Den Haag – home

Holocaust Tweet Case

Holocaust Tweet Case

Re: the Legality of comparing the treatment of people due to the Covid measures to those in the Holocaust

Back to All Cases

Facts of the Case

Dates: Dec 15, 2021
Location: Netherlands
Court: Rechtbank Amsterdam
Case #: C/13/710651 / KG ZA 21-989
Plaintiff: CIDI & Jewish Groups

Defendant: Thierry Baudet
Trial Type: Geding
Judge: Unknown
Status: Decided
Verdict: For the Plaintiff

*updated: Jan 22 2022

Background

Baudet, a member of the Dutch House of Representatives and leader of Forum for Democracy (FVD), was sued for the tweets by 4 Holocaust survivors and two Jewish organizations (Centrum Informatie en Documentatie Israël (CIDI) en het Centraal Joods Overleg). The lawsuit described the tweets as “seriously insulting and unnecessarily hurtful to the murdered victims of the Holocaust, survivors and relatives.” [1]

CIDI released a statement at the time of the lawsuit’s filing, saying that “with these comments, Baudet puts the horrors of the Shoah on the same level as the measures against the coronavirus. He is minimizing the importance of the Holocaust.” [1]

One of Baudet’s tweets compared being unvaccinated to being a Jewish person during the Holocaust. “The unvaccinated are the new Jews, those looking away are the new Nazis,” Baudet tweeted in November. [1]

In an interview with Ilana Rachel Daniel on CHD-TV’s online show ‘The Jerusalem Report’, (see below) the Jewish Israeli host agreed with his comparison and noted that many Israelis have made the same comparisons, including holocaust survivors.

Holocaust Survivors also filed a suit with the International Criminal Court in the Hague making this same analogy. They write:

“If 80 years ago it was the Jews who were demonized as causing infectious diseases, today it is the unvaccinated who are accused of spreading the virus,” they write. The Holocaust survivors concluded their letter as follows: (2)

Significance

This case challenges the free speech of a politician to make comparisons to the Holocaust.

Plaintiff’s Argument

…More information is needed…

Defendant’s Argument

…More information is needed…

Relevant Prior Judgements/ Cases

…More information is needed…

Decision

The judge ruled that lawmaker Thierry Baudet needs to delete four tweets he made comparing coronavirus measures and the Holocaust. [1]

“The right to freedom of expression for a representative of the people is not unlimited,” said the judge during the ruling. For each day that the tweets remain online, an additional €25,000 will be imposed on Baudet as a fine. [1]
“By equating in the messages, without any nuance, the situation of unvaccinated citizens with the fate of the Jews in the 1930s and ’40s, you make a comparison, as I said earlier, that is factually wrong and you wrongly use, in other words, you instrumentalize, the human suffering of Jews in the Holocaust and the memories of them,” said the judge during the trial. [1]

Baudet has 48 hours to remove the tweets before the fines begin accumulating. [1]

“The comparison you made in the contested posts goes beyond what can be justified in the interests of robust public debate,” the judge hearing the case said. The judge’s name was not immediately available. [1]

Aftermath

In a reaction on Twitter, Baudet called the judgment “Insane, incomprehensible.” [1]

“We are angry and combative. And of course we will appeal,” he tweeted. [1]

The Jewish groups that started the civil case against Baudet welcomed the ruling, saying in a statement that it “made an important contribution to indicating the limits of the public debate.” [1]

Further Research

Court Documents:

Read the Court Ruling (in Dutch)

In the news:

Thierry Baudet verliest kort geding en moet Holocaustuitspraken verwijderen van sociale media

Media

Holocaust Survivor Compares today to then

source: Ron Paul Liberty Report

Holocaust Survivor: This is Worse!

source: ….

Vera Sharav Interview

source:Virus Waarheid

Baudet & Plantiffs Reacts to Ruling (Dutch)

source: Omroep PowNed

Baudet on Court Case (12:50-23:33) -English

source: CHD-Jerusalem Report Ep 10

Baudet Banned Speech (Dutch )

source: notanotherbrick

References

Keyword

Censorship, CHD, coronamaatregelen, Crimes against Humanity, Den Haag, Dutch, Forum for Democracy, FvD, Holocaust, ICC, Ilana Rachel Daniel, International Criminal Court, Jerusalem, Moshe Brown and Hillel Handler, Netherlands, Nuremberg, Parliament, Politician, social media, The Hague, Thierry Baudet, Tweede Kamerlid, Twitter, UK government, Vera Sharav

