Content Sections

By Robert Verkerk PhD, Founder, executive & scientific director

Authoritarian, coercive, anti-democratic, unaccountable, disproportionate – just some of the adjectives that are being used to describe the global governmental response to Covid-19.

Secretary-General António Guterres of the United Nations, speaking online on 22 September with the leaders of 32 nations at the opening of the General Assembly’s annual general debate, described it differently. He referred to Covid-19 and the global response as “a wake up call and a dress rehearsal for future challenges.” This, ladies and gentlemen – as we’ve suggested before – is just the warm-up act.

United Nations onboard with the Great Reset

With no holds barred, Guterres, former prime minister of Portugal, as well as a devoted socialist and Catholic, laid bare the UN’s agenda for a New Global Deal and New Social Contract with citizens, echoing Klaus Schwab’s Great Reset proposal that has emerged as the globalists’ masterplan. In his introduction to the UN’s Annual Report (2020), Guterres said, “There can be only one fight in our world today: our shared battle against COVID-19.”

The World Economic Forum unabashedly view covid-19 as a “once-in-lifetime opportunity” to roll out the Great Reset.

Sharper than a razor

All of this raises questions in many of our minds.

Here’s one, albeit cynical or at least rhetorical: Isn’t it something of a non-sequitur to claim that because Covid-19 has brought so much inequity to the world, it’s now necessary to put in place an altogether new plan and system to fix the problems, when it’s clear the people who caused the inequity are also the people with the new, shiny ‘solution’? In the old days we used to refer to such behaviour as sharp practice or a conflict of interest. But that was before the ‘new normal’ came in.

Now for a genuine question: do we have a choice? If we support the narrowing of social or health inequalities, and if we also harbour a deep desire to protect what’s left of our natural environment and halt or reverse the downward spiral of biodiversity, have we no alternative but to sign up to this Davos-inspired plan?

We adamantly believe the answer is ‘no’. In fact, we’re concerned that the plan is a honey trap, that also can’t and won’t deliver on its promises.

Limited options

Our options to take control over our own destinies got a whole lot narrower with the opportunistic arrival of Covid-19 this year. That’s because the emergency measures justified by the existence of a ‘pandemic’ mean democracy in many parts of the world has been largely suspended. This boils down to the World Health Organization’s scoping of an ingenious, deceptive and controversial definition for a ‘pandemic’ that ensures there is no requirement for the pandemic-causing pathogenic agent to pose any serious risk to human health.

So we get held to ransom not by a bug, but by humans, who it seems have been planning our future for quite a number of years.

So what can we do? We can try to share our concerns. Trouble is, more often than not, we get censored or marginalised. We can protest. But let’s be aware that protests can give the authorities exactly the reason they need to clamp down on us to neutralise what the World Economic Forum calls “profound social instability”. 

What about the courts? Well, if we can raise the readies, we can go to the courts and try to test the constitution, and determine if the Davos deity have genuinely overreached themselves legally. But have the globalisers, or the groupthink with which they've become associated, infiltrated the courts? Frankly we don’t know, and we’ll be in a better position to judge when we see how the many rulings for those cases already initiated end up panning out.

It turns out many are holding hope for some redress via the courts. Here we give you taster for some of the cases in train.  

British Bulldogs

Simon Dolan Lockdown challenge. This has been the most well publicised case in the UK initiated by British entrepreneur Simon Dolan. The crowdfunded case argues that lockdown contravenes a number of basic human rights under English law. It was kicked out by government lawyers in July but has successfully gone to appeal last week and the verdict awaits.

The Good Law Project cases. The Good Law Project is the brainchild of leading Queen’s Council, Jo Maugham QC. It’s been running for a few years and has taken many actions including challenging the Electoral Commission over funding transparency of the DUP during the Brexit campaign. It’s now turned its attention to matters covid. Cases include challenging the claimed “world-beating”, now failing and backtracking, £100 billion Operation Moonshot of Boris Johnson. The anti-cronyism case seeks to make transparent government deals and contracts and their scientific and contractual bases. 



