and Mediator (South Africa) John O’Sullivan, CEO of Principia Scientific International, an independent international scientific body defending the traditional scientific method, incorporated for charitable purposes as a Community Interest Company (United Kingdom)
Dr Violeta Sotirova, MPhil, PhD, Lecturer in English (United Kingdom)

5) Slovakia rejects signing the WHO Pandemic Treaty
Prime Minister of Slovakia ordered investigation into COVID-19 response & vaccines

Prime Minister of Slovakia, Robert Fico,
Translation by William Makis MD
Slovakia rejects signing the WHO Pandemic Treaty. Fico describes the jabs as ‘experimental’ and ‘untested’. He speaks out about the abuse of the unvaccinated and mandatory vaccination as having had “scandalous consequences”.

Fico calls WHO Pandemic Treaty "nonsense invented by greedy pharma companies"

President Fico:
"If someone had a different opinion about vaccination against COVID-19, they were “dangerous to society”.

“The media openly wrote, as you all remember, and I’m quoting right now: “that every unvaccinated person should squeal from pain like a pig. It is necessary to use force if someone rejects the policy of the needle”

“One study after another confirms the scandalous consequences of mass vaccination with untested experimental vaccines.”

“In the same way, I also very clearly declare, that SMER Slovakian Social

Democracy (the ruling political party) will NOT support the strengthening of World

Health Organization’s powers at the expense of sovereign states in managing battles against pandemics.”

“I will say that such nonsense could only have been invented by greedy pharmaceutical companies which began to perceive the resistance of certain governments against mandatory vaccination."

“This is a major development and it has dramatic global implications.”

“One study after another confirms the scandalous consequences of mass vaccination with untested experimental vaccines.”

Fico has also extensively called out corruption of the Ukrainian government and the financial aid that goes to Ukraine, as “maybe the biggest corruption in the world"

He also intends to investigate the scandalous activities of the previous government during the pandemic including "the financial side of extensive, often completely nonsensical purchases medical devices and vaccines."

January 30th 2024 Prime Minister Robert Fico speech before the European Parliament

Slovak Prime Minister announced Slovakia would launch an investigation into the “COVID circus” related to the experimental vaccine rollout and pandemic response

measures.

“We will never understand the truth about what role pharmaceutical companies played and who actually organized the entire COVID-19 circus,” Fico said. “With this in mind, ladies and gentlemen, the Government of the Slovak Republic has decided

to include a promise to resolve this issue in official announcements.”

“The Slovak people simply need an answer. What was it really? Why were various experimental vaccines given to people without any testing? Why were all sorts of drugs pushed on people? Why was there statewide testing? Who bought these? Why were these purchased? How much quantity was purchased? How much money

was spent on that? We end up with billions, billions!”

Fico went on to explain that the investigation is especially warranted given Slovakia saw 21,000 excess deaths since 2020, which he blamed on “government

incompetence.”

“We have 21,000 deaths, which we connect with the fact that the governments that were here since 2020 were not capable of managing (the pandemic) and cared only about economic gains and of course made sure they were bowing to pharmaceutical companies from which they bought huge quantities of useless medical equipment

and often also vaccines,” he said.

Fico said Slovakia will create a new government office specifically to investigate the matter and appoint its Deputy of the National Assembly to lead the probe and publish

its results.

“Based on what we have available, we want to know what really happened. I think that Dr. Kotlar, Deputy of the National Assembly, is equipped with sufficient information,” he said. “I see that he is prepared, even when it comes to keeping the team together. I asked him to discuss everything in the cabinet before making any public statement. And I am absolutely, I repeat, absolutely confident that his work will yield results,which we will publish and tell the Slovak public what really happened

during this COVID period.”

“Today we know one thing: Previous governments absolutely failed to manage Covid and left 21,000 people to their own devices. And, as we all know, they made a lot of money from unnecessary purchases of various medical supplies and vaccines,” he

concluded.

6) Indonesia
Senate Endorse Official Letter to refuse the WHO proliferation of Biolabs, the IHR as unfounded in law, amendments, the work of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Body and seek remedy to the fraudulent accusing of national debt and loss of control of natural resources, and refuse UN Nuclear submarines in Indonesian waters.

