Vaccine Pass Case: Supreme Court

Vaccine Pass Case: Supreme Court

Vaccine Pass Case: Supreme Court

Re: the Legality of imposing “Passports” to legitimize health as a condition for entering restaurants, hotels, clubs & other hospitality venues

 

Back to All Cases

Facts of the Case

  • Dates: Feb 2, 2022
  • Location: Czech Republic
  • Court: Supreme Court
  • Case #:
  • Plaintiff: woman from Brno
  • Plaintiff’s Lawyer:
  • Defendant: Health Ministry
  • Trial Type: Supreme Court
  • Judge: Chief Justice Peter Mikes
  • Status: Decided
  • Verdict: for the Plaintiff


*updated Feb 3, 2022

 

Background

The Supreme Court -Nejvyšší správní soud (NSS)- heard a lawsuit filed by a woman from Brno challenging the Covid Health Pass aka Digital Green Certificates. The provisions (established Dec 29, 2021) prohibit customers from entering food service establishments, music, dance, gambling and similar social clubs and discos, gambling halls and casinos, and from using short-term and vacation accommodation services unless they meet what the ministry calls “infection-free” conditions. These conditions are either completion of vaccination or having contracted covid-19 within the last 180 days. Only in exceptional circumstances is it possible to prove oneself by PCR test. [1]

This case comes at a time when several European countries are lifting Emergency restrictions, including the UK, Denmark, Bosnia.

Finland’s Prime Minister Sanna Marin has announced that the country will be lifting all Wuhan coronavirus restrictions by mid-February as the country starts easing some restrictions this week. [2] https://t.co/ACwJZuE0vl

 

Significance

This case is highly important as it challenges the very fundamentals of the Rights of the individual in a “free” society.

 

Plaintiff’s Argument

…More information is needed…

 

Defendant’s Argument

…More information is needed…

 

Relevant Prior Judgements/ Cases

In Spain, [2]

the Basque High Court ruled against the introduction of the vaccine passport for certain venues in November, arguing the measure was unjustified.

Despite the ruling, the vaccine passport was later approved after the case was taken to the Spanish supreme court in December.

Just months prior in August, the Spanish Supreme Court ruled that Spain’s 2020 strict lockdown policies had been unconstitutional but claimed that businesses and people were not eligible to take the government to court to sue for monetary damages incurred during the lockdowns.

 

Decision

  • The Supreme Administrative Court (NSS) has dealt another heavy blow to the Health Ministry’s measures restricting the operation of restaurants or accommodation in the fight against the coronavirus pandemic. The court overturned an extraordinary measure, according to which people without completed vaccinations or after an illness were banned from entering catering establishments, clubs and short-term accommodation. [1]
  • The Supreme Administrative Court of the Czech Republic has ordered the abolition of vaccine passports for restaurants, hotels, and other venues, arguing that the measure is tantamount to vaccination coercion, and therefore not legal. [3]

  • The judges left the measure in place for one more week, after which it will cease to apply. [1]
  • Judge Mikeš ruled that the government’s pandemic laws do not allow for the specific regulation of restaurants, clubs and hotels and that measures would only be justified if the government could prove the entire country was at risk of the Wuhan coronavirus or if the government were to enact a state of emergency and use emergency powers to force venues to accept the vaccine passport. [2]

“The Supreme Administrative Court has already stated in the past that the Ministry of Health has no basis for restricting this type of establishment in the so-called Pandemic Act, unless it is technical measures, such as the use of disinfection or the placement of seating,” Mikeš stated. [2]

  • According to NSS Chief Justice Peter Mikes, the ministry had no support in the pandemic law for restricting services. [1]

“The ministry has no justification for restricting these types of establishments in the so-called pandemic law, unless they are technical measures, such as the use of disinfection or the placement of seating. The ministry could only restrict their activities under the Public Health Protection Act, but only against persons suspected of being infected,” Mikes explained, adding

that not everyone can be suspected of being infected without further ado. This would only be conceivable if the entire Czech Republic was designated as an outbreak.