Another case by the Good Law Project goes under the catchy heading of ‘Money for Dominic Cummings’ mates’. It challenges a direct award (yes, no advertising or formal tendering) to polling company Public First owned by good friends of Dominic Cummings, Boris Johnson and Michael Gove for a cool £840,000 of taxpayers money. They’ve another case challenging the government over its messy handling of PPE for NHS staff and care workers, as well as apparently shady procurement or distribution deals over PPE including one worth millions with a two-bit company called Crisp Websites Limited, trading as PestFix, with assets of less than £20,000.         

                                                                                                                                                           

>>> View extensive evidence of covid cronyism by the Johnson government, compiled by The Canary       

Rational Global class action. This initiative is urging people to come together in the three distinct jurisdictions of England & Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland, to serve notices (letters) of non-compliance on authorities that attempt to close businesses, using common law as the legal basis. 

John's campaign - Government guidance has failed care home residents and their families. Around the UK families have been separated from their loved ones be they in care homes, hospitals, mental health units and prisons due to the fear of infection by the coronavirus. Court proceedings have now been issued against the government to challenge the blanket bans on visits to those in care homes that has had and continues to have a devastating impact on both their mental and physical health.                      

The Night Time Industries Association has joined forces with industry leaders in the North of England to challenge the Government’s lockdown restrictions on the night-time economy and hospitality sector. The move came after the imposition of a 10pm curfew and predates the lockdown initiated on the 4th November across England. The campaign calls the restrictions “hugely disproportionate and unjust” with neither scientific rationale to back up the measures, nor correlation to Public Health England (PHE) transmission rates. In Scotland a coalition of five hospitality industry bodies, The Scottish Beer & Pub Association, The Scottish Licensed Trade Association, UKHospitality (Scotland), the Scottish Hospitality Group and the Night Time Industries Association Scotland, sent a pre-action letter to the Scottish Government over the restrictions on the hospitality industry. The Scottish Government has now responded to the letter and the coalition are deciding on their next moves.

The Free Speech Union is a mass-membership public interest body that stands up for the speech rights of its members and it argues (rightly, we say) that free speech is in greater peril than at any time since the Second World War. On 20th October the Free Speech Union’s case challenging the ‘coronavirus guidance’ issued by the UK’s communication regulator, Ofcom was rejected in the High Court. The Free Speech Union is now seeking an oral permissions hearing to go before a judge.   

 

 

The People’s Brexit describe themselves as “a group of solicitors, legal researchers and campaigners that have been extensively researching the current legal situation since 'lockdown' removed democracy, human rights and freedoms.

The group has apparently now established that The Coronavirus Act 2020 is null and void. There are many reasons for this, the main one being that Section 1(1) of the Act defines 'coronavirus' as being 'covid-19' or 'SARS Cov-2'. However, they argue, “by virtue of the fact that it is not legally, medically or scientifically recognised as a disease or virus it cannot be legislated against, and this makes the whole Act null and void.”

Save Us Now case. Kate Shemirani & Mark Steele have initiated an action that challenges the right to peaceful protest and the validity of the coronavirus regulations in the courts, as well as the legality and the necessity of planned mass covid-19 vaccination of the public.

Common law to the rescue! Common law actions against the UK Government and Parliamentarians are gathering pace. One of the leading initiatives is headed by Michael O'Bernicia (aka, The Bernician), who describes himself as a "Critically Acclaimed Comedian, Playwright & Filmmaker, a Blacklisted 'Potential Subversive' Revisionist Historian, a Recalcitrant Philosopher Bankster-Busting Nemesis of the Rigged System." This latter tag is well deserved given Michael's ground-breaking, common law-based work on exposing mortgage fraud (see film The Great British Mortgage Swindle). Now he's focused on the tyranny and non-democratic process that has unfolded courtesy of, what he refers to, as Covid-1984. In late September he served every Member of Parliament with a notice of intended private criminal prosecution that would be followed up if they continued to support the Coronavirus Act 2020. The pressure is being maintained on the majority of MPs who didn't opposed the Act. Now the Government and Cabinate have been served notice, the unfolding story described in The Bernician's latest Facebook post below.

To add to the Government's headache, former co-leader of the Green Party, Caroline Lucas, is reportedly also taking legal action against the Government, although her view on the need for lockdown is almost diametrically opposed to those initiating the other actions.    

