Updated: 4 April 2021
Below on this page you find the following chapters
about legal battles against covid politics (update date)
Legal NEWS: Belgium must lift ‘all Covid-19 measures’ within 30 days (4 April)
- NEW: General Advice & Help (14 Feb 2021)
- Private Criminal Prosecution Against Parliament (19 Mar 2021)
- Crimes Against Humanity (1 Dec)
- Simon Dolan’s UK legal initiative (11 Dec)
- UK ‘Event 202’ based on ‘Common Law’
- Portuguese Court Rules PCR Tests “Unreliable” & Quarantines “Unlawful” (11 Nov)
- Legal action launched over missing three BILLION Tories spent on private Coronavirus contracts (11 Oct)
- Emergency Grand Jury for Natural Law (7 Jan 2021)
- LIBERTY – a UK Human Rights organisation
- Empower Yourself Legally – Common Law (31 Dec)
- Magna Carta Introduction (5 Dec)
31 March: “The Belgian State has been ordered to lift “all coronavirus measures” within 30 days, as the legal basis for them is insufficient, a Brussels court ruled on Wednesday.
The League for Human Rights had filed the lawsuit several weeks ago and challenged Belgium’s system of implementing the measures using Ministerial Decrees, which means it is done without any input from parliament.
The judge gave the Belgian State 30 days to provide a sound legal basis, or face a penalty of €5,000 per day that this period is exceeded, with a maximum limit of €200,000, reports Le Soir.
The current coronavirus measures are based on the Civil Safety Act of 2007, which enable the State to react quickly in “exceptional circumstances,” but the judge has now ruled that these laws cannot serve as a basis for the Ministerial Decrees.” [read more]
1) General Advice & Help
POWER TO THE PEOPLE – www.powertothepeopleuk.com
“Together we stand, divided we fall”:
“We are a group of individuals who are promoting initiatives to serve the people who are being affected by Government, Media and Pharmaceutical corruption. We advocate for anyone who has suffered at the hands of the Government. We believe in taking action with urgency in order to raise public awareness about the misinformation in the Mainstream Media and the Government manipulation. No persons private, home or work life should be negatively affected by the Media and Government having their hands in Big Pharma’s pockets.”
Empowering Small Businesses – www.empoweringbusiness.info (Common, Equity and Trust Law)
with lots of help, info forms, notes to download and zoom networking calls and more.
“‘Common Law for Small Businesses’ has been set-up purely to aid those wishing to trade under Common Law as an alternative to the statutory system put in place by the government.”
UK Medical Freedom alliance – ukMedFreedom.org
“We are an alliance of UK medical professionals, scientists and lawyers who have found that the Government’s response to COVID-19 is misguided and not based upon the best available scientific evidence. We are campaigning for Medical Freedom, Informed Consent and Bodily Autonomy to be preserved and protected.”
Not-for-Profit Company limited by guarantee – No. 13080501.
Adverse Vaccine Reactions
COVID Vaccine Experience – Survey
Vaccine Consent Form
Compensation From UK Government Due To Covid Restrictions
PCRclaims.co.uk is a Pro Bono global network of advisors and independent lawyers led by Jo Rogers at Navistar Legal.
“Our mission statement is simple: To bring LEGAL JUSTICE to UK citizens for the devastating harm caused by lockdowns to families and businesses.”
Were you, your children, or your business adversely affected by lockdowns, quarantines or forced self-isolation based on PCR testing? You may be eligible for compensation from your government due to covid restrictions.
“Please provide a short statement of evidence outlining the harms you suffered using our simple questionnaire.
You will then be contacted regarding next steps in this process.
This service will be free of charge to you, ‘the plaintiff’.”
“It is our prediction that this will become
the biggest lawsuit against the government
ever seen in this country.“
“This government has been negligent in the use of Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) tests in response to Covid-19.
Using mass testing to drive lockdowns was an error of huge magnitude.
Quarantining healthy people is unprecedented. Shutting down the economy is unprecedented.
PCR tests were NEVER FIT FOR PURPOSE.“
[text above from PCRclaims.co.uk]
PCP Papers Laid Alleging Pandemic Fraud Against Hancock, Whitty, Vallance & Ferguson
Posted 19th March 2021 by The Bernician
At 16:23 pm this afternoon, one year after the Advisory Committee on Dangerous Pathogens’ decision to reclassify COVID-19 as no longer being considered a High Consequence Infectious Disease was published by Public Health England, the papers were laid electronically at a south London Magistrates Court, in the People’s Union of Britain’s momentous Private Criminal Prosecution against Matt Hancock, Chris Whitty, Patrick Vallance and Neil Ferguson for pandemic fraud.
Early next week, the court will receive a 1,200 page bundle of evidence, which includes expert witness statements from two professors, three doctors, a dental surgeon, a probate solicitor, a mathematician, a retired nuclear submarine data analyst, an independent data analyst and a former CID fraud detective, who is acting as a trustee of the PUB in bringing this most serious of prosecutions to the criminal court.
