Prof Bhakdi Defamation Case

Prof Bhakdi Defamation Case

Prof Bhakdi Defamation Case

Re: the Legality of Comparing the Global Covid Injection Disaster with the Holocaust


Back to All Cases

Facts of the Case

  • Dates: May 23, 2023
  • Location: Plön, Germany
  • Court: District Court
  • Case #: OJs9/21
  • Plaintiff: The German State
  • Defendant’s Lawyer: Prof. Martin Schwab et al.
  • Defendant: Prof. Sucharit Bhakdi
  • Trial Type: Criminal Complaint
  • Justice: Dr Malte Grundmann
  • Status: Decided
  • Verdict: for the Defendant

*updated June 05, 2023



Prof. Sucharit Bhakdi has been charged by the lower court in Plön, Germany, with the following:

  1. having incited hatred against a religious group and attacked the human dignity of others by insulting and maliciously disparaging that religious group, while acting in concert in a manner likely to disturb the public peace; and

  2. having publicly trivialized an act committed under the rule of National Socialism of the kind described in Section 6 (1) of the International Criminal Code in a manner likely to disturb public peace.

The two charges stem from statements made during two separate occasions, the first on an unknown date in April 2021 and the second on September 24, 2021.  (1)(3)

The charges partly result from separate complaints filed by 4 individuals:

July 14, 2021: Dr. Elio Adler,chairman of the civil society association Die Wertinitiative e.V, files a criminal complaint for incitement of the masses against Prof. Bhakdi via the online portal of the Berlin Police at 11:13 a.m. Mr. Adler cites the interview titled “Vaccination! Hell on earth! Professor Bhakdi,” published via Kai Stuht’s website claiming that it contains anti-semitic content. It is mentioned in the police documents that the interview is no longer available at the website. However, Dr. Adler indicates that a summarized version of the interview is available on Twitter: … [account suspended as of May 2023] (1)


July 14, 2021: Mr. Klaus Baumann files a criminal complaint against Prof. Bhakdi via the online portal of the State Criminal Police Office Lower Saxony at 4:45 p.m. Mr. Baumann references a Twitter post which contains a video excerpt of Prof. Bhakdi from an interview titled, “Vaccination! Hell on earth! Professor Bhakdi.” An acknowledgement of receipt of the report states that the State Criminal Police Office Lower Saxony have been assigned to process the complaint. The text of the complaint is as follows: (1)

Prof. Bhakdi gave an interview to KenFM *editor’s note: this is incorrect – the interview was given to Kai Stuht* excerpts of which are available as a video in the following tweet: [account suspended as of May 2023]. He speaks there about Israel and the Jews. Claiming, “The people who fled, from this land (Germany)—from this land where arch evil was and have found their land; have turned their own land into Something worse than Germany was.” he described the vaccinations in Israel as worse than the Holocaust, thereby trivializing the Holocaust, which is a punishable incitement of the masses. His sentences thereafter also underline this context, where he blathers about “they have now learned evil and implemented it” and “Israel as a living hell.”


July 14, 2021: Mr. Sigmount Königsberg*, Commissioner Against Antisemitism of the Jewish Community Berlin, files a criminal complaint against Prof. Bhakdi to the Commissioner against Anti-Semitism at the Office of the State General Prosecutor. The complaint is filed via an email addressed to Mr. Hartmann Hild at 10:46 am. The text of the complaint is as follows:*

I hereby file a criminal complaint and criminal charges against Prof. Dr. med. Sucharit Bhakdi—Adress unknown; the association he is president of, Physicians and Scientists for Health, Freedom and Democracy“ [Mediziner und Wissenschaftler fur Gesundheit, Freiheit und Demokratie e.V] lists the following address [as its own] in the imprint: c/o Wittgasse 9, 94032 Passau—for incitement of the masses as can be seen in this twitter video segment: [account suspended as of May 2023] that is part of this video and video


By November 1, 2021: Kiel regional court prosecutor’s office issues an internal memo stating the decision to close the proceedings for lack of merit. (1)

By November 12, 2021 the Keil State Court Prosecutor had informed all three complainants that the proceedings have been closed on the grounds of insufficient suspicion. (1)

Following objections to the dismissal by Dr. Elio Adler *and *Mr. Sigmount Königsberg and on November 24, 2021, The Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office of the province of Schleswig-Holstein notifies Dr. Elio Adler of its decision to reopen the investigation of the Kiel public prosecutor’s office and that it has taken over the case against Prof. Bhakdi pursuant to § 145 section 1 of the German Judicature Act (GVG [Gerichtsverfassungsgesetz]). (1)