 

The aim of the measure cannot be to indirectly force citizens to vaccinate

The state may not force people to vaccinate, referring to the ministry’s argumentation, which is voluntary. [1]

“However, the aim of the measure cannot be to indirectly force citizens to vaccinate. This would turn voluntary vaccination into compulsory vaccination by means of an emergency measure, since unvaccinated persons would have no choice but to be vaccinated if they wanted to live a normal life,” Mikeš stressed. [1]

  • Supreme Administrative Court Judge Petr Mikes described the measure banning unvaccinated people from going to restaurants as illegal. [1]
  • “The ministry has three options under the current legislation. [1]
  1. Either assess the situation to be so bad that everyone can be considered suspected of being infected,
  2. or appeal to the government to declare a state of emergency.
  3. And of course there is the option of leaving the area unregulated,” Mikes said.
  • The SAC erred when it did not address the objection to the recognition of antibodies, the Constitutional Court ruled [1]

“Under the current wording of the Pandemic Act, the Ministry of Health could only adopt a similar regulation if the conditions of the Public Health Protection Act were met. If these conditions are not met, then it is up to the government to decide whether it is able to manage the pandemic without such regulation or whether this is not the case, and if other conditions are met, this is grounds for declaring a state of emergency and adopting similar regulation through a government emergency measure,” Mikes added. [1]

 

Aftermath

Statement from Prime Minister Petr Fiala

The Czech Republic will stop requiring COVID passes for entry to restaurants and other service or entertainment venues starting next week, opening them up to unvaccinated people, Prime Minister Petr Fiala said. [3]

As Novinky.cz reports, the change will take effect on February 9, following a decision by Czech cabinet ministers on Wednesday evening. [3]

“Taking into account current developments, the government will abolish the obligation to prove with a certificate of vaccination or negative test when entering restaurants, services, cultural and sports events on February 9,” said Prime Minister Petr Fiala (ODS).

According to Fiala, the obligation to wear respirators indoors will remain in force. “According to experts, it proves to be highly effective and at the same time minimally restrictive,” he said.

The limit on the number of participants in mass events will also continue to apply, added Fiala. [3]

  • Measures requiring mask wearing indoors and limits to the number of people at public events will remain. [3]
  • Those who have not suffered from covid-19 or are not vaccinated will also be able to enter restaurants and hotels. [3]
  • Compulsory wide-ranging coronavirus testing at work and in schools will also end on February 18. [3]

 

Statement from Health Minister Vlastimil Válek 

Health Minister Vlastimil Válek (TOP 09) first planned to comment on the verdict at a government press conference. However, he commented on the verdict at the plenary session of the lower house, which is dealing with an amendment to the pandemic law, saying that this is why the norm needs to be adopted. The SPD MPs are complicating its discussion by obstructing it. [1]

The minister supports amendments to the controversial pandemic law, which entail a wider range of COVID-19 restrictions, including the introduction of mandatory testing of entrepreneurs, students, and teachers, as well as a separate set of measures by the defence and interior ministries.

If the amendment to the pandemic law were already in force, the current situation would not have arisen, according to Válek. “This measure would be unassailable,” Válek told the plenary. [1]

Válek told Novosti on Saturday that entry to restaurants for the unvaccinated is under discussion in the Czech Republic. [1]

Despite Válek’s support for more pandemic laws, he also stated

“I believe that in March we will be able to cancel all [coronavirus] measures to the maximum. The current development of the epidemic and the forecast for the near future prove that [it is possible],” Valek said at a meeting with lawmakers. [4]

  •  

The Supreme Court has other actions on the table against existing measures, and it is possible that it will overturn them on similar grounds. [1]

 


Further Research

Court Documents:
  • Read the Court Ruling
In the news:
  • …More information is needed…

related:

 

Media


……

source: ….


….

source: ….


….

source: ….