In addition to the charges of fraud by false representation and non-disclosure, in material breaches of sections 2 and 3 of the Fraud Act 2006, we are informally applying for a declaration, under the inherent powers of the court, which states that autopsies are to be carried out for all alleged COVID deaths, which will be held as evidence in the forthcoming trial, on the ground that we have expert witness testimony of the falsification of death certificates, as per UK Government policy.
We are also asking for a moratorium on the UK flu and COVID ‘vaccinations’ programmes to be declared for period of at least 90 days, in order to definitively establish whether it is COVID-19 or ‘vaccines’ that are killing people at a minimum mortality rate of 377 per 100,000 healthy adults, as per the leaked WHO approved ‘vaccine’ safety study which we are adducing into evidence.
Boatload of Prima Facie Evidence
They told us they wanted more prima facie evidence when we made the last application in late 2020, seeking the arrest of Matt Hancock for fraud by non-disclosure over the declassification of COVID-19 by the ACDP.
Well, now they have a veritable boatload of the stuff heading their way, so prepare yourselves for the inevitable shitstorm on the near horizon, after the defendants’ QC’s tell them that their only defence is to plead gross negligence. However, the evidence is so emphatic that they knew exactly what they were doing that the jury will almost certainly convict them as charged.
Nevertheless, don’t expect the defendants to be wheeled off in handcuffs to Belmarsh by tomorrow morning. Whilst it is just about conceivable that the court’s legal department could make an initial assessment of the case by the end of next week, even if it happens that swiftly, the matter will then be passed to the Chief Magistrate of the UK’s legal department, which will probably take at least another week to make their assessment.
In the event all of that is turned around within the next two weeks, the case would then be passed to a senior district judge, who must then decide whether to grant the applications for the summonses and the declaration, whether on paper or at a hearing.
If the summons application is granted, a pleading hearing would then be listed to take place within the next couple of weeks. This would take us to 28 days from now and probably represents the earliest time that the defendants will be summonsed to plead in the Magistrates Court. The informal application for the declaration would also be dealt with at that hearing.
Given the seriousness of the charges and the urgency of the situation, with clear evidence of fraud with murderous consequences already adduced into evidence, we will then ask the court to list a trial by jury at the very earliest opportunity, which will almost certainly take place at the Old Bailey.
If and when all of that transpires rests on the judgment of a single district judge, who will necessarily have experience dealing with such serious charges. However, it is the considered opinion of the former CID fraud detective and the team behind the scenes who have supported me every step of the way that the Statement of Case is “monumental”, “truly historical” and:
“Regardless of the judiciary’s response to it, once the information is in the public realm/consciousness, along with the cited evidence, it will be incendiary. The accused will squeal like the little swines they are.”
[end of update quotes from thebernician.net]
COVID-1984 PCP UPDATE 20 Nov [from Michael O’Bernicia’s Facebook page] After having no red flags raised by the legal advisers at Westminster Magistrates Court this week, we understand that the warrant application is now before the nominated judge and that a decision is imminent.
I realise that things are not happening as quickly as we would all like but please understand that it took six weeks to get to this stage in my family’s PCP against BOS and its receivers in 2013, so in reality the case has progressed at a relatively rapid pace.
We must also take into consideration the fact that, before he rules on the matter, the judge will have to ascertain whether the Director of Public Prosecutions is electing to take over the case, on the ground that it is of such importance that it cannot run as a private prosecution.
Either way, in the absence of a miscarriage of justice, the warrant will be issued and as soon as there are any developments, you will read about them on this page.
UPDATE Friday 13th Nov 6pm [from Michael O’Bernicia’s Facebook page] COVID-1984 NEWSFLASH
The prosecution in People’s Union of Britain v Matt Hancock has just sent the executed form, applying for his arrest warrant, to the court of issue. We have already got the green light from the court’s legal advisers and now we have the chief magistrates’ permission to proceed. They also sent us the form to fill out for the arrest warrant, which has now been acknowledged by the same as having been received. However, the form won’t be processed till Monday [16 Nov.], when it will be sent up to the crown court to be administered and then served upon the defendant, without delay, by the arresting officers, who will soon be appointed by the court.
Therefore, the case will now proceed as directed, unless the Director of Public Prosecutions [DPP] intervenes, which is unlikely because nobody will want to take the poisoned chalice. However, even if they do, we can object on the ground that the DPP is working for the government, so they are obviously conflicted. If they refuse to back down, we will insist that the case proceeds with our legal team. In other words, my family, friends and growing army of peace-keepers and freedom fighters, we are all about to witness the most significant events that have transpired on these shores, since Charles I lost his head.