November 29, 2021*: The Office of the Attorney General issues a press release which “states that the Office of the Attorney General requested the files from the Kiel Public Prosecutor’s Office on November 19, 2021, based on a complaint from a complainant. Additionally, the press release states the Attorney General then decided to take over the proceedings in view of the importance of consistently prosecuting anti-Semitic crimes.”*


On January 3, 2022 a fourth individual … Mr. Sebastian Willing files a complaint via email to the prosecutor’s office at the Kiel Regional Court at 8:14 p.m. Mr. Willing alleges that Prof. Bhakdi committed the crime of belittling/trivializing the Holocaust by comparing the COVID-19 vaccination campaign to the Holocaust during a speech at a campaign event in Kiel on September 24, 2021 and urges them to investigate. Mr. Willing cites a twitter post containing a video excerpt of the speech. The text of the complaint is as follows: (1)

Dear Sir or Madam,

According to § 160 I of the Code of Criminal Procedure, please take note with this email that Mr Sucharit Bhakdi has very probably committed a punishable offence against § 130 Ill of the Criminal Code.

Mr Bhakdi publicly commented on the Holocaust as follows:

“With the approval of the vaccines the first milestone of the agenda has been achieved and the race is on to achieve the ultimate goal. This ultimate goal is the creation of the new reality and involves nothing other than the second Holocaust.”

By putting the vaccination—which is demonstrably harmless—against the Corona virus on par with the Holocaust, he is belittling the genocide of the National Socialists in the 3rd Reich and thus fulfilling the constituent elements of § 130 III StGB [StGB = Criminal Code].

The original statement can be found in this tweet:

and in the attachment to this email. Since you have now become aware of the offence that has been committed, I ask you to commence an investigation.

I myself am not further connected with the matter and only want Mr. Bhakdi to be held accountable for his statement. Therefore, I request you to take this information as a cause for investigation, but not include my name in the file.(1)


May 1, 2022: 

the Kiel Public Prosecutor and new Commissioner for Combating Antisemitism in the state of Schleswig-Holstein, Silke Füssinger, issued an indictment [ Case no. OJs 9/21 ] against the defendant, Prof. Sucharit Bhakdi, charging him with two counts. (1, 6)

  1. having incited hatred against a religious group and attacked the human dignity of others by insulting and maliciously disparaging that religious group, while acting in concert in a manner likely to disturb the public peace; and

  2. having publicly trivialized an act committed under the rule of National Socialism of the kind described in Section 6 (1) of the International Criminal Code in a manner likely to disturb public peace. (6)

(Note: translated from German to English)

The two charges refer to public statements made by Prof. Bhakdi, in which he compared the COVID-19 vaccination program to 1940s Germany. Prof. Bhakdi has opposed this vaccination program from the very beginning. (6)

In an open letter to the European Medicines Agency (EMA), which was co-signed by more than 100 other doctors and scientists, Prof. Bhakdi demanded that the Agency revoke its approval of the gene-based vaccines. He consistently warned the public of its dangers. (6)

His prediction that the vaccines would induce autoimmune-like inflammation and vascular damage throughout the body, leading to severe injury and death, has since been substantiated by the work of pathologists such as Prof. Arne Burkhardt and Dr. Michael Mörz.(6)

While Prof. Bhakdi’s advice had been sought out by high-ranking government officials in previous years, his criticism of the COVID-19 vaccines proved unpopular with the authorities and the mainstream media. The two charges brought against Prof. Bhakdi should be understood in this context. They stem from statements made on two separate occasions.(6)

The first charge of “incitement” relates to statements made during an interview titled “Die Impfung! Die Hölle auf Erden! Professor Bhakdi,” which in English means “Vaccination! Hell on Earth! Prof. Bhakdi.” The interview was filmed on an unknown date in April 2021 and released in excerpts the following month and then released in full in early July 2021. During the interview, Prof. Bhakdi can be heard saying the following: (6)