Back to All Cases

icc uk humanity crimes case

ICC UK Crimes Against Humanity Case

Re: Request to investigate the UK government for Crimes Against Humanity following their covid emergency measures

Back to All Cases

Facts of the Case

Dates: April, 2021
Location: The Hague, the Netherlands
Court: International Criminal Court
Case #:
Plaintiff: Mayne & McCallum

Defendant: UK Government
Trial Type:
Judge:
Status: Ongoing
Verdict: TBD

Background

British lawyers Melinda C. Mayne and Kaira S. McCallum submitted a 27-page “request for investigation” to the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague back in April 2021. In it, they accused the British government and its advisors of involvement in crimes against humanity in the wake of the Covid 19 pandemic (Corona-Transition reported). (1)

In an Aug. 17 press release, the lawyers acknowledged receiving affidavits from leading experts. They included from researcher and nuclear cardiologist Dr. Richard M. Fleming, Nobel laureate and professor of virology Luc A. Montagnier, and Dr. Kevin W. McCairn, a neuroscientist and expert on neurological diseases. Mayne and McCallum were joined most recently by other lawyers who have also filed requests for an investigation at the International Criminal Court on behalf of France, the Czech Republic, and Slovakia. (1)

the lawyers have recently been supported by Holocaust survivors Vera Sharav, Moshe Brown and Hillel Handler. They also addressed the International Criminal Court in an open letter at the end of September, which GlobalResearch recently pointed out.(1)

“We, the undersigned, as survivors of atrocities against humanity during World War II, feel obligated to follow our conscience and write this letter in support of the joint ‘Requests for Inquiry’ to the International Criminal Court,” Sharav, Brown and Handler wrote, referring to the requests by Mayne and McCallum and other lawyers. (1)

In the letter, the Holocaust survivors recall Principle 1 of the Nuremberg Code, which was established after World War II. One of the reasons for this is that the Nazis had carried out medical experiments such as forced sterilizations on human beings. Precisely against this background, the Code stipulates, among other things, that “voluntary consent” must be given for medical experiments. (1)

“If 80 years ago it was the Jews who were demonized as causing infectious diseases, today it is the unvaccinated who are accused of spreading the virus,” they write. The Holocaust survivors concluded their letter as follows: (1)

“We, the survivors of the concentration camps, witnessed numerous atrocities committed during World War II and were told that it would never happen again, but yet it is happening again. What a devastating realization: how many elderly people were forced by fear to be vaccinated and did not survive? How many survived the Holocaust but not the COVID-19 injection? How many survived the medical experiments in Auschwitz and Birkenau, but not this present medical experiment? (1)

Significance

This request seeks to hold the UK government accountable for Crimes against Humanity caused by their emergency measures

Plaintiff’s Argument

…More information is needed…

Defendant’s Argument

…More information is needed…

Decision

…More information is needed…

Aftermath

…More information is needed…

Further Research

Court Documents:

Read the open Letter from Holocaust survivors Vera Sharav, Moshe Brown and Hillel Handler here

In the news:

…More information is needed…

Media

….

source: ….

….

source: ….

….

source: ….

Back to All Cases

ICC UK Nuremberg Case

ICC: UK Nuremberg Case

Re: the request to investigate the extreme actions taken by the UK government (& allies) to allegedly stop a deadly virus as Crimes Against Humanity

Back to All Cases

Facts of the Case

Filed: Dec 6, 2021
Location: The Hague, The Netherlands
Court: International Criminal Court
Case #:
Plaintiff: Rose, Yeadon, Corbyn, Sexton, O’Looney, McStay, Shotbolt

Defendant: UK Government, et al
Trial Type: Request for Trial & Investigation
Judge: TBD
Status: Ongoing
Verdict: TBD

*updated: Feb 24, 2022

Background

A complaint has been filed with the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court on December 6th, 2021 by a team from the UK on behalf of the people alleging crimes committed by UK government officials and international world leaders of various violations of the Nuremberg Code, crimes against humanity, war crimes and crimes of aggression perpetrated against the peoples of the UK. (1)

Acknowledgment was received on the 6th of December 2021, some of those named in the ICC complaint are also named responsible in (in a separate case) the criminal complaint lodged at the (UK) Metropolitan Police. (3)