Words simply cannot adequately express the truly humbling experience of the love, support and commitment I’ve received, from people who all tell me that my words have moved and inspired their hearts into resisting this tyranny, for the sake of our children and grandchildren. Thank you, from the bottom of my heart, for rising to the call. Very soon, our number will be millions.
This truly is our moment to seize the opportunity to build an advanced civilisation, on the rubble of the corrupted one, which is crumbling around us by COVID-1984 design […]
In that new civilisation, we will protect the unalienable birthrights of the individual from the tyranny of the collective, to become truly self-governed under the Common Law, as expressed in Magna Carta 2020, an idea whose time has come.
From now until you see the arrest live-streamed on the mainstream and alternative media worldwide, let’s make #ArrestMattHancock go viral on every platform, to the point where the People are chanting it in the streets nationwide.
COVID-1984 PCP UPDATE | At 11:11 pm on the 11th day of the 11th month, charges of criminal fraud by non-disclosure were laid against the secretary of state for mandatory vaxxtermination. He has been charged with knowingly failing to disclose to MPs that the fake government lurgy was reclassified as not being a Highly Contagious Infectious Disease, before they voted on the treacherous Coronavirus Act 2020.
Had he done so, there can be no doubt in the mind of any reasonable individual there would have been no possible justification for its enactment. [from Michael O’Bernicia’s Facebook page]
“the case is very simple to understand and prosecute – each MP intentionally relied upon [and then caused the People to rely upon], a series of false statements, which caused the deaths of untold thousands, destroyed the economy and enabled unaccountable and tyrannical government, in breach of section 2 of the Fraud Act 2006, the Treason Felony Act 1348 and articles 1 and 2 of the Bill of Rights 1689.”
“The barrister… is confident that the allegations are founded upon enough evidence to convict and that her partners will be in agreement”
On 15 October we received confirmation that the partners of the firm of barristers we are talking to about the case against Parliament are all in agreement – the case is one that can be won… we are now moving forward into the preparation of the court papers, including an affidavit containing all of the allegations of fraud, treason and genocide. It will be the first time allegations of treason have been made since the aftermath of WWII, whilst genocide is a crime under international law and the such allegations would almost certainly be dealt with in the Hague. … we are aiming to lay the charges in a criminal court as soon as they have been properly drafted.
We will also be seeking an order placing the entire cabinet and their advisers under house arrest, to prevent the rogue government from attempting to murder more people [as well as its opponents, under the new homicide enabling act] with purported statutory impunity.
Here’s a conversation with Mark Devlin youtu.be/w9pm3Z6nFnk. Find all Mark Devlin’s work here: https://djmarkdevlin.com/
The final drafting will be done over the weekend and Monday 8 November has been set aside by our legal team for the information to be laid in a criminal court, with summonses to follow without delay.
In addition, the People will also seek an order placing the accused under indefinite house arrest, to prevent any further government crimes being committed.
3) Crimes Against Humanity
In the video below “Crimes against humanity” from 3 Oct., the German top lawyer Dr. Reiner Fuellmich, who has been practicing law primarily as a trial lawyer against fraudulent corporations such as Deutsche Bank, VW and more corporations in the last 26 years, speaks as one of four members of the German Corona Investigative Committee:
“those responsible for it will be criminally prosecuted“
“the allegedly new and highly dangerous coronavirus has not caused any excess mortality anywhere in the world”
This “Corona Crisis” must be renamed as “corona scandal” and those responsible for it will be criminally prosecuted and sued for civil damages by an international committee of lawyers according to section 7 of the International Criminal Code.
“Is there a Corona pandemic or is there only a PCR test pandemic?”
“Do the so-called anti Corona measures, such as the lockdown, mandatory face masks, social distancing and quarantine regulations serve to protect the world’s population from Corona, or do these measures serve only to make people panic so that they believe without asking any questions, that their lives are in danger, so that in the end the pharmaceutical and tech industries can generate huge profits from the sale of PCR tests, antigen and antibody tests and vaccines, as well as the harvesting of our genetic fingerprints?”
“This Corona Investigative Committee was founded on July 10th by four lawyers in order to determine, through hearing expert testimony of international scientists and other experts.
1) how dangerous is the virus, really?
2) what is the significance of a post positive PCR test?
3) what collateral damage has been caused by the Corona measures, both with respect to the world’s population’s health and with respect to the world’s economy?”
first lawsuit filed against
so-called fact checkers on social media:
UPDATE 1st December: Dr. Reiner Fuellmich… founding member of the German Corona Extra-Parliamentary Inquiry Committee [from Mercola.com]
“The committee is now filing the first of many lawsuits to come, this one against so-called fact checkers on social media. They opted to file a defamation lawsuit on behalf of Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg, a former member of the German Congress and the Council of Europe who has been an outspoken critic of PCR testing, as it cannot be used to diagnose infection.”