“… what hit you guys. Faster than lightning. And if you are so indolent and you don’t rise up and say ‘no, you are not doing this with us,’ then you are done for. And then you wouldn’t have the possibility to flee. Israel, the Israelis can no longer flee. The country is closed. That’s what will happen here. And I was once asked by an American what I have to say about Israel, I said, for me the Israelis, this people that I admired more than any other people in the world, I was an admirer of Jews, yes, you know I’m a music lover, art lover. The greatest spirits were the Jews. I’m sorry to tell you this, yes. I’m sorry, I’m a Buddhist … Yes, I admired them. I am, you have seen my record collection, I went after these Jewish musicians to get a signature from them. Isaacson, David Oistrach, yes, I travelled hundreds of kilometres to hear them and to get their autograph. I adored them. And now they’re doing this. They, the people who fled from this land, from this land where arch evil was, and have found their land. Have turned their own country into something even worse than Germany was. So unbelievable. And then I told the Americans, that’s the bad thing about the Jews. They learn well. There is no people who learns better than they do. But they have learned evil now. And implemented it. And that’s why Israel is now “living hell”. And I told the Americans, “and if you’re not careful, America will be living hell too, and I’m telling you now, your country will be turned into living hell if you don’t rise up soon.” (6)

The second charge of “trivialization of the Holocaust” relates to statements made during a speech at a campaign event in Kiel, Germany, on Sept. 24, 2021. During the speech, Prof. Bhakdi could be heard saying the following: (6)

“It is clear to all in the know that with the formal approval of the vaccines, the first milestone of the agenda has been reached and the race is on to achieve the ultimate goal. This final goal is the creation of the new reality and involves nothing less than the second holocaust. The abolition of humanity in its current manifestation.” (6)

According to the indictment, the maximum penalty, if found guilty, was two years in prison and/or a fine. (6)

In October 2022, a hearing was scheduled for March 24, 2023. However, due to a court error, the hearing was postponed to Tuesday May 23, 2023, at 9 am at the Amtsgericht Plön (Local Court). (6)

This is how Holocaust Survivor Irène Tokayer, who was born in 1927 in Germany, phrased the charge in a statement on behalf of Prof Bhakdi just a few days ahead of the trial.  (5)


May 23, 2023 Day of Trial

  • See running commentary on the proceedings of the one day trial leading to the acquittal of Prof. Bhakdi posted by an observer, data analyst Tom Lausen, whose brother, Sven Lausen was one of the three lawyers defending Bhakdi (2)
  • See also the comprehensive report from journalist, Taylor Hudak based on a transcript of the full court proceedings (6)



First high profile German show trial of a prominent anti-Covid measures retired Professor Emeritus of Microbiology.


Plaintiff’s Argument

The Senior Public Prosecutor Füssinger stated that Bhakdi had, together with media channel owner Kai Stuht, planned to incite the public with seditious language (2)

She argued that a breach of the public peace had occurred and that Bhakdi should be fined up to 180 daily sentences of 90 Euros each. (2)

Prosecutor at the county court in Kiel, Schleswig-Holstein’s capital. Silke Füssinger, who at the Chief Public Prosecutor’s office of Schleswig-Holstein had been in charge of “political crime” for a number of years already, was named Commissioner for Antisemitism for the Chief Public Prosecutor’s office, effective in December of 2021, just weeks after the charges against Professor Bhakdi were dropped. A press release dated November 29 stated that by then the Chief Public Prosecutor had decided to take over the proceedings “in view of the importance of consistently prosecuting anti-Semitic crimes.” (4)


Defendant’s Argument

The defense counsel representing Prof. Bhakdi consisted of lawyers Martin Schwab, Tobias Weissenborn and Sven Lausen. Lead lawyer Martin Schwab began his opening statement with Prof. Bhakdi’s biography, highlighting the defendant’s contributions to the fields of science and medicine. The defense then addressed the legal irregularities in the process and argued several reasons for the court to drop the case, including: (6)

1) The prosecution did not have the full video of the interview “Vaccination! Hell on Earth! Prof. Bhakdi” at the time in which the prosecutor issued the indictment on May 1, 2022. (6, 2)

2) The prosecution did not make a timely effort to obtain and review the full video of the interview “Vaccination! Hell on Earth! Prof. Bhakdi.” (6)

3) The indictment included sensitive information such as Prof. Bhakdi’s address, which could put him at risk. (6)

Defence Counsel Martin Schwab argued that :

“Bhakdi, had not incited, not even insulted anyone or harmed human dignity. He has explained what the shots are doing! This is not about anti-Semitism, it is about the fear of those who are responsible for the crimes committed during that false pandemic. They fear that Professor Bhakdi might be called as witness for the prosecution in the tribunal against them once all of this is over.” (4)

