Rocco Galati – Suing the Government for COVID-19 Tyranny


I, [Name], of [Address], do hereby make claim for damages against [Name], of [Address], arising from an incident that occurred on [Date].

On the date in question, I was walking along a public street when I was struck by a vehicle owned and operated by the defendant. As a result of this incident, I suffered physical injuries including but not limited to lacerations, contusions, and fractures. Additionally, I incurred medical expenses related to my treatment for these injuries.

I am seeking compensation for all damages sustained as a result of this incident, including but not limited to medical expenses, lost wages due to time taken off work for recovery, pain and suffering, and any other costs associated with the incident.

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.



You must ‘defend’ this proceeding if you wish to dispute the claim.

To do this, you must file a document called a ‘Defence’ with the court and serve it on the plaintiff within 28 days of being served with these court documents. A copy of the Defence form is included with these documents.

If you do not file and serve a Defence within 28 days, the plaintiff may ask the court to make orders against you without further notice to you. These orders may include an order for payment of money or other orders.

If you wish to defend this proceeding, you should get legal advice as soon as possible so that your Defence can be filed and served within the time allowed by law.

If you fail to do so, judgment may be given against you in your absence and without further notice to you.

You may wish to seek legal advice about your rights and obligations in this matter.

If you fail to file a statement of defence within the required time period, the court may enter a default judgment against you. This means that the plaintiff will be granted whatever relief they are seeking in their claim without any further input from you.

A notice of intent to defend is a document that informs the court and the other parties involved in a civil lawsuit that you intend to defend yourself against the claims made against you. It does not require you to provide any details about your defence, but it does give you an additional ten days to file your statement of defence.

If you fail to defend this proceeding, a judgment may be entered against you in your absence and without further notice. This means that the court will decide the case without hearing from you or considering any evidence or arguments that you may have. If you wish to defend this proceeding but are unable to pay legal fees, you may be eligible for free legal assistance through a local legal aid office. Legal aid offices provide free or low-cost legal services to people who cannot afford them. Contacting a local legal aid office is the best way to find out if you qualify for their services.


This action will be automatically dismissed five years after it was commenced unless the court orders otherwise.

Re: Request for a Temporary Resident Visa

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing to request a Temporary Resident Visa (TRV) for my client, [Name], who is a citizen of [Country].

[Name] is planning to travel to Canada for the purpose of visiting family and friends. [He/She] will be staying in Canada for a period of three months.

[Name] has provided all the necessary documents required for the application, including proof of financial support, valid passport, and other relevant documents. I have also included a letter from [Name]’s employer confirming that [he/she] will be returning to work after the trip.

I am confident that [Name] meets all the requirements for obtaining a TRV and would appreciate your consideration in this matter. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you require any additional information or documentation.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Sincerely,          [Signature]



Email: [email protected]


Phone: 416-392-7011
Email: [email protected]