 

References

  1. Konec. Soud pustil neočkované do restaurací
  2. Czech Court Abolishes Vaccine Passports For Restaurants and Hotels
  3. BREAKING: Czech Government to End COVID passes as of February 9
  4. Czech Health Minister Expects All COVID Measures to Be Lifted in March

 

Keyword

antibodies, Chief Justice Peter Mikes, constitution, Constitutional Court, Covid Health Pass, Czech, Czech Republic, Digital Green Certificates, Health Minister, Ministry of Health, Nejvyšší správní soud, NSS, Pandemic Act, Public Health Protection Act, Supreme Court, TOP 09, Unconstitutional, Vaccine, Válek, Vlastimil


Back to All Cases

 

Public Entertainment Closure Case

Public Entertainment Closure Case

Public Entertainment Closure Case

Re: the Legality of Closing Cinemas & Theatres for Covid

 

Back to All Cases

Facts of the Case

  • Dates: December 2021
  • Location: Brussels
  • Court: Council of State
  • Case #:
  • Plaintiff: Actors & Theatre Union
  • Defendant: PM DeCroo
  • Trial Type:
  • Judge:
  • Status: End
  • Verdict: For the Plaintiff


Background

In December 2021, Prime Minister Alexander De Croo announced the closures, introduced to curb the spread of the Omicron variant of Covid-19. De Croo also restricted people from sports stadiums and imposed capacity limitations in stores, in addition to shutting down entertainment venues. Belgium was not the only European country to enact similar legislation, as Denmark and the Netherlands had done previously. [1]

A union representing actors, performers, and movie theatre owners petitioned the government to overturn its ruling. Thousands of entertainment workers and supporters marched in Brussels on Sunday, accusing the government of “contempt, discrimination, and abuse,” but to no avail, as Health Minister Frank Vandenbroucke told state broadcaster RTBF earlier on Tuesday that “there is no possibility to immediately revise the decision.” [1]

 

Significance

This case challenges the legality for government enforced closures

 

Plaintiff’s Argument

…More information is needed…

 

Defendant’s Argument

…More information is needed…

 

Relevant Prior Judgements/ Cases

A court in Wallonia declared earlier this month that requiring vaccination passes to enter cafes, restaurants, gyms, and other locations was illegal in the region. While the pass is a national government initiative, individual regions are in charge of enforcing its use. (Authorities in Wallonia, on the other hand, have appealed the ruling and stated that vaccine passes will continue to be required.) [1]

 

Decision

The government’s decision to close cinemas, theatres, and other entertainment venues in Belgium has been overturned. [1]

The judgment was made on Tuesday by Belgium’s Council of State, the country’s highest administrative court, nearly a week after Prime Minister De Croo announced the closures. [1]

 

Aftermath

…More information is needed…


Further Research

Court Documents:
  • Read the Court Ruling
In the news:
  • …More information is needed…

 

Media

……

source: ….

….

source: ….

 

References

  1. Belgium’s court rules on Covid’s closure of cinemas and theatres after protest
  2.  

 

Keyword

Belgium, Brussels, Capacity, Cinema, Cinemas, Closure, Council of State, De Croo, Entertainment, Health Minister, Passes, Prime Minister, Stadiums, Theatres, Vandenbroucke, Wallonia


Back to All Cases

 

LankaHealthMinisterLetter

LankaHealthMinisterLetter

Lanka Letter to Health Minister

Re: The unscientific nature of virology & the danger of that when making policy

 

ENGLISH TRANSLATION (SEE BELOW)


Click on the buttons in the lower left corner to go to another page

StefanLanka_Brief_an_Deutschen_Gesundheitsminister


Dr Stefan Lanka Langenargen 5.10.2021

Federal Minister of Health Jens Spahn Friedrichstraße 108

10117 Berlin

Urgent need for action on SARS-CoV-2 and compulsory measles vaccination

Dear Mr Jens Spahn, Federal Minister of Health,

You are the main person responsible in Germany for establishing the legal Corona/Covid measures and the measles vaccination obligation. The Infection Protection Act (Infektionsschutzgesetz, IfSG) interferes with several otherwise inalienable fundamental rights. For example, the right to life, physical integrity and freedom according to the Basic Law (GG) Article 2 (2): “Everyone has the right to life and physical integrity. The freedom of the person is inviolable. These rights may only be interfered with on the basis of a law.”

Section 1 (2) IfSG requires all those involved with the examination, planning and implementation of corona/covid measures and compulsory measles vaccination to “design and support those in accordance with the respective state of medical and epidemiological science and technology.”