Furthermore, the defense argued that the entirety of Prof. Bhakdi’s statements were not considered by the prosecution. Instead, just a few selected sentences were examined and taken out of context. Defense lawyer Tobias Weissenborn stated that the prosecutor did not thoroughly investigate the case. (6)

Regarding Prof. Bhakdi’s campaign speech in Kiel, Germany, which was the subject of the second charge, defense lawyer Sven Lausen argued that because it was a political speech, the speaker must be allowed to use illustrative and metaphoric language. (6)

Lausen continued that Füssinger failed in her duties as a prosecutor. She had an obligation to collect and evaluate not only evidence that is incriminatory but also that which may be exculpatory, and she did not do so.(6)

The defense then addressed the six-page indictment, which Lausen argued is poorly crafted, based on ignorance and consists of assumptions rather than evidence. He remarked that the indictment lacks critical information. Furthermore, the indictment failed to mention that the letter cited by Prof. Bhakdi in the Kai Stuht interview, is a letter written by Holocaust survivors to the EMA.(6)

Regarding Prosecutor Füssinger’s assessment of the 90 minute long interview in which Prof. Bhakdi discussed immunology and the dangers of the mRNA vaccines, Lausen said he wondered if he and the prosecutor were sitting in the same courtroom when the interview was played.(6)


Relevant Prior Judgements/ Cases

…More information is needed…



On May 23, 2023

At 17:45 Justice Grundmann gave a not guilty verdict, clearing Prof Bhakdi of all charges.

The judge explained that Prof. Bhakdi was not liable for either charge and did not do what he was accused of. The judge referenced the importance of free speech and freedom of expression. He stated that Prof. Bhakdi advocated for peace and unity and expressed himself in a manner that allowed for open discussion. Prof. Bhakdi sought to create an atmosphere in which people can have open dialogue and embrace one another.(6)



Prosecutor’s Response

After the verdict was read and the hearing ended, the Chief Public Prosecutor [Silke Füssinger] issued a statement that the decision would be appealed. (4)

Following a verdict, a dissatisfied party may file an appeal. There are two kinds of appeals. The first one results in an entirely new court hearing, in which the discovery of evidence is repeated. This is called “Berufung” in German. The second option is to file for what is called “Revision.” In this case, the facts on which the judgment is based are not called into question; instead, it is only reexamined whether or not in the initial decision the law was properly applied. (6)

Two days after the hearing, on May 25, 2023, …. Prosecutor Füssinger filed an appeal with the Plön Local Court.  (6)

At this time, there is no written judgment in the case, and as long as there is no written judgment, the party who files an appeal may only decide which type of appeal to pursue once the written judgment is available to both the prosecution and the defense. (6)

In Prosecutor Füssinger’s letter of appeal, she acknowledges that the type of appeal she decides to pursue will be determined once the written judgement is issued. (6)



Holocaust Survivor Irène Tokayer Defends Bhakdi -May 1 2023

source: Rumble / Alschner.Klartext.

Hundreds Support Bhakdi at Trial -May 23 2023

source: YouTube

Bhakdi Speech in Kiel that Lead to the Trial -Sept 24 2021

source: YouTube

Prof Bhakdi receives Standing Ovation at Peace Talk -March 2023

source: YouTube

UK Column News Report on Upcoming Trial -May 15 2023

source: Odysee / longXXvids

Holocaust survivor Vera Sharav speech at Nuremberg 75 -Aug 20 2022

source: Odysee / Towards The Light

How the German Government Oversees the Courts -May 14 2023

source: Odysee / shortXXvids

Holocaust Survivor Compares today to then

source: Ron Paul Liberty Report

Holocaust Survivor: This is Worse! -Oct 3 2021

source: Odysee / Library of Alexandria



  1. Timeline: Prof. Sucharit Bhakdi Case
  2. Translation of Tom Lausen`s 1st Person Trial Observations
  3. Bhakdi Speech in Kiel -Sept 24 2021
  4. State prosecutor Füssinger will appeal the judgement
  5. English translation of statement of Holocaust survivor, Irène Tokayer on behalf of Prof Bhakdi
  6. Report from Taylor Hudak published May 30 2023