“Social media companies have labeled Wodarg’s statements as “false,” and by filing a defamation suit, the burden of proof now falls on the fact checkers to prove that they are correct. In other words, to win, the fact checkers must prove that PCR tests diagnose active infection. The scientific evidence proves they don’t, so this case could turn out to be pivotal in the fight against the big tech censorship that keeps the fearmongering alive.”
4) Simon Dolan’s UK legal initiative
Join the Legal Challenge to the UK Govt Lockdown – by Simon Dolan: “We seek an injunction which would immediately halt the Government’s latest lockdown laws. By forcing people to stay at home, and forcing businesses to close, they are, we believe, in contravention of basic Human Rights offered under English Law, that of the right to enjoy your property peacefully.
The lockdown… will lead to far more deaths from suicide, undiagnosed conditions, untreated conditions – indeed far more than would have been potentially saved by the lockdown.
£418,060 pledged of £450,000 stretch target
[17 December] from 14,064 pledges
to take this case through to completion“
UPDATE 11 December: This week the Supreme Court has decided to refuse to hear our appeal relating to a Judicial Review into lockdown.
The Supreme Court decision to refuse to hear an appeal relating to a Judicial Review into lockdown, means that unelected Judges have set a precedent which now makes it impossible to challenge the Government’s use of the Public Health Act 1984 to trample over Civil Liberties and to emasculate Parliament in the process.
By not allowing the Appeal to go ahead, this puts a protective shield around Ministers and gives them a free run to lock up people in their homes using the Act, without having to worry any more that their actions in using the Act like this are illegal. This is a chilling development which should not be underestimated.
The Government’s ruthless use of the 1984 Act is an effective destruction of democratic process on behalf of the public around the lockdowns we have suffered and any that may happen again in the future. Although lately there has been some pushback from MPs, the decision of the Supreme Court and Court of Appeal gives the Government more power than it should rightfully have.
It threatens even to rip up the rights protected by the Magna Carta – the basic premise of you being free unless it is specifically unlawful has now effectively been changed, meaning that you now have to have the Govt’s permission to do literally anything. This goes against 800+ years of legal principle.
“By criticising us for having a ‘Rolling Judicial Review’ case, it means that when a Government in future uses these emergency powers, provided that they change the regulations every time they are challenged, they can keep avoiding the very mechanism – Judicial Review – that is there to provide a vital check and balance under the UK’s unwritten constitution. It is ironic that in July of this year, the Government launched a wide ranging review into the scope of judicial review chaired by Lord Faulks QC which has yet to publish its recommendations.
Equally disturbing is how the lockdown Judicial Review cases have found a lack of willingness from the Courts to challenge Government; Judges have said all along “It isn’t the place of the Court to get involved in politics”. They didn’t make that claim when the Brexit case was going.
From the first directions order made in the Judicial Review claim, it was clear that our unelected judges were entirely dismissive of the notion that we should be able to protect rights in the midst of a Pandemic, or that the Government’s actions could in any way be disproportionate or illegal in terms of the real situation being faced.
No one is disputing the impact on public health as a result of the novel Coronavirus, but far more so the Government’s handling of it, however, I do not feel the judges engaged at all with the key points or the 1,200 pages of evidence that was submitted as part of the case. The judgments and judicial comments made throughout are strongly suggestive of an unwillingness to look at the evidence and to depart from a high level “media” view of the pandemic. This suggests the Courts have not taken the opportunity to scrutinise key statistics and facts around the case, effectively waving away vital points around misleading data being used to justify lockdowns and impose further restrictions.
While scrutinising this type of data was seen as almost being unholy in March, April and May of 2020, this case, the Dodgy Dossier and the recently and very quietly amended ONS stats used to impose Lockdown 2 on the nation, has shown that, as a seemingly democratic society, it is vital that we do scrutinise what we are being told and that we continue to do so. The Government has used data to terrify the nation into compliance over a virus from which, in the words of the Government’s own medical officers, the vast majority people recover from and many do not even show symptoms of having.
I also feel strongly that our case has been treated with a far different approach to the Brexit case brought by Gina Miller, who twice defeated the Government in the Supreme Court, once over the right of MPs in triggering Article 50 and then again over the Prorogation of Parliament – arguably far less significant to the nation than the greatest economic contraction in peacetime history and the unprecedented restriction of rights, including access to healthcare – that we have seen as a result of Government measures.
The Supreme Court route is one we took as we fully believed in the case. It returned its decision in rapid time in an email of just a few lines long. This is a kick in the face for the thousands of people who have supported this case.
It must be accepted that the path to the Supreme Court is notoriously difficult. Of the many applications for permission to the Supreme Court each year, very few are granted. From July to September of this year, there were 21 applications. Five applications granted but three of them were for cases arising from 1971 shootings in N Ireland. Among them, and one of the most recent cases to be given permission to appeal, were the Government’s own appeal against the appeal court’s decision to let ISIS bride Shamina Begum back into the country pending her appeal. The massive health, civil liberties, parliamentary and economic implications of the use of the 1984 Act, was not, however, deemed worthy of consideration by the Court.
