mRNA – home

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

Background

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].

Significance

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…

Decision

TBD

Aftermath

…More information is needed…

Further Research

Court Documents:

Original Criminal Complaint Document (Deutsch)

In the news:

Media

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

Back to All Cases

Swissmedic mRNA Injury Case

mRNA Injury Case

Re: The Legality of 1) Authorisation of Covid Vaccines by Swissmedic & 2) Vaccination by Swiss doctors of substances for which Safety was Unknown

Back to All Cases

Facts of the Case

Dates: July 14, 2022 (filed)
Location: Switzerland
Court: TBD
Case #: TBD
Plaintiff: 6 Injection Victims
Plaintiff’s Lawyer: Philipp Kruse

Defendant: 3 individuals at Swissmedic, 5 vaccinating doctors at Univ. Hospital Bern
Trial Type: criminal complaint
Judge: TBD
Status: Ongoing
Verdict: TBD

*updated Nov 16, 2022

Background

This case involves a criminal complaint made by Swiss lawyer Philipp Kruse on behalf of six people who were injured after taking the m-RNA vaccines. Kruse and his colleagues are not only initiating an action against the drugs regulator, Swissmedic but also against doctors who vaccinated these people knowing that the products were not properly tested.

The complaint was filed in July 2022 and the public announcement of this case made on Nov 14 2022 with a press conference held that same day. At the conference Kruse was supported by 3 vaccine victims telling their stories, 5 medical experts and 2 other lawyers, one of these being a former cantonal public prosecutor.

Significance

This case may be the first in Europe to be prosecuted relating to the Covid injections and where a national medicines regulator stands accused of criminal negligence in allowing products to be marketed which are demonstrably causing injuries and deaths on a massive scale.

Plaintiff’s Argument

Against Swissmedic

Lawyer Kruse states (1,2):

37 complainants and six private claimants directly harmed by mRNA «vaccinations» (all of whom are specified in the recitals) are filing the present criminal claim to protect their own health and out of legitimate concern for the health of their fellow human beings.

What we are dealing with here is the greatest threat to human health caused by medicinal products and the greatest injury to human health that Switzerland has ever seen: The authorization and administration of the largely ineffective mRNA «vaccines» represent a far greater danger than the SARS-CoV-2 pathogen against which these «vaccines» are supposed to provide protection.

Swissmedic is primarily responsible for this threat: By law, it has the central function of protecting the health of the Swiss population. To this end, it must ensure, on the one hand, that only high quality, safe, and effective therapeutic products are placed on the market. On the other hand, it must protect consumers of therapeutic products against fraud (Art. 1 TPA). The notifying parties acting on behalf of Swissmedic failed to comply with these guarantee obligations on several occasions and to a significant extent, which is why they have been under strong suspicion, since December 2020 and up to the present day,

• of having repeatedly violated the due diligence obligations under therapeutic product law (Art. 86(1a) TPA, in conjunction with. Art. 3 TPA [general due diligence] and Art. 7 TPA [due diligence requirement of the manufacturer]) in the course of marketing authorization and batch testing which, according to federal court rulings, is deemed to be manufacturing, in that

• they granted «temporary» authorization for the mRNA «vaccines» within the meaning of Art. 9a TPA despite the lack of sufficient evidence of efficacy and safety and despite massive risk signals,

• they massively undercut the already very low safety precautions that are decisive for the procedure according to Art. 9a TPA and have thus created risks for public health that had never been posed by a medicinal product before,

• they not only permanently withheld elementary information on the minimal to complete lack of protective effect of the mRNA «vaccines» and the actual risk of side effects from the population and the medical community, but also systematically conveyed this information in a misleading manner,

• of not having fulfilled the duty of post-marketing surveillance (so-called «pharmacovigi-lance») in a risk-adequate manner, but rather having permanently violated the obligation to notify under therapeutic product law (Art. 87(1c) TPA) in a serious manner,
• of having seriously violated the prohibition on the advertising of therapeutic products (Art. 87(1b) TPA),
• of having satisfied the corresponding elements of an offense under the Criminal Code when death/ bodily injury has occurred.

• On December 19, 2020, Swissmedic announced the following regarding the authorization of Comirnaty:

«This represents the world’s first authorization in the ordinary proce-dure».

This statement is simply false and represents a misleading lie, which many people still mistakenly believe to be true to this day – after all, this announcement can still be viewed on the Swissmedic homepage.

• In the information for healthcare professionals for Comirnaty, Swissmedic published in December 2020 that «no vaccine-related effects on female fertility, pregnancy, embryo-fetal development, or the development of offspring have been observed». This is in stark contrast to study results and warnings from the manufacturer and expert committees, which were available to Swissmedic.
• At the end of 2020, Swissmedic had already posted on its own website an «FAQ» ad-dressed to the public, which contained countless misleading details that Swissmedic could have recognized as clear misinformation based on the data already available in-ternally at the end of 2020.

…..

According to the information provided above, Swissmedic has approved a highly experimental and dangerous medicinal product against a disease that posed and poses no greater threat to the general population than influenza. As a last «lifeline», Swissmedic would have to prove that the somewhat higher-risk target population of elderly people and those with pre-existing illnesses would have been at least somewhat effectively protected against SARS-CoV-2. However, this is also absolutely not the case. The «vaccination» obviously fails to achieve the necessary «large-scale» efficacy:

As a result, this «temporary» authorization in the sense of Art. 9a, TPA means nothing more than the fact that the entire Swiss population unknowingly participated and continues to participate in the largest clinical experiment ever conducted in Switzerland (and indeed the world).

Against vaccinating physicians at the “Insel Group” Hospital

The breaches of due diligence obligations complained of here essentially consist in the fact that the notifying parties acting on behalf of Swissmedic (and, in principle, also the notified physicians) were already aware of countless risk factors from December 2020 onwards, each of which, when assessed in isolation, would have prevented the granting of the «tem-porary» authorization (and the administration of the corresponding mRNA injections) until the corresponding risk factors had been clarified in detail and eliminated under normal cir-cumstances. …

If the “Insel Group” has used COVID “vaccines” on humans in breach of the duty of care under the law on therapeutic products, has reported side effects to Swissmedic in an in-adequate manner and if the “Insel Group” has endangered or already injured the health of a large number of people in the careless use of the mRNA “vaccines”, the offences of defendants 4-8 in this regard are deemed to have been committed in 3010 Bern and/or at Friedbühlstrasse 15 in 3008 Bern (location of the Inselspital vaccination centre).