Anti-Semitic, Bhakdi, Doctors4CovidEthics, free speech, Genocide, Germany, Holocaust, Israel, Kiel, Kiel Public Prosecutor, Martin Schwab, Microbiology, Plön, professor, Schleswig-Holstein, Schwab, Sucharit, Tokayer, Vera Sharav, Wertinitiative 

Back to All Cases


Doctors Censure Case

Doctors Censure Case

Doctors Censure Case

Re: the Legality of a Group of Doctors & Scientists Warning Patients of Clear Dangers from Experimental injections


Back to All Cases

Facts of the Case

  • Dates: Jan 12, 2023
  • Location: Passau, Germany
  • Court: Regional Court
  • Case #: ?
  • Plaintiff: The Bavarian Medical Association
  • Plaintiff’s Lawyer:
  • Defendant: MWGDF (Dr. Ronald Weikl as chair)
  • Trial Type: appeal
  • Judge: ?
  • Status: Decided
  • Verdict: for the Defendant

*updated Feb 14, 2022



The group, Doctors and Scientists for Health, Freedom and Democracy (Mediziner und Wissenschaftler für Gesundheit, Freiheit und Demokratie or MWGFD), led by Dr. Ronald Weikl has been the subject of a complaint filed by the Bavarian Medical Association which had sought to prevent this group keeping a public warning about the dangers of Covid-19 vaccines on their website. Specifically [1]:

The association had published an information letter to doctors on its homepage, in which it had pointed out the ineffective and dangerous “vaccines” against Corona and, in particular, possible liability risks at the expense of vaccinating doctors. The Bavarian Medical Association therefore wanted to issue a warning to the MWGFD and demanded an injunction against the publication and distribution of the letter.

An appeal by the MWGDF was heard in a Passau court in Bavaria with the result that … [1]

… the warning against the ineffective and dangerous Corona “vaccines” was declared a permissible statement of fact and opinion. After Federal Health Minister Karl Lauterbach (SPD) had been allowed by a judge as recently as November to continue spreading his obviously and demonstrably false theoriesof a supposedly “side-effect-free vaccination” (which he has since stopped doing), this ruling seemed only logical on the one hand. On the other hand, there has unfortunately been more than one judge who was removed from office because of a “wrong” -i.e. not government-compliant -judgement.[1]



First Corona Case in Germany to uphold the Right of a Group of Medical Professionals to Free Speech


Plaintiff’s Argument

The plaintiff’s lawyer argued that:

the MWGFD was acting in a businesslike manner because the association was calling for donations via its homepage and was also accepting them. (1)


Defendant’s Argument

The defendant’s lawyer, Beate Bahner had pointed out in an information letter even prior to the appeal certain serious facts concerning the injections that the plaintiff did not want to accept: (1)

“We urge you to no longer close your eyes to these serious facts. Draw the necessary consequences now, do not wait until the medical and political authorities come to their senses.” Among these “grave facts”, the lawyer specifically includes the fact that the Covid-19 vaccines are all unnecessary, ineffective and dangerous, and that the vaccinating doctors can be held personally liable in case of vaccine damage. The letter went on to say, “Do not be complicit in the senseless prolongation of this irresponsible vaccination campaign that has already cost so many people their health and quite a few their lives.” These remarks were backed up by numerous references to relevant publications and studies proving the ineffectiveness and danger of these “vaccines”.

The main argument which has however settled the outcome of this case is a point in commercial business law where the judge clearly found the argument of the plaintiff invalid. This is well explained in a video which lawyer Bahner posted after the hearing. Her original video was immediately taken down by YouTube. Watch an english subtitled version of the video here. [4]


Relevant Prior Judgements/ Cases

…More information is needed…



The court’s decision (1 HK O 1/22) ruled in favour of the defendant [2]

… for formal legal reasons, the court had no choice but to dismiss as unfounded the complaint filed by the Bavarian Medical Association against the MWGFD (Mediziner und Wissenschaftler für Gesundheit, Freiheit und Demokratie) in the person of its deputy chairman, Dr Ronald Weikl. [1]

The action … was … dismissed by the Regional Court of Passau “because such information is already not a commercial act. And only commercial acts may be warned and prosecuted in court under competition law – in this case, claims under the Unfair Competition Act (UWG).” More importantly, however, the court also found that the letter was exclusively a statement of fact and opinion on “vaccinations”, which is why it falls within the realm of public communication and explicitly does not constitute a commercial act. [1]