Translation of Dr Kun and Siti Fadilah’s Statement.

Dear. Ir. H. La Nyalla Mahmud Mattalitti Chairman of the Regional Representative Council Republic of Indonesia
In place

Yours faithfully,

May Allah SWT always provide health, safety and convenience to Mr. Chairman of the Regional Representative Council of the Republic of Indonesia (DPD RI) in carrying out his mandate and daily duties.
On this occasion we would like to convey the aspirations of the Indonesian people who are members of the Healthy Movement for the Indonesian People (GESURI) that we reject the concept of the Pandemic Treaty which is currently being discussed in the Intergovernmental Negotiating Body (INB) and will be adopted on May 24 2024, and reject the Amendment International Health Regulations (IHR). The complete reasons for rejecting the Pandemic Treaty and the Amendments to the International Health Regulations (IHR) are fully explained in the Appendix.

WHO is trying to take over Global Power by seeking that all member

countries of the World Health Assembly (WHA) adopt amendments to the International Health Regulations (IHR) and adopt the proposed Pandemic Treaty.
The proposed amendments would make the WHO statement legally binding and not just a recommendation. The changes would institutionalize the Global Digital Health Certificate and require countries to implement regulations WITHOUT respecting human dignity, human rights and fundamental freedoms.

If the Indonesian state agrees to the Pandemic Treaty along with the Amendment to the International Health Regulations (IHR), this will have the impact of losing Indonesian State Sovereignty, hurting democracy, not respecting human rights, and not being in line with the basic principles and constitution of the 1945 Constitution.

We ONLY recognize WHO as an advisory body, without any power to implement in Indonesia the recommendations they make.
Indonesia is a country that adheres to People's Sovereignty as regulated in Article 1 paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution, which states that "Sovereignty is in the hands of the people and is implemented according to the Constitution". We, the Indonesian people, claim our right to popular sovereignty in all matters, and do not cede any authority to WHO.

We are responsible for our own health, and “We are not responsible to WHO”.
Thus we convey, we thank you for your attention.
Best regards,

HEALTHY MOVEMENT FOR THE INDONESIAN PEOPLE (GESURI) Appendix 1
This statement refers mainly to the WHO Treaty but applies to all international governance by the WEF, the IHR and amendments, GAVI, WHA, Conference of the parties, UN ‘Climate Action’, the military, and Artificial Intelligence.

If Indonesia fails to actively reject any of the agreements, full executive powers and security silently pass to organizations that are protected from financial and operational liability. Simultaneously, the Indonesian government will remain responsible but lose the authority and ability to exercise control over any financial or operational risks.

Any external instruction to proliferate weapons of mass destruction; Radiological (Smart) Biological (medical, mosquito & green ‘biotech’) and Nuclear, will be legally binding and implemented as a military protocol.

Regardless of negotiations and final wording, control of the technology

and data remain with the patent holders.

World Council For Health26th March 2024

Dr Widya Murni, Indonesia World Council For Health, Expert Hearing 26th March 2024
After the Expert Hearing 40 Country Councils Voted Unanimously to exit the WHO

Thank you for this opportunity to add the weight and gravitas of Indonesia’s doctors to this vote to stop the World Health Organization. Without further ado, I am Dr. Widya Murni, representing Indonesia & Country Council Indonesia. The WHO’s declaration and handling of the Covid 19 plandemic had a detrimental impact to our physical, emotional, mental wellbeing, economy, and democratic constitution that we are yet to recover from.

Indisputably, the mandated lockdowns, masks and experimental vaccines constitute significant unlawful abuses of power by the authorities. The Amendments to the International Health Regulations and the proposed Treaty show that the WHO has no intention of returning our sovereignty or constitution, the Undang - Undang Dasar (UUD) 1945.

During the pandemic, the threats and discrimination against Indonesian people were particularly harsh, with no financial or food provision made, despite the receipt of a pandemic fund. Even for many health practitioners like myself who are passionate in providing healthcare to our patients. All this by the restrictive order and direction from WHO.

They have continued with experimental vector and vaccine programs but the lack of public consultation has woken up Indonesia to the fact that WHO are clearly contravening the Nuremburg Code and some are already arguing Genocide in the International Criminal Courts, with thousands of cases and pages of evidence being submitted.