The applicants state that they have tried to raise their case through the local English police and the English Court system without success. The team is represented by lawyer, Hannah Rose, with co-applicants including: (1)

Dr. Mike Yeadon, who is a former vice-President and Chief Scientist of allergy and respiratory research at Pfizer in respiratory pharmacology,
Piers Corbyn – Weather Forecaster, Physicist, Businessman
Mark Sexton – Retired Constable
John O’Looney – Funeral Director,
Johnny McStay – Activist and
Louise Shotbolt – Nurse and human rights activist (1)

“The seriousness and extent of the crimes committed in the United Kingdom, highlighted by the scope of people that these crimes affect, that these crimes continue to be committed, the wide range of perpetrators, the recurring patterns of criminality and the limited prospects for accountability at the national level, all weigh heavily in favour of an investigation” . (1)

The complaint focuses on: (2)

Violations of the Nuremberg Code
Violation of Article 6 of the Rome Statute
Violation of Article 7 of the Rome Statute
Violation of Article 8 of the Rome
Violation of Article 8 bis3 of the Rome Statute

The Complaint charges the following people: (2)

Based on the extensive claims and enclosed documentation, we charge those responsible for numerous violations of the Nuremberg Code, crimes against humanity, war crimes and crimes of aggression in the United Kingdom, but not limited to individuals in these countries. Perpetrators:

Prime Minister for the United Kingdom BORIS JOHNSON,
Chief Medical Officer for England and Chief Medical Adviser to the UK Government CHRISTOPHER WHITTY,
(former) Secretary of State for Health and Social Care MATTHEW HANCOCK,
(current) Secretary of State for Health and Social Care SAJID JAVID,
Chief Executive of Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) JUNE RAINE,
Director-General of the World Health Organisation TEDROS ADANHOM GHEBREYESUS,
Co-chair of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation WILLIAM GATES III and Co-chair of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation MELINDA GATES,
Chairman and Chief executive officer of Pfizer ALBERT BOURLA,
Chief Executive Officer of AstraZeneca STEPHANE BANCEL,
Chief Executive Officer of Moderna PASCAL SORIOT,
Chief Executive of Johnson and Johnson ALEX GORSKY,
President of the Rockefeller Foundation DR RAJIVSHAH,
Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease (NIAID) DR ANTHONY FAUCI,
Founder and Executive Chairman of the World Economic Forum KLAUS SCHWAB,
President of EcoHealth Alliance DR PETER DASZACK

John O’Looney, a joint applicant on this request is a funeral director running his own funeral home in Milton Keynes. As a funeral director, Mr. O’Looney testified that he saw a massive effort made to deliberately inflate Covid death numbers. Cancer patients and stroke victims and even one guy that was run over all ended up with Covid on their death certificate’.(1)

The applicants state that “It is our intention to present to you and detail how, in the United Kingdom this year, the Government of the United Kingdom, with its Ministers and senior officials have violated the Nuremberg Code not only in a single aspect but in many aspects”. (1)

What is the International Criminal Court?

The International Criminal Court (ICC) is an intergovernmental organization and international tribunal based in The Hague, Netherlands. The ICC’s activities are governed by an international treaty, the Rome Statute, which has been ratified by more than 120 countries, including the US. [4]

The ICC is a permanent, independent court that investigates crimes that concern the international community, such as charges of genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity and crimes of aggression. In theory, member states are supposed to cooperate with the court, but this is not always the case. [4]

If warranted, the court can prosecute and try individuals accused of this type of crime, but it will usually only do so if the member state fails to take appropriate legal action against the perpetrator, which can happen if a government tries to deprive the person in question. to protect against criminal responsibility. As noted in the complaint: [4]

“We have tried to raise this matter through the local English police and the English legal system, but without success; after several attempts we even failed to register the case with the police or with the court.
The ICC Statute states: “The ICC is intended to complement, not replace, national criminal justice systems; it only prosecutes cases where a state is unwilling or unable to actually initiate an investigation or prosecution (Article 17(1)(a)).
This is one such case and that is why we are addressing the ICC directly.”

However, the ICC relies on the national law enforcement agencies of the states to arrest individuals, so a member state can still limit the ICC’s ability to bring a criminal to justice. The ICC does not have its own police force to carry out arrest warrants or arrests. In this case, the suspects are scattered across different countries. According to the ICC complaint, the 16 suspects have violated the Nuremberg Code and four articles of the Rome Statute. [4]

Significance

This case is important as it charges the UK government with multiple counts of Crimes Against Humanity, resulting from their handling of the alleged covid epidemic.