They have failed to check or have checked the statements of virology about the claims of the existence of an alleged new SARS-CoV-2 and a measles virus for scientificity, compliance with the rules of scientific work. These rules of scientific work, in order to be allowed to call statements scientific, have been fixed in writing since 1998, are international and valid for all disciplines. These rules are part of the employment contracts of scientists who use taxpayers’ money.

These rules of scientific work are obviously violated by virology. The prescribed control tests to exclude errors and self-deception have never been carried out and published.

This easily verifiable fact proves that the statements of virologists are not scientific, but must be described as anti-scientific. Since the basis of our democracy is science in essential areas, this anti-scientific behaviour of virology must be called anti-democratic and unconstitutional in your responsibility. I refer here to Article GG 5 (3): “Art and science, research and teaching are free. The freedom of teaching does not release from loyalty to the constitution.” Teaching is what you and others pass off in public as scientific facts.

The logical conclusion is that the requirement by the IfSG to effectively interfere with fundamental rights is not met. Since the scientificity is not given, which the IfSG demands in § 1 (2), but which has so far been tacitly, recklessly to grossly negligently assumed or asserted against better knowledge, all subsequent paragraphs of the IfSG are ineffective and not binding.

This means that all Corona/Covid measures and the measles vaccination obligation have no legal force, but are unlawful, i.e. illegal. I point out to you that I have already personally pointed out these and other relevant facts to you on 17.3.2020 and subsequently.

Based on these easily recognizable and verifiable facts, I call upon you to immediately withdraw all Corona/Covid measures and the compulsory measles vaccination, to call the responsible national, international virologists, other “scientists” involved to account and to take responsibility for what has happened.

Due to the fact of the lack of control experiments in virology since 1954 and the fact of a purely mathematical construction of the so-called gene sequence of the alleged SARS-CoV-2 and/or due to the legally binding judgement of the Stuttgart Higher Regional Court (OLG Stgt) of 16.2.2016, AZ: 12 U 63/15, in the so-called measles virus trial, the following applies:

With this finding of fact, the legal force of all Corona/Covid measures and that of the measles vaccination obligation ceases to apply immediately, even individually.

I point out that extensive “other remedies” to which Article 20 (4) GG calls for have not been successful so far.

Comments on:

From reading this and all other publications confirming the sequence strand once given, three facts clearly emerge:

1. a hereditary strand that would correspond to the published sequence listing has never been detected. No genetic strand of a virus was found in the mixture of nucleic acids obtained from a human with pneumonia (and later from other humans). Even after the first round of artificial, extremely strong and non-specific propagation by PCR technique of millions of short fragments of nucleic acids, no sequences were ever discovered that, when put together, would give the sequence sequence of a virus’ genome strand finally presented to the public.

2. using the sequence data generated in the first round of nucleic acid propagation, short pieces of nucleic acids are biochemically generated for the propagation of nucleic acids by PCR, so-called primers. Depending on the protocol, these artificially generated primers themselves yield approx. 4-20% of the sequence sequence of what is ultimately presented as the sequence sequence of SARS-CoV-2 after this second step of PCR propagation. This second PCR amplification process for the subsequent mathematical, so-called bioinformatic formation of the sequence sequence is called deep meta-transcriptomic sequencing, among other things. The fact that an extremely unscientific high number of cycles of PCR is used here (35-45, so-called Ct value), in which artificial nucleic acid sequences are automatically generated that do not exist in reality, is further proof of the anti-scientific nature of virology, but plays no role in the argumentation presented here.

It follows from points 1. and 2. that no genetic strand of a virus has ever been found. Instead, existing fragments of nucleic acids were first multiplied biochemically, by means of double PCR, strongly and with an extremely high error rate. The sequence sequences of these millions of artificially produced nucleic acids were determined, then mathematically subdivided into much shorter sequence sequences and combined with each other as desired. From the multitude of these arbitrary combination products, special software programmes are used to select those that match a nucleic acid once it has been specified. The resulting mathematical construct is output as the genetic strand of a virus.