Indonesia is committed to there being another false declaration of world pandemic and all the harm that would follow. To make sure this is not allowed to happen again in the future, the World Health Organization and representatives in member states must be held to account by law.

Most importantly WHO does not possess the same values, ethics and mission of a health authority but just acts as a business outlet to rule. We, therefore, will stress the importance of liberating ourselves from foreign rulings whose interests are to benefit themselves, not the people and global community. We should not consent to any tyrannical health or surveillance compulsions or colonization of our human rights ever again. The lack of transparency from WHO prompts us to question, do they endeavor representation of true care or just indignity enhancement.

Report for Indonesia’s General, by :Frances

Significance for Indonesia’s urgent withdrawal from the WHO treaty, of the Mosquito Releases, dated 11th November 2023

Immediate Action required for Hankamrata: Total people defence
Indonesia has two choices that must be made immediately or no longer have any choice at all.

In two days’ time 13th November 2023 there is the planned Bali Mosquito Release, in Denpasar and another city.
In two weeks’ time, 1st December, the withdrawal period closes, from the World Health Organization’s so-called Pandemic Treaty. After that date, it would take two years to withdraw and it may not be legal or allowed to withdraw.

The WHO Amendments will give the WHO itself legally binding authority over all governments; to declare a pandemic, to lock down the country, to limit the movement of the people, to monitor and modify the behaviour of people, to inflict economic collapse, debt and starvation on the people, ban Indonesia’s own medicines, ban access to any self-sufficient farming methods - for example rice fields, as potentially a breeding ground for diseases, to allocate public money to Gain of Function research, pharmaceutical vaccine research, mosquito factories, and give the WHO the exclusive right to Approve such drugs for the market, to require governments buy supplies of these PPE and vaccines, and put mandates and penalties in place for any country, or individual man or woman’s acting with any freedom, which are in alignment with Indonesian medicine, religion, culture, wisdom, justice, and infrastructure that the government deem more successful to improve and provide national health.

After the 1st December, no world government will have any choice at all.
Stopping the mosquito release on National Security, and Scientific grounds (as well as legal and political) will provide the grounds for withdrawal from the agreement with the WHO Amendments (and lead and support other countries to do the same). This would be a major legacy for this incoming government.

The way to raise it to a priority politically for this election period is to ask every minister and candidate for a statement about the WHO amendments.

I bet only the health minister will know and not one other minister, let alone the Coordination Departments, have been consulted or reached an informed consensus about the huge impact. On this point, that only the Health Minister was consulted, we can show the example of the Mass Mosquito Release, going against the 2017 legislation. We had to let the other ministers know, and that was after reading the mayor of Denpasar’s Instagram announcement just 6 weeks ago.

The implications for the WHO treaty at government level, are that it will create an imbalance that the Ministry of Health will be much more powerful than any other department, and will no longer have to consult with even the ministry of defence. They will control the budgets and choices for all Indonesia. At the moment, if we discredit the actions by the minister of health as political control and financially motivated, as he is not a doctor, we can also question the Minister’s Pandemic Preparedness department and principles which are:

1) Giving an unelected foreign organization (WHO) global power on totally false scientific grounds 2) The treatment of whole countries that are not sick. 3) Justification for ‘Gain of Function’ research, which involves the Public funding of genetic engineering of diseases, to be more fatal or virulent. Gain of Function research results are then not disclosed to the regulatory or environmental protection authorities, or available for independent testing. Instead, they are patented for the development of vaccines, by the pharmaceutical industry, and with-held for biosafety, by the military. The WHO argue that these diseases ‘could have happened in nature’ and they need to prepare. Governments have been lobbied to accept this false argument that GMOs are substantially equivalent to natural organisms. For example, the World Mosquito Program promote the mosquitoes as carrying Wolbachia “like many other insects do”. These engineered enhancements could never have happened in nature. DNA does not get damaged in nature. We have to use this scientific argument and challenge this foundational principle of pandemic preparedness and Gain of Function potential pandemic pathogens.