While the Supreme Court decision is a bitter blow, we have scored many victories and helped give a platform to tens of thousands of people who felt their voices were unheard. We forced SAGE to produce its minutes, got the Government to concede it had not lawfully shut schools, and lit the fire on scrutinizing data and information.
What started for me as a personal crusade against this Government and their shocking ineptitude quickly turned into a campaign for everyone whose lives have been wrecked by lockdown polices which were implemented in haste and without proper consideration.
We started Keep Britain Free to protect the basic freedoms of everyone living in the UK and it has become one of the fastest growing pressure groups in the UK, with thousands of you joining together to fight creeping totalitarianism. Our legal challenge has become one of the biggest crowdfunded legal cases in British history. We have raised over £416,000 from 14,000 pledges – people from all different walks of life from every corner of the UK. This shows the strength of feeling out there for this ongoing battle.
Whilst the Supreme Court decision is far from the outcome we were fighting for, our campaign has been vital in giving individuals up and down the country hope during an unprecedented time and in challenging a Government that was simply ruling by decree without any scrutiny. We also believe our findings and evidence, while not considered properly by the judges, will be of use in the inevitable public inquires which will follow and will help history judge the PM, Matt Hancock and their advisers in the light that they deserve.
Our fight continues and as ever, I will keep you posted on developments.
Update on “Join the Legal Challenge to the UK Govt Lockdown” Simon Dolan, via CrowdJustice 23 Nov:
The legal team has made amends to the 2nd Judicial Review meaning that it’s arguments are in relation not only to the first national lockdown but also include the SECOND lockdown currently taking place in England. The Re-Amended Statement of Facts and Grounds have been filed with the Court and the Government has been served with them.
Our case will argue that the “evidence” presented by Whitty and Vallance at the press conference on 31 October at which the new lockdown was announced included some old, suspect data and was misleading.
We will argue that in fact there was no serious escalation in the epidemic as evidenced by:
– Use of old data and overinflated warnings as to likely deaths – a subject already aired in the media
– The continuing relatively flat excess death figures compared to the five year average for the same period
– The unreliability of PCR tests as a diagnostic tool given their propensity to produce large numbers of “false” positives by picking up dead virus particles in people who have long since recovered from infection
– Lack of transparency about NHS capacity and bed occupancy and in relation to typical conditions at this time of year in previous years with the onset of the usual autumn/ winter upsurge in respiratory infections
That being the case, imposing a lockdown with all the disastrous consequences it has for health, economy etc was disproportionate and irrational.
It is only right that the consequences of both lockdowns imposed on the nation are properly considered by the Court. The most recent measures were pitched to England on the promise that come December 2nd, restrictions would be lifted and people up and down the nation could enjoy Christmas festivities.
Reports suggest that the UK could be plunged into yet more restrictions under the guise of a strengthened tiered approach with SAGE also suggesting further lockdowns will be needed to ‘recover’ from eased restrictions.
What has become evident from the first and second lockdown is that this cycle is not sustainable. Whatever economic measures and packages the Government dangles in front of us, millions are likely to lose their jobs and businesses will be forced to close down.
This flip-flop approach to lockdown, paired with the complete farce that is Test and Trace, is bringing chaos to every echelon of society. Businesses, already up against the wall, are facing another period of unsettling uncertainty. The unemployment rate continues to surge. School attendance is in chaos and with exams already cancelled for thousands, another generation is at risk of being ruined.
Lockdowns cost lives and cannot be allowed to continue.
Update on “Join the Legal Challenge to the UK Govt Lockdown” by Simon Dolan from 3 November:
I wanted to update you on our appeal, which was heard at one of the highest courts in the land last Thursday and Friday.
The hearing took place in the very grand Court 4 at the Royal Courts of Justice which is the Lord Chief Justice’s Court.
The three appeal judges included the Lord Chief Justice himself, Lord Burnett of Maldon and two other appeal judges Lady Justice King and Lord Justice Singh. It was a ‘hybrid hearing’ which meant that the hearing physically took place in a courtroom but it was also being live streamed for people to watch. I was pleased to see some supporters in court – thanks for coming down.
Once again it was Philip Havers QC putting forward our side of the argument, supported by junior barrister Francis Hoar.
Sir James Eadie QC was representing the government (with three other barristers at his side, handing him notes and working on their case.
The whole of the first day and the morning of the second were taken up with Philip Havers presenting our case. His main argument was that the lockdown legislation was ‘ultra vires’ or outside the scope of the 1984 Public Health Act which was used to bring them in. In other words the lockdown was illegal.