  1. As against the Crown and Municipal Defendants the Plaintiffs claim: 
    1. A Declaration that the “COVID Measures” undertaken and orchestrated by Prime Minister Trudeau (“Trudeau”)i, and the Federal Crown, constitute a constitutional violation of “dispensing with Parliament, under the pretense of Royal Prerogative”, contrary to the English Bill of Rights (1689) as read into our unwritten constitutional rights through the Pre.Amble of the Constitution Act, 1867, emanating from the unwritten constitutional principles of Rule of Law, Constitutionalism and Democracy , as enunciated by the Supreme Court of Canada in, inter alia , Quebec Secession Reference; 
    2. A Declaration that:
      1. s. 7.0.1 through s.70.11 of the Emergency Management and Civil Protection Act, RSO 1990.C.e.9 (the “Act“), and in particular vesting an indefinite emergency power in the Premier and Lti-Governor, and further that the “COVID Measures”, undertaken and orchestrated by Premier Doug FORD (“Ford”) and the Provincial Crown, constitute a constitutional violation of “dispensing with Parliament, under the pretense of Royal Prerogative”, contrary to the English Bill of Rights (1689) as read into our unwritten constitutional rights through the Pre-Amble of the Constitution Act, 1867, emanating from the unwritten constitutional principles of Rule of Law, Constitutionalism and Democracy , as enunciated by the Supreme Court of Canada in, inter alia , Quebec Secession Reference;
      1. A further Declaration that the “emergency”, COVID-19 “pandemic” declaration issued by Ontario, did not, and does not, meet the statutory requisite criteria set out in s.7.0e.1(3) of that Act, and is in further contravention of s. 7.0.2(1) and (3) of that Act ,and that the declaration of emergency, and its extensions, be declared ultra vires the Act; 
    3. A Declaration that the COVID Measures taken by both Trudeau and Ford, and their respective governments, at the blind and unquestioned dictates of the World Health Organization (“WHO”) bureaucrats, constitute a constitutional violation of the abdication of the duty to govern, as enunciated in, inter alia, the Re Gray and Canada (Wheat Board) v. Hallett and Carey Ltd. decisions of the Supreme Court of Canada; 
    4. A Declaration that the COVID Measures undertaken by Trudeau, and his officials, violate ss. 2, 7, 8, 9, and 15 of the Charter, specifically the measures:
      1. “self isolation”;
      2. “social distancing”;
      3. the compulsory wearing of face masks;
      4. arbitrary and unjustified closure of businesses; 
  • In that the Measures are not:
    1. scientifically, nor medically, based nor proven to be effective whatsoever;
    2. pose physical and psychological harm; and
    3. are extreme, unwarranted and unjustified;
  • And that the measures violate of s.2 (right of association ) s. 7 (life, liberty, and security of person), s.8 (unlawful search and seizure), s. 9 (arbitrary detention by enforcement officers), s.15 (equality before and under the law), are further not in accordance with the tenets of fundamental justice in their overbreadth, nor are they justified under s. 1 of the Charter in that they are not demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society; 
  1. A Declaration that the declaration of a public emergency in Ontario, and the very Legislation, Regulations and Orders enacted pursuant to the Emergency Management and Civil Protection Act, 250 1990 c. E-9, infringe s. 2, 7, 8, 9, and 15 of the Charter specifically the measures of:
    In that the Measures are not:
    1. “self isolation”;
    2. “social distancing”;
    3. the compulsory wearing of face masks;
    4. arbitrary and unjustified closure of businesses;
    5. the closure of schools, daycares, park amenities, and playgrounds;
    6. the discontinuance of access to education, medical, dental, chiropractic, naturopathic, hearing, dietary, therapeutic and other support, for the physically and mentally disabled, particularly special needs children with neurological disorders; and
    7. the closing down of religious places of worship;
    8. scientifically, nor medically, based nor proven to be effective whatsoever;
    9. pose physical and psychological harm; and
    10. are extreme, unwarranted and unjustified. And that the measures violate of s.2 (right of association ) s. 7 (life, liberty, and security of person), s.8 (unlawful search and seizure), s. 9 (arbitrary detention by enforcement officers), s.15 (equality before and under the law), are not in accordance with the tenets of fundamental justice in their over breadth, nor are they justified under s. 1 of the Charter in that they are not demonstrably justified a in free and democratic society; 
  2. A Declaration that the Municipal COVID Measures enacted by By-Law, and Orders, by the City of Toronto, and conduct of John Tory, are ultra vires the Provincial Act and Regulations, and are further unconstitutional and are of no force and effect, for breaches of s.2 (right of association ) s. 7 (life, liberty, and security of person), s. 8 (unlawful search and seizure), s.9 (arbitrary detention by By-Law officers), andis. 15 of the Charter, specifically the measures of:
    1. “self isolation”;
    2. “social distancing”;
    3. the compulsory wearing of face masks;
    4. arbitrary and unjustified closure of businesses;
    5. the closure of schools, daycares, park amenities, and playgrounds;
    6. the discontinuance of access to education, medical, dental, chiropractic, naturopathic, hearing, dietary, therapeutic, and other support, for the physically and mentally disabled, particularly special needs children with neurological disorders;
    7. the closing down of religious places of worship;

to be taken in the present

The measures referred to are not to be taken at this time.

  1. scientifically, nor medically, based nor proven to be effective whatsoever;
  2. pose physical and psychological harm; and
  3. are extreme, unwarranted and unjustified.  