The judge rejected the plaintiff’s argument on the basis that:

the Passau Regional Court did not consider the solicitation of donations to be a commercial act. And a possible service in the sense of competition law was also not recognisable for the judge, since the MWGFD did not advertise for vaccination – but explicitly against it – and did not derive any financial benefit from it. [1]



A video update concerning the court’s decision posted by the defendant’s lawyer, Beate Bahner on her video account with YouTube was quickly deleted. (2) (see it below in Media)

Lawyer Bahner has filed a complaint 31 Jan 2023 against YT in the Heidelberg Regional Court. (3)



Further Research

Court Documents:
In the news:



Lawyer Beate Bahner explains the Dr. Ronald Weikl verdict -Feb 9th 2023

source: Odysee / longXXvids

Dr Weikl’s Call to all judges, prosecutors and lay judges Dec 6, 2022

source: MW

MWGFD Lawyer Bahner warns of C19 injections Dangers -Nov 16 2022

source: Odysee / Wahrheit und Fakten aufgedeckt

Dr Weikl’s Daughter Describes Police Intimidation -May 2, 2022

source: Odysee / longXXvids



  1. Passau judge unblocks suppression of vax critical information
  2. Landesaerztekammer Bayern verliert klage gegen den arzt dr ronny weikl
  3. Telegram: rechtsanwaeltinbeatebahner/15634
  4. Lawyer Beate Bahner explains the Dr. Ronald Weikl verdict -Feb 9th 2023



Bahner, Bavarian Medical Association, Beate Bahner, Censorship, Censure, Covid-19 vaccines, Doctors, Dr Ronald Weikl, Freedom of Speech, Germany, Medical Ethics, MWGFD, Passau, Passau Court Ruling, Untested and Unsafe, Vaccine Injuries and Deaths 

Back to All Cases


Health Minister Complaint Case

Health Minister Complaint Case

Health Minister Complaint Case

Re: the Legality of a Health Minister knowingly distributing False Information about a new Pharmacological Product regarding its safety & efficacy


Back to All Cases

Facts of the Case

  • Dates: Jan 16, 2023
  • Location: Berlin, Germany
  • Court: State Prosecutor /Staatsanwaltschaft Berlin
  • Case #: TBD
  • Plaintiff: Wilfried Schmitz
  • Plaintiff’s Lawyer: Wilfried Schmitz
  • Defendant: Health Minister Karl Lauterbach & others in Federal Health Ministry
  • Trial Type: Criminal Complaint
  • Judge: TBD
  • Status: complaint submitted
  • Verdict: TBD

*updated Jan 31, 2023


This is a legal complaint [3] formulated and submitted by lawyer Wilfried Schmitz against:

Prof. Dr. Karl Lauterbach, Federal Minister of Health and all other employees of the Federal Ministry of Health who may still be involved in the crime. [3]

on suspicion of:

dangerous and grievous bodily harm (in office) resulting in death according to §§ 223, 224, 226, 227, 340 StGB,

manslaughter and murder according to §§ 212 and 211 StGB,

negligent bodily injury according to § 229 StGB,

involuntary manslaughter according to § 222 StGB,

all possible criminal offences according to §§ 95, 96 AMG,

all other possible criminal offences and forms of participation under the Criminal Code, the War Weapons Control Act, the International Criminal Code.

In essence, this complaint arose from action taken by German Dr. Weikl, vice chairman of Medical Workers and Scientists for Health, Freedom and Democracy (MWGFD), following his interest in a similar complaint against the Swiss president Alain Berset (1). He then began to analyse the legal situation in Germany to establish whether a similar action could conceivably be taken against Federal Health Minister Karl Lauterbach [2]:

The ball was set rolling by an interview by Dr. Ronald Weikl with the Swiss investment banker Pascal Najadi. The Vice of the Medical Workers and Scientists for Health, Freedom and Democracy (MWGFD) spoke with Najadi about his criminal charges against Federal Councillor Alain Berset, whose responsibilities in Bern include the Health Department. As a triple-vaccinated man, the banker feels he has been hoodwinked by Berset and his “false allegations on the Corona issue”.

The aspect of Swiss law used in the complaint against Alain Berset is not directly applicable in Germany: [2]

Unlike the Swiss Penal Code, the German equivalent does not know the offence of abuse of office in this form. A lawyer who was not named in the MWGFD press release therefore recommended to Dr. Weikl: “The only law that could be invoked is the Heilmittelwerbegesetz (HWG), which requires truthful information […] Or, in the interplay of the Infektionsschutzgesetz (IfSG) and the obligation to vaccinate (or the obligation to tolerate, as in the case of members of the armed forces, for example), possibly the offence of ‘coercion in office’ Paragraph 240….”.