German lawyers expose ‘Coronavirus Fraud Scandal’

A group of 5 lawyers, led by Dr Reiner Fuellmich a citizen protection trial lawyer licensed in both Germany and California who has previously taken on the might of the banks, shipping companies and the VW car company, have established Corona Schadensersatzklage that is defending the rights of businesses destroyed by covid policies in Germany. They are also working on finding solutions for businesses impacted in other German-speaking countries, Switzerland and Austria.

The lawyers have forged links with other lawyers in the USA, Canada, Austria, UK, Jordan, Portugal, Poland and Brazil with a view to taking similar actions and filing for “crimes against humanity”. They argue that governments have breached principles established during the Nuremberg trials on the basis that lives and livelihoods have been ravaged through lockdowns justified by a deliberate exaggeration of the true nature of the risk posed by SARS-CoV-2, while certain parties, with the support of the WHO, are profiteering massively.

Check out below Dr Fuellmich’s 49-minute video launching his team’s legal initiatives on the ‘Coronavirus Fraud Scandal’ that had over 1.5 million views before being censored by YouTube – but is available on Bitchute.

 

You may also want to see Dr Fuellmich’s recent ‘Money Talks’ video (5 minutes) released on 15 October.

American rights

Such is the desire of the American to defend rights set down in the US Constitution by the Founding Fathers, Americans have taken to the courts in large numbers in order to protect civil liberties stripped of them courtesy of state governments and federal agencies.

A list of 997 cases (at the time of writing) has been consolidated on Ballotpedia.

Also check out what political activist Candace Owen has to say about her legal action against Facebook's fact-checkers. More at her website www.factcheckzuck.com.

Source: wwwfactcheckzuck.com

Other countries

It doesn’t stop there. There are more cases kicking off in different parts of the world. Here’s just a sprinkling that have come to our attention:

  • Australia– under the direction of lawyer Serene Teffaha, Advocate Me is seeking to challenge the Victorian government’s disproportionate response the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.
  • Canada – Action4Canada is a not for profit grassroots organisation mounting a constitutional challenge to defend Canadians Charter rights and freedoms in response to the extreme and destructive emergency measures instituted by the Canadian government to control the spread of the coronavirus.
  • Israel – a group of journalists and scientists have instructed a legal team to submit a freedom of information request requesting the Israeli Health Ministry provide information on various issues related to the pandemic due the Ministry’s repeated failure to provide information requested.
  • Italy – the Covid-19 Class Action is a class action lawsuit being built to obtain compensation for those who have suffered damage due to the reactions and restrictions to the pandemic that allowed the spread of the coronavirus by the Italian government.

When the gavel goes down

It’s anyone’s bet what will eventuate after this surge of legal cases works its way through the courts and out the other side, no doubt with many following on its heels. But it’s one of those situations when a loss can still be a win – if it draws attention to government actions that are ultra vires or outside of the rule of law.  

There are still a very large number of people who have yet to wake up. Who have not accepted that many governments in democratic countries are overreaching their authority as executors of the people’s will. They have yet to hear of the Great Reset, or if they have, they think it’s a conspiracy theory. The majority don’t know that the people who invented the Great Reset view Covid-19 as a “once-in-a lifetime opportunity” to force the biggest change to societal function seen since the Industrial Revolution of the 1800s. It’s not that change is bad. Nor is it that the greening of industry and the breaking down of gender and other inequalities is bad. Quite the reverse.

What’s bad is the removal of a rash of human rights, some of which have been with us since medieval times – as in the Magna Carta – are being stripped from us so the top-down, undemocratic, our-way-or-the-highway approach is enforced coercively. The highway could mean you’re just pushed out to the margins of society, it could mean you’re thrown in jail, although it’s becoming more apparent that one of the the most likely tools of coercion will be the withdrawal of personal privileges, such as the use of shared tech platforms, travel and maybe even the education of your children.

NOW is the time for action

Please don’t not take this seriously. It isn’t a conspiracy theory, it’s a conspiracy reality. Don’t forget the words of the top man in the UN, Secretary General António Guterres: this is just the “dress rehearsal”.

Here at ANH-Intl, we are preparing to bring another legal action with a leading team of lawyers that tackles issues that have yet to be targeted by the existing clutch of well developed cases. We’ll keep you posted. The time for action is now.

And one more request: please share this article widely through your networks – thank you.  

 

 

>>> Back to ANH-Intl Covid Adapt Don’t Fight campaign