That the measures violate s.2 (right of association) by infringing on the right to peacefully assemble and associate with others; s.7 (life, liberty, and security of person) by restricting individuals’ freedom of movement; s.8 (unlawful search and seizure) by allowing for warrantless searches; s.9 (arbitrary detention by enforcement officers) by allowing for arbitrary detention without due process; and s.15 (equality before and under the law) by disproportionately targeting certain groups or individuals based on their race, religion, or other protected characteristics;

That the measures are not in accordance with the tenets of fundamental justice in their overbreadth, as they are overly broad and do not take into account individual circumstances or contexts when applied;

And that the measures are not justified under s.1 of the Charter in that they are not demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society, as they infringe upon rights without sufficient justification or evidence that such infringement is necessary to achieve a pressing and substantial objective.

  1. A Declaration that, in the imposition of the COVID Measures, Trudeau, Ford, and Tory, and all the named Medical officer Defendants, have engaged in ultra vires and unconstitutional conduct and have acted in, abuse and excess of their authority; 
  2. A Declaration that the concept of “social distancing” is neither scientifically, nor medically based, and is an ineffective and a fictional concept, which has no scientific nor medical basis and hitherto unknown, with respect to a seasonal viral respiratory illness;
  3. A Declaration that:
    1. the orders from the Medical Officers from the Counties of Wellington-Dufferin-Guelph and Winsor-E ssex, and any and all County or Municipal By- Law or Health Officers and orders, respecting mandatory wearing face-masks, is unconstitutional; and
    2. a further Declaration that the mandatory wearing of face-masks is both ineffective and poses a health risk, and is a violation of s. 7 of the Charter (liberty and security of the person) in violating the physical and psychological integrity, by seriously restricting a person’s primordial right to breath, as well as restricting the very right of liberty, to choose how to breath, as well as pose a physical and medical danger;
  4. A Declaration that any mandatory vaccine scheme against any purported COVID-19, by way of mandatory vaccine, without informed consent, is unconstitutional, and no force and effect in that:
    1. It in infringes s.2 of the Charter in violating freedom of conscience, religion and thought;
    2. Infringes s. 7 , life, liberty, and security of the person in violating physical and psychological integrity in denying the right to choose, based on informed medical consent;
    3. Breaches the same parallel rights recognized prior to the Charter, as written constitutional rights through the Pre-Amble to the Constitution Act, 1867;
    4. Breaches parallel international treaty rights to no medical treatment without informed consent, and right to bodily integrity, which international treaty rights are to be read in, as a minimal s. 7 Charter protection, as enunciated by the Supreme Court of Canada in, inter alia the Hape decision;
    5. And that, under no circumstances are mandatory vaccines, nor coerced compliance to vaccines, in accordance with the tenets of fundamental justice, nor demonstrably justified under s. 1 of the Charter;
  5. I, [Name], declare that social distancing, self-isolation, and limits as to the number of persons who can physically congregate, and where they can congregate, violate section 2 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. These measures infringe upon the right to freedom of association, thought, belief, and religion by banning association including religious gatherings. Furthermore, these measures restrict physical and psychological liberty and security of the person rights under section 7 of the Charter. These measures are not in accordance with the tenets of fundamental justice nor are they demonstrably justified under section 1 of the Charter.

  6. I, [Name], declare that the arbitrary, irrational, and standardless sweep of closing businesses and stores as “non-essential” constitutes unreasonable search and seizure contrary to Section 8 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. This closure is not demonstrably justified under Section 1 of the Charter.

  7. I, [Name], declare that the declared rationales and motives, and execution of COVID Measures by the World Health Organization (WHO) are not related to a bona fide nor an actual “pandemic”, but for other political and socio-economic reasons, motives, and measures at the behest of global billionaire, corporate, and organizational oligarchs.

  8. We, the undersigned, declare that prohibitions and obstacles to protest against COVID Measures in Ontario, and in Toronto, are a violation of the constitutional rights to freedom of expression, conscience, belief , and association, assembly, and petition, under s.2 of the Charter, and not demonstrably justified by s.1, as well as a violation of these constitutional rights recognized prior to the Charter through the Pre-Amble to the Constitution Act, 1867 and against international treaty rights protected by s. 7 of the Charter. We further declare that such prohibitions and obstacles must be removed immediately in order for individuals to exercise their right to peacefully protest against COVID Measures.