Plaintiff’s Argument

The official complaint challenges every aspect of the Covid measures, including (2)

The efficacy of PCR tests & Masks,
Inflated Covid figures
The Rebranding of Flu, Pneumonia, and Respiratory Infections.
The Inclusion of Graphene Hydroxide
Other Areas and Parallels to 1930s Germany
The safety & efficacy of the vaccines
Violation of informed consent
Suppression alternative treatments
Censorship
Violation of the Nuremberg Code & genocide & torture
Apartheid & the Vaccine Passports
& more

Through providing an over ten-thousand-word document, the team has gathered extensive evidence that are areas of concern have occurred under the guise of measures or interventions for the prevention of a “virus.” (1)

Inflated Covid figures

A particularly notable and important area addressed within this documented complaint, is the fact that the number of covid-19 cases has been artificially inflated due to the inaccuracy and unreliability of the PCR testing. Arguably, without these inflated figures, there would have been no need for the other measures and interventions that are now be classed as crimes against humanity. (1)

The team highlight the fact that a covid death is recorded if an individual died for any reason within 28 days of a positive Covid-19 test (that was confirmed with the inaccurate and unreliable PRC tests). (1)

“These deaths are being recorded as Covid-19 regardless of whether Covid-19 was the factual cause of death” (1)

Rebranding of Flu, Pneumonia, and Respiratory Infections

Additionally, another way the Covid-19 statistics have been artificially inflated is by the ‘rebranding’ of the common influenza, pneumonia, and other respiratory infections as covid -19. The applicants cited data from the ONS which showed that deaths in 2018 from influenza and pneumonia amounted to 29,516 and in 2019, 26,398. (1)

However, deaths in 2020 for influenza were recorded at just 394 and pneumonia at 13,619. (1)

Violation of The Nuremberg Code

The Nuremberg Code is a set of ethical principles for medical research that emerged from the “Doctors Trial” in Nuremberg after World War II. The Nuremberg war crimes tribunal established 10 standards that physicians must adhere to when conducting experiments on human subjects. [4]

Chief among these codes of ethics is the need for informed consent to participate in medical experiments. The Nuremberg Code has also been the basis for other guidelines and laws in the field of medical ethics, including the 1965 Declaration of Helsinki, which obliges practicing physicians “to act in the best interests of the patient when providing medical care.” [4]

Although not a binding law, the complaint alleges that the Nuremberg Code qualifies as a source of international law under Article 21(1)(b) of the Rome Statute, which incorporates international law, international treaties, customary international law and principles of law recognized by civilized nations are recognized as equivalent. [4]

see more here: Pfizer Trovan Case

War Crimes, Genocide & Crimes against Humanity

War crimes fall under Article 8 of the Rome Statute. [4]
We submit to you that a covert war has been waged against the people of the United Kingdom (and the world) through the release of the biological weapon SARS-Cov-2 and the additional bioweapon, m-RNA gene therapy ‘vaccines’. We submit that the people of the United Kingdom (and the world) are under systemic attack from those who released the before mentioned biological weapons and by those individuals within the UK Government and international leaders against which we have brought this request, who seek to serve the same agenda. We therefore submit that the contextual element of a war crime has been met and the alleged crimes took place in the context of an international and non-international armed conflict [2]

Pursuant to the Rome Statute’s Article 6, – “genocide” means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial, or religious group, as such: [2]
(a) Killing members of these groups: the group in this case is in principle “the entire population of the United Kingdom” (and the world) starting with the elderly, chronically ill and disabled.
(b) Causing serious bodily harm or mental harm to members of the group
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life, calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part
(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group:
Article 7 of the Rome Statute covers crimes against humanity, including: [4]
Murder
Extermination
Imprisonment or serious deprivation of physical liberty in violation of the fundamental rules of international law
Torture
Forced sterilizations
Persecution of an identifiable group
Apartheid and other inhumane acts
The specific charges are further explained in the complaint and substantiated with data.

The document concludes with a strong request: (2)

“WE WANT TO REPEAT: It is of the utmost urgency that ICC take immediate action, taking all of this into account, to stop the rollout of covid vaccinations, introduction of unlawful vaccination passports and all other types of illegal warfare mentioned herein currently being waged against the people of the United Kingdom by way of an IMMEDIATE court injunction”.