The lawyer Wilfried Schmitz, however, saw in this statement: [2]

a “grossly false” and “extremely trivialising representation” and felt it was clearly “too lax”, which is why he addressed Dr. Weikl directly with an email in which he wrote: [2]

“…If a health minister deceives the entire public, in particular by deliberately misstating that Covid-19 injections are ‘free of side effects’, contrary to his legal duties, then the most serious criminal offences such as murder must also be examined here, in particular (i.e. not only) the murder characteristic of insidiousness. Furthermore, criminal offences under the AMG (Medicines Act): Finally, in this context, at least (!) the aiding and abetting of the serious criminal offences of third parties, which were supported or made possible by such public false allegations, would have to be examined. His statement that the Covid-19 injections were also ‘highly effective’ was – as has long been proven – of course also deliberately false. But with the lie of no side effects, it is even easier to prove. For your information, I am enclosing my criminal complaint against those responsible at the PEI, etc. I assume that your association will inform visitors to its homepage more accurately in future. For you should not give the impression of wanting to divert attention from the true criminal guilt of those primarily responsible for the administration of the Covid-19 injections. A half-truth that distracts from the whole truth is a whole lie!

Lawyer Wilfried Schmitz formulated & submitted the complaint against Lauterbach [3].



First Corona Case in Germany accusing a Health Minister of criminal intent to cause harm


Plaintiff’s Argument

To justify his accusations, the lawyer first refers to a Youtube video in which several experts comment on a complaint filed in Switzerland against Swissmedic and explain the context from a professional point of view. [2] [3]

For an introduction to the facts that gave rise to this criminal complaint, I recommend the YouTube video entitled “Media conference: Criminal complaint against Swissmedic”, available under the link

From this video you will already be able to gather a whole series of highly qualified experts who would certainly not refuse to give expert advice to your authority, in particular:

  • Dr. Michael Palmer on the special mode of action of mRNA injections,
  • Prof. Dr. Andreas Sönnichsen on the (lack of) effectiveness of these injections,
  • Prof. Dr. Dr. Martin Haditsch on the risks of mRNA injections,
  • Prof. Dr. Konstantin Beck on the risk to public health from these Covid 19 injections (excess mortality etc.).

Lawyer Schmitz goes on to argue: [3]

the full text of the criminal complaint filed by the Swiss lawyers Kruse Law on 14.7.2022, which will adequately inform you that and – at the latest – from when and why (also) the responsible persons of the PEI and thus the defendants here had to be positively aware that these Covid-19 injections are questionable medicinal products in the sense of § 5 AMG, so that they were obliged by virtue of their legal competence to prevent these medicinal products – ever and further – from entering the market and being used on humans.

The prerequisites for a conditional authorisation never existed, and this was evident from the very beginning, so that from a point in time yet to be determined, the defendants would also have been aware of it.

Furthermore: [3]

You will certainly remember that the accused Federal Minister of Health, Prof. Dr. Karl Lauterbach, never tired of publicly emphasising at every possible opportunity that the Covid-19 vaccines were very or highly effective and, in particular, “free of side effects”.

He of all people had to know better from the very beginning, so that his misleading statements in any case already justify criminal liability according to § 95 para. 1 nos. 1 and 3 a AMG.


Defendant’s Argument

…More information is needed…


Relevant Prior Judgements/ Cases

…More information is needed…






…More information is needed…

Further Research

Court Documents:
In the news:



Media Conference Against SwissMedic -Nov 14 2022

source: Odysee/ longXXvids

MUST WATCH: C19 Death Data Analysis for Every Country pre & post mRNA -Jan 12 2022

source: Odysee/ yabba

Germany Vaccination Consequences -Dec 12 2022

source: Odysee/ shortXXvids



  1. Corona Cases: Presidential Crimes Case
  2. link to translation of Reitschuster article on the case
  3. Original Criminal Complaint Document (Deutsch)
  4. Corona Cases: mRNA Injury Case



Beck, Berlin, Criminal Complaint, Germany, Haditsch, Health Minister, Injections, Karl Lauterbach, lauterbach, mRNA, Palmer, Sönnichsen, Swissmedic, Switzerland, Wilfried Schmitz 

Back to All Cases