He also argued that our case was not ‘academic’. When our judicial review into the lockdown was refused in July one of the reasons given was that the case was no longer valid because the lockdown regulations had been revised numerous times (and are being reimposed as we speak). However, we say that the legal challenge is absolutely vital and necessary to stop the government doing the same thing again.
Philip also explained why we believe the regulations contravened people’s human rights which are enshrined in the European Convention of Human Rights and that they were a ‘disproportionate breach’ of those rights. He told the court the lockdown regulations ‘imposed far-reaching restrictions on the lives and businesses of the entire population of England’.
Philip said: “If the court subjects these regulations to judicial scrutiny and if the government is considering a second lockdown, the government, together with parliament and the public, will have available to them what this court has to say about the proportionality of the original lockdown.”
Philip argued that the original lockdown regulations were subjected to ‘no judicial scrutiny at all.’ He said: “Over five weeks elapsed between the making of the original regulations on March 26 and being approved by affirmative resolution by the House of Commons… seven weeks with both houses. These regulations were made without any parliamentary scrutiny at all and only debated weeks later.” He said the 1984 Public Health Act did not allow for ‘house arrest on the whole population.’
My QC then directed his aim at the five tests the government relied on to consider an easing of the lockdown, arguing that these had to be satisfied regardless of the damage or harm being caused to other illnesses and jobs and so on. He told the hearing the five tests did not take into account ‘domestic violence, cancer, disease – the consequences for all those who suffer from other illnesses’. He said: “Less restrictive measures could have been adopted without causing disproportionate harm.”
The debate moved on to deaths from Covid-19. Mr Havers said: “The chance of children, mercifully, or adults under 20 dying from Covid-19 who didn’t have a pre-existing condition was and still is vanishingly small and the chance of an adult under the age of 60 dying was and still is also extremely small….To continue to keep the whole population under house arrest…to continue to ban all gatherings and so on was irrational when a more targeted approach could have been achieved.”
Lord Justice Singh asked if protecting the NHS was a good enough reason to impose the restrictions. Philip responded: “There were well over 3000 spare capacity beds… there was no realistic prospect of the NHS being overwhelmed.”
The justices then questioned whether our legal challenge was too general. They also probed into whether the legislation’s ‘reasonable excuse’ caveat meant it did not violate human rights. In other words, they were suggesting there were get-outs for people who could breach the regulations and then cite human rights law to justify why they had gone to see their grandma ? This felt like a controversial point to me. Is it realistic that the average person would think to quote human rights law to a policeman?
On the second day, Mr Havers argued the closure of schools was disproportionate. He said: “All schoolchildren with no pre-existing conditions could readily have gone back to school by July 2 and we say should arguably have gone back to school by then.”
Lord Chief Justice asked: “So you are saying because the data was showing the risks were low therefore the government should have persuaded reluctant people to restore the status quo to do so?” Philip replied: “Given the enormous harm being done to the education of every schoolchild in the country my answer is ‘yes’.”
Sir James Eadie took to his feet on the second day to put the government’s case. He said: “The structure and nature of restrictions has changed pretty fundamentally over time, reflecting the scientific understanding. The various judgements that have to be made over time and the balance governments have to strike… to keep the economy maximally open as humanly possible against the resurgence of the violence and the risk it creates.” Sir James also denied claims the coronavirus restrictions were improperly implemented.
Philip said the 1984 Public Health Act used to order the lockdown only applied to individuals and should not have been used ‘to keep everyone ‘under house arrest.’ He suggested the Government should have used the 2004 Civil Contingencies Act instead.
The Lord Chief Justice, Lord Justice Singh and Lady Justice King are now considering their judgement which could be issued any day now.
Depending on their verdict, we will have to consider our next step. It may be that we have to challenge their ruling in the Supreme Court. One thing remains certain – we will not be giving up. What’s also clear, is that this case is momentous, having brought into question significant elements of our legal system as well as the powers of our ministers.
In the meantime, we must continue to gather as much support as we can.
Please continue to spread our message, by sharing our updates, our cause and the link to this Crowdjustice fund.
Together, we will Keep Britain Free.
UPDATE 20 Oct: Sir Lindsay Hoyle has applied to intervene in a legal fight brought by Simon Dolan and Cripps Barn Group against the Government’s lockdown restrictions. Hoyle, the Speaker of the House of Commons says he will intervene in the case because it raises issues of ‘constitutional importance’.
By 21 Oct £372,920 (of £425,000) are pledged.
5) UK ‘Event 202’ based on ‘Common Law’
Tuesdays 20 Oct, 27 Oct & 3 Nov. 2020 at 2pm,
legal notices will be handed in at UK constabularies:
WE-THE-PEOPLE: NOTICE – OF – OBLIGATION – ACCORDING – TO – ENGLISH – CONSTITUTIONAL – LAW
Presentation To 40 Chief Constables, Local Witnesses and Video (Project “Elephant”)
“For it is the police who are called upon to uphold law and order and apprehend those guilty of criminality.”