The WMP and the Ministry for health falsely claim the mosquitoes are ‘natural’. The ways that the mosquitoes are scientifically unnatural are really important. We have to argue the other world-wide lie that has been lobbied to governments, that Gene Editing is different and safer than genetic modification.

If the government take the time now to stop all bio-technology use in Indonesia, pending an investigation into this claim that Gene Editing is not GMO, we will have saved the nation. If we don’t, we may not get these mosquitoes but we will have to watch out for and resist every “Green Technology” creation presented at the AIS Technology Conference on Bali (Oct. 10th and 11th 2023), such as plastic- and oil- eating bacteria, and carbon capture and storage (CCS), engineering algae that could change the algae we rely on for oxygen, and every other unpredictable, unsafe and inaccurate edit of Nature’s gene pool (microbiome), that man believes he has achieved.

Specifically, to understand today, the Aedes Aegypti mosquito has been bred to carry Wolbachia bacteria, inoculating the mosquitoes from Dengue. The risk is that the diseases including Dengue will themselves mutate into more dangerous strains of disease to compete with the Wolbachia. And Wolbachia itself causes Filarial diseases and is present in fish, birds, and human parasites, as well as transmitting water-borne diseases - where mosquito larvae live for two weeks.

One legal precedent the government could use is that Microsoft were taken to court in 2003 for anti-competition practices, ending in the re-marketing of technologies as not for profit, health strategies.

Indonesia can argue that Microsoft are creating a market for their vaccines, by supplying technology for a built-to-fail mosquito health strategy. And then creating another market, for their 5G and 6G smart cities, using health-justified monitoring and reducing the population’s ability to live and work in the natural environment, justified by saying it is for their own safety and to stop the spread. And then when we are a captured market, we will be vaccinated, even if the manufacturers are still saying an effective vaccine has not been found yet.

(Senior WMP managers were at the All Eyes On Bali summit yesterday and admitted they had started releases in August in the north of Bali and there already are horrendous blood images and symptoms being observed, that do not test positive for Dengue or other familiar diseases.

This could be a covert attack on Bali, which will be followed by Kalimantan, where the new capital is to be. And then on 12 other countries, via mosquitoes (as is stated in the WMP Scale UP PDF).

However, we have to raise awareness of the attack on 193 countries through their acquiescence and blind acceptance of the International Health Regulation Amendments and WHO Treaty, via a multitude of health strategies.

We need to find out at once, if it is only the Health Minister in each country who has been involved in negotiations and recommending adoption of the WHO Pandemic Preparedness Treaty. We must tell them to appeal to all their planning legislation to withdraw their country from inclusion, on grounds of the foreign-control being given, the level of impact on their country, the absence of financial and scientific due diligence in regard to the WHO, and the absence of due planning process with all ministers and competent authorities.

At the same time, Indonesia does not have to conflict with the super powers of other countries. It can withdraw and state that it wishes to be the Control Group of the medical experiment. The Control Group exists already. The experiment is obviously the Global Smart Health Strategy.

The mosquitoes and the majority of biotech for use in medicine, food, agriculture, conservation and military are all on an Experimental Permit of Approval. Every experiment needs a control group. Indonesia can prove that it can be self sufficient on all these levels, including the refusal of financial investment for research.

Indonesia can use another quantitative and quantitative methodology for measuring our health and quality of life and biodiversity. The case against the WHO was brought by Indonesia’s previous Health Minister, to stop the WHO from taking Indonesia samples to America, of Avian Bird Flu. This could be used as a legal precedent. The taking of the samples was followed by gain of function engineering to create H5N1, which escaped from top security labs in America (ref. Institute For Responsible Technology White Papers and draft Bioweapons, Green Technology and GM Mosquitoes papers.) Now the samples she tried to guard are in Ukraine.

We must stop the idea of Indonesia’s capital being a smart city under the control of surveillance through American artificial intelligence. Again the mosquitoes are strategic for the WHO (who did the risk analysis of the releases, and found 50 potential biohazards as ‘negligible’). The Mosquitoes will carry Wolbachia IP Technology, coupled with CNN Artificial Intelligence. The mosquitoes have an interest in human blood as they bite in order to feed and breed. The biggest business in the world is interested in human blood too, including DNA information, data, and samples. There has already been major evidence that the Covid vaccines have corrupted blood in a myriad of detrimental ways.