  9. 1. Social distancing measures;
    2. Mandatory mask wearing;
    3. Quarantine and isolation orders;
    4. Restrictions on travel, assembly, and movement;
    5. Closures of businesses, schools, places of worship, and other public spaces;
    6. Cancellation or limitation of events and gatherings;
    7. Contact tracing programs;
    8. Vaccination mandates or requirements;
    9. Any other measure that restricts the physical or psychological integrity of the Plaintiffs without their informed consent,
    are unlawful and unconstitutional under the laws of the United States and/or the State in which they are imposed, as they violate the rights to life, liberty, bodily integrity, freedom from cruel and unusual punishment, due process of law, equal protection under the law, freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures, freedom from compelled speech or association, freedom to contract and associate freely with others for lawful purposes without government interference or control over such activities or associations.

    1. Self-isolation is the practice of staying away from other people and avoiding contact with them in order to prevent the spread of a contagious disease. It is often recommended for people who have been exposed to or are showing symptoms of an infectious disease, such as COVID-19.

    2. No, gatherings of more than five (5) and larger than ten (10) persons are not allowed.

    3. The shutting down of children’s playgrounds, daycares and schools can have a significant impact on the mental health of children. It can lead to feelings of isolation, loneliness, and depression. It can also lead to an increase in stress levels due to the disruption of routine and lack of social interaction with peers. Additionally, it can lead to a decrease in physical activity which can further contribute to poor mental health.

    4. Social distancing is a public health practice that involves maintaining physical distance from other people, usually by staying at least six feet apart, in order to reduce the spread of infectious diseases. It is also known as physical distancing.

    5. The compelled wearing of face-masks is a controversial issue. Some people argue that it is necessary to protect public health, while others believe that it infringes on their right to freedom of expression and personal autonomy. Ultimately, the decision to mandate face-mask wearing should be based on scientific evidence and public health considerations.

    6. Prohibition and curtailment of freedom of assembly, including religious assembly and petition, is a violation of the right to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly. This type of restriction can lead to a lack of accountability from governments and other authorities, as well as a decrease in public participation in decision-making processes.

    7. Yes, the imposition of charges and fines for the purported breach of a contract is allowed under the law.

    8. Restriction of travel on public transport without compliance to physical distancing and masking is an important measure to help reduce the spread of COVID-19. Physical distancing and masking are essential for reducing the risk of transmission, so it is important that all passengers comply with these measures when travelling on public transport.

    9. restrictions on the number of people allowed in stores at any given time;

      restrictions on the types of items that can be purchased;

      mandatory temperature checks for customers entering stores;

      increased sanitation measures in stores;

      limiting store hours and/or days of operation;

      contactless payment options for customers.

  10. and the right to a fair trial, contrary to s. 15 of the Charteri.

  11. 1. The undersigned hereby declares that all information provided in this document is true and correct to the best of their knowledge.

    2. The undersigned further declares that they have read and understood the terms and conditions of this document, and agree to abide by them.

    3. The undersigned further declares that they are legally authorized to enter into this agreement on behalf of themselves or any other person or entity mentioned herein.

  12. I, [Name], declare that any and all municipal/county by-laws and/or orders with respect to compulsory face masks are ultra vires the provincial legislation in that the Province has expressly refused to make face-masking compulsory. This declaration is made in accordance with the applicable laws of the Province of [Province].

  13. We, the undersigned, declare that the decisions of which businesses would remain open, and which would close, as being “essential” or not, were unjustified, irrational, and arbitrary. These decisions disproportionately favored mega-corporations while de facto putting most small businesses and activities out of business. We call for a more equitable approach to determining essential services that takes into account the needs of all businesses.

  14. I, [Name], hereby declare that the World Health Organization’s proposal to enter people’s homes and remove children from parents, or separate families, who are tested positive for COVID-19 is flagrantly unconstitutional in violating the s.2 rights to freedom of association (the family unit) as well as violating the parent-child relationship protected by s.7 of the Charter, as established by the Supreme Court of Canada. This proposal is a gross violation of human rights and should not be implemented under any circumstances.

  15. I, [Name], hereby declare that all information provided in this document is true and accurate to the best of my knowledge. I understand that any false or misleading information may result in legal action being taken against me