“It is not sustainable that a few corporations and government both enforce policies that purport to deny human rights and seek to coerce the common man by creating and applying overreaching ‘rules’ restricting the same man’s ability to lawfully and freely go about his daily business..”
“No man/woman (neither monarch, nor prime minister, nor any prelate, politician, judge or public servant) is above the common laws and customs of the English constitution.”
“…Magna Carta 1215 has NOT been repealed nor annulled, despite what the imposters within Westminster may say…”
Four people share their work in Common Law: “serving The Servants – A Call to Action” and explain the procedures for the three Tuesdays.
Addresses of 48 UK constabularies: we-the-people.co.uk
11 November: “An appeals court in Portugal has ruled that the PCR process is not a reliable test for Sars-Cov-2, and therefore any enforced quarantine based on those test results is unlawful.
Further, the ruling suggested that any forced quarantine applied to healthy people could be a violation of their fundamental right to liberty.“
“Most importantly, the judges ruled that a single positive PCR test cannot be used as an effective diagnosis of infection.”
“The ruling goes on to conclude that, based on the science they read, any PCR test using over 25 cycles is totally unreliable.”
The UK seems to use 40 amplifications [see the PCR Test chapter]
“Three cross-party MPs and the Good Law Project, a non-profit-making organisation, have launched legal action against the Government over its failure to disclose details of its spending on contracts related to the pandemic.”
“Green MP Caroline Lucas, Labour’s Debbie Abrahams and Liberal Democrat MP Layla Moran have filed a judicial review against the Government for breaching the law and its own guidance and argue that there are mounting concerns over the Government’s coronavirus procurement processes.”
“at least £11 billion worth of contracts have been awarded by the department since April, related predominantly to coronavirus, new analysis by Tussell shows that over £3 billion worth of these contracts have not been made public.”
Jolyon Maugham QC, director of Good Law Project said:
“Huge sums of public money have been awarded to companies with no discernible expertise. Sometimes the main qualification seems to be a political connection with key Government figures. And I have seen evidence that Government is sometimes paying more to buy the same product from those with political connections.” [London Economic, 11 October]
8) Emergency Grand Jury for Natural Law
URGENT MESSAGE DO NOT IGNORE SHARE VIRAL
Greetings Everyone, we have formed an Emergency Grand Jury for Natural Law from Public Health & Justice along with 32 Judges from around the world who are experts & together we have launched an International Tribunal for Emergency Injunctions & we have served Indictments for Crimes Against Humanity To Ban:
1) Forced Vaccinations,
2) Unlawful Lockdowns
3) The Criminal Misuse
4) Fraudulent Tests on Healthy People
5) The Criminal misuse of 5G Technologies
6) Economic Terrorism
7) Forcing people into poverty.
Please find links of our Global Indictments here: www.peaceinspace.org
As many of you may already know, rogue highly corrupt usurpers who have now taken over all our public offices, departments & positions of power are misusing COVID 19 as an excuse to strip ‘We The People’ of our God given inalienable Rights & Freedoms.
The are grossly abusing the powers given to them by ‘We The People’
Those in positions of Government & Mainstream Media are Acting as a Corrupt Corporations to facilitate their own special interests & no longer honoring the Will of ‘We The People’
In Law this is an ABUSE OF POWER called a Breach of ULTRA VIRES LAWS meaning ‘They have gone BEYOND THE SCOPE OF POWERS’ That ‘We The People’ have given them.
We have arrived at a extremely dangerous situation whereby they are now acting criminally & are planning to roll out FORCED mass vaccinations upon HEALTHY PEOPLE in the UK and worldwide which they are FULLY AWARE are likely to at worst KILL healthy people, or at best likely to PARALYSE MILLIONS /BILLIONS entirely on the basis FALSE science & data.
The company behind the vaccines called Pfizer were already sued by Nigeria in 2013, for harming countless Nigerian victims with their contaminated Testing Kits & now this very same company, (who should have been shut down years ago) are seeking to do the same thing again by administering unsafe deadly vaccines in the UK & all around the rest of the world. They MUST be immediately STOPPED! But we need unified MASS ACTION TO BE SUCCESSFUL.
In addition, there is evidence that 490.000 children were paralyzed in India by Bill Gates’s vaccines but again, instead of this man being arrested & stopped from causing further harm, on the 10th of November 2020 we are told that Boris Johnson had a meeting with Gates to roll out these same lethal unregistered unlicensed UNLAWFUL Deadly vaccines & force them upon the British public in the coming next 10 days.
AS THIS IS A CRITICAL STATE OF EMERGENCY – WE ARE CALLING FOR UNIFIED WORLDWIDE ACTION THAT REQUIRES EVERYONES INPUT TO HELP US TO IMMEDIATELY STOP THEM BY
1) REPORTING ON OUR INDICTMENT NEWS (make videos on your phones if possible)
2) SHARING OUR INJUNCTION & INDICTMENT CHARGES LINK www.peaceinspace.org
3) Join the hashtag campaign by tweeting
If you do not have a social media page or platform, START ONE TO HELP GET THE INDICTMENTS NEWS OUT!