All these mRNA and other biotechnologies are foreign-owned and patented with exclusive rights to access the data and control the equipment. This will inevitably exclude Indonesian oversight.

In the case of producing and releasing disease vectors; a gene drive technology is irreversible. In addition, environmental protection agencies will not be given the information on the exact gene sequence/strain of wolbachia or the ingredients in vaccines, to be able to monitor their spread. Gene drive technology is not approved for release outside a laboratory. The World Mosquito Program answer. 1) It is not a gene drive but they intend for the mosquitoes to replace the wild mosquitoes (the exact definition of a gene drive) 2) The mosquitoes are harmless - this is not a scientific statement and not backed up by any scientific evidence) 3) The mosquitoes are natural and deny IP technology in them. This is a denial of the one monitoring system and control (possibly) system, of the mosquitoes, that Bali has. The Minister for health has bought a license for the Wolbachia Technology and yet he denies its existence.

The investigation must include whether 1) the minister intended to sell the data? Or 2) whether he must hand over the data for the foreign owner of the technology? Or 3) Whether the Health Minister intended to deny a mosquito release monitoring system, specifically in order to avoid liability for damages.

In the case to stop the mosquito release on Monday, it has been shown that the program is Australian Funded, fully. It is not a government program. It is likely, however that the Department of Health with say that the Implementer is from the Department of Health and therefore it is a government program. The implementer, is Wiwied Trisnadi. When asked what he had worked before that prepared him to manage the release of 200 million mosquitoes with confidence, he said the Pandemic Preparedness section in the Ministry for Health. He also said that he does not know anything about the science behind the mosquito method and is unaware of any risks to environment or ecosystem.

If the Wolbachia bacteria is inherited or it is self-replicated, they are both equally dangerous but the implementers with liability have no idea of what they are responsible for.

If the WHO treaty is agreed, Indonesians will be subjected to the worst lockdowns, with no financial supports for the people, the worst strains of disease will remain un- recorded, and the environment will be uninhabitable.

Charges Filed 8th November 2023

On Monday 6th November 2023 (1) the World Mosquito Program (2) and Save The Children Fund’s (3)
Massive Mosquito Release Program (4)
was found to be a Foreign Program NOT A GOVERNMENT PROGRAM (5) And therefore must Cease and Desist (STOP)

It is illegal (6), fraudulent (7), without efficacy (8), without notice (9), without transparency (10) or disclosure (11) and of high National Security risk of being a

hostile deployment of biological agents (12). A figure of 40 billion Australian Dollars was paid by the Gillespie Family fund, to establish stake holders who would allow the releases in Bali (13). There has been no Due Diligence done in regard to operational management, financial management, regulation (14) or Liability (15)

16) Immediate confiscation of the mosquito eggs
by the Police with Army support - Wednesday 8th November, within office hours. 17) The mosquito factory must not be given prior warning of your arrival. WMP and SCF are managed by a non-national agent.

18) Or any opportunity to sell and transport the eggs to another buyer,
19) Or dropped on another community.
20) Or disposed of in Bali unsafely
21) Risk of retaliation. They must not have time to distribute the eggs in any of the sites identified

22) Already recruited families to incubate the eggs.
23) Laws broken Legal Instruments applicable.
Copies of the above charges have been copied and sent by email to attendees of the above meeting.
Full body of evidence referenced by number:

Dr Peter McCullough MD MPH - Vaccine-induced Myocarditis January 14th 2024
Released a film ‘Shot Dead’ with vaccine-death families.

Low potassium can occur as a result of increased catecholamine release after mRNA vaccination. Increases the risk of cardiac arrest and sudden death in vaccine victims. See Hulscher N, Hodkinson R, Makis W, McCullough PA. Autopsy findings in cases of fatal COVID-19 vaccine-induced myocarditis. ESC Heart Fail. 2024 Jan 14. doi: 10.1002/ehf2.14680. Epub ahead of print. PMID: 38221509.

Holistic Life

Harmony Hall

Pages

Sunday, May 18, 2025

Formal Rejections of The WHO Treaty & UN By Other Member States

No comments:

Post a Comment