This proves that it has never been possible to mathematically construct the alleged hereditary strand of the alleged virus from sequences of nucleic acids that actually exist. The mathematical construction of the alleged genetic strand of the alleged SARS-Cov-2 succeeds only after two rounds of unspecific and extreme propagation by PCR technique.

The anti-scientific nature of all virologists involved is proven by the fact that in the publication by Prof. Yong-Zhen Zhang from Shanghai, who together with his co-workers discovered and specified the alleged sequence of the viral genome of the alleged SARS-CoV-2, the mandatory control experiments are missing and this conspicuous omission was and is tolerated. The compulsory control experiments here are the attempt to construct the sequence of a hereditary strand of claimed or suspected new viruses using nucleic acids from healthy humans and a wide variety of organisms. They are the prerequisite for being allowed to call a statement scientific. They also have the task of recognising and avoiding misinterpretations.

In none of the subsequent publications, with which the sequence given by Prof. Yong-Zhen Zhang was repeated, are there any control attempts, even the words “control” or “negative control” are missing. Not only have the virologists disproved themselves with their actions, they themselves have proven their anti-scientific nature and documented it in each of their numerous publications.

II. judgement OLG Stuttgart, AZ: 12 U 63/15, 16.2.2016 in the measles virus trial

The measles virus trial, initiated by me in 2011, achieved the goal in 2017 of generating legally effective proof that all virology, not just measles virology, acts anti-scientifically. Since 2017, it has been part of German jurisprudence that all virology lacks a scientific basis. Within the measles virus trial, it has been documented that the mandatory control experiments required by science have never been carried out and documented since 1954. Therefore, all virologists involved have overlooked the fact that they themselves produce effects which they interpret as viral by means of applied techniques. Thus, as exemplified by SARS-Cov-2, typical bio-molecules are mentally assembled into virus models that do not exist in reality.

In the lawsuit, a medical doctor claimed the €100,000 prize money offered for scientific proof of the measles virus. His claim was upheld in 2014 because he submitted six publications, each claiming to prove the existence of the measles virus. The forensic expert appointed by the court of first instance, the cognisant court, the Ravensburg Regional Court, found that none of the publications submitted contained proof of the existence of a virus. This fact was confirmed by the Higher Regional Court of Stgt in its judgment of 16 February 2016, which became final in 2017 and by which I was acquitted of having to pay the plaintiff the suspended €100,000.

In the minutes of the hearing of the Ravensburg Regional Court of 12.3.2015, AZ: 4 O 346/13, it is documented that the court-appointed expert states that none of the six publications contains the control tests prescribed in science, which are also referred to as negative controls. Thus, the court-appointed expert has proven – which was also confirmed by four other expert opinions that I submitted – that the entire field of virology is acting anti-scientifically. The logical conclusion: all statements of virology are neither practically nor legally usable, but must be rejected as self-deception and deception of others.

In addition, the oldest of the six publications that was submitted and which was judicially determined to contain no proof of the existence of a virus has become the exclusive basis of all virology since 1954. This means that with the final judgement of the OLG Stgt of 16.2.2016, the entire virology, which claims the existence of disease-causing viruses, is deprived of its scientific and legal basis.

The details of this can be found in my article “The Federal Court of Justice lets the belief in viruses perish” in the magazine w+ 2/2017, which since 17.3.2020 in your files and can be found freely on the internet, on my page www.wissenschafftplus.de under “Important texts”.

As a human being, I ask you,

as an active scientist, virologist with a doctorate and discoverer of a useful structure now called “giant viruses” and “viro-plankton”, I ask you,

as a citizen and sovereign of the FRG, I demand of you, as my public servant,

that you immediately withdraw the Corona/Covid measures and the compulsory measles vaccination.

I expect you to admit your omissions to the population and to cooperate in repairing the damage caused to the body and soul of the population and the economy by the unjustifiable Corona/Covid measures and by the compulsory measles vaccination.

Yours sincerely from Lake Constance

Dr Stefan Lanka

Langenargen, 5.10.2021

Keywords

Lanka, Spahn, Health Minister, Germany, Virology, Measles


Back to All Cases