4) Make a short video of your own public I DO NOT CONSENT DECLARATION AND GET IT VIRAL. WE NEED MILLIONS OF THEM TO BE BLASTED WORLDWIDE.
PLEASE DO NOT IGNORE THIS URGENT MESSAGE HELP GET VIRAL www.peaceinspace.org SEND TO EVERYONE YOU KNOW AS FAST AS POSSIBLE.
You can also visit www.newsinsideout.com
www.peaceinspace.org – FaceBook / Seven Starseed
9) LIBERTY – a UK Human Rights organisation
“Liberty is an independent membership organisation. We challenge injustice, defend freedom and campaign to make sure everyone in the UK is treated fairly.
We are campaigners, lawyers and policy experts who work together to protect rights and hold the powerful to account.
Together we’ve been making the UK a fairer, more equal place since 1934.”
JUDICIAL REVIEW: “No one should be above the law, especially those in power”
LIBERTY: COVID ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS AN INSULT TO PEOPLE TRYING TO DO THE RIGHT THING
“Ramping up heavy-handed enforcement of rules will do more harm than good”
“Hiring undercover officers to spy on people is an insult to the efforts communities across the country have made to look after and protect each other during the pandemic.”
More and more doctors, scientists and medical professionals are speaking out – see Critical Voices below..
10) Empower Yourself Legally
updated 31 December 2020
Learn the BASICS of Common Law, what to say and do – and what not. The Truth will set you free. Knowledge is power.
Once you see through the system, you can laugh about it – a very health boosting way to overcome fear.
Here is a 1/2 hour short recommended introduction:
Below is another documentation in text and graphics:
If you want to dig deeper into the legal framework the United Kingdom is based on, you will discover, that nearly all institutions are corporations (for profit), and how the ‘legalese’ language is (ab)used. Watch this 52 minute lecture:
“John Harris – ‘It’s an illusion’ talk at Stoke”: youtu.be/VrtS3hJC2Vg
11) Law Of The Land: Magna Carta
In case you are interested, below is some introductory information about the Magna Carta. The following paragraphs are from GreenMedInfo.com The Great Reset:
The 1215 Magna Carta was a treaty between the Barons and the King. It was subsequently re-issued into Statute law in 1297 by King Edward I, proclaiming in the introductory text, which remains the law of the land, that:
“these Liberties following, to be kept in our Kingdom of England for ever.”
And in Article 1 that “We have granted also, and given to all the Freemen of our Realm, for Us and our Heirs for ever, these Liberties under-written, to have and to hold to them and their Heirs, of Us and our Heirs for ever.”
Magna Carta (1297) Article 29 (XXIX) “Imprisonment, &c. contrary to Law. Administration of Justice.” states that: “NO Freeman shall be taken or imprisoned, or be disseised of his Freehold, or Liberties, or free Customs, or be outlawed, or exiled, or any other wise destroyed; nor will We not pass upon him, nor deal with him [condemn him,] but by lawful judgment of his Peers, or by the Law of the Land. We will sell to no man, we will not deny or defer to any man either Justice or Right.”
Article 29 of the Magna Carta (1297) remains the law of the land in the United Kingdom and Crown Dependencies and its principles remain the foundation of all common law countries. It was confirmed to be retained in the Republic of Ireland by the Statute Revision Act (2007) and the whole of Ireland also has its own Magna Carta Hiberniae (1216). It arguably remains law in Canada and Australia and remains on the statute book in New Zealand. The United States Constitution is in compliance with Chapter 29 of the Magna Carta.
The English Bill of Rights goes further, making it unconstitutional for the UK, Canada, Australia and New Zealand to be ruled by a foreign power, which places a cloud over the UK’s previous membership of the European Union, it states:
“I doe declare That noe Forreigne Prince Person Prelate, State or Potentate hath or ought to have any Jurisdiction Power Superiority Preeminence or Authoritie Ecclesiasticall or Spirituall within this Realme Soe helpe me God.”
“England appears to be the rock on which the revolutionary waves split and disperse and which starves the coming society even in the womb.” Karl Marx, (Cologne, December 31, 1848)
the Liberty of Subjects Act (1354) and Observance of Due Process Act (1368) signed into law by King Edward III, both of which remain law in the UK today. They further reinforce protection of general liberties and due process. In particular, and relevant to Article 29 of the UN Declaration and all UN treaties that pretend to be able to suspend liberty and due process, the 1368 Observance of Due Process Act made Constitutional the ancient Saxon custom, that:
“if any Thing from henceforth be done to the contrary (of due process of law), it shall be void in the Law, and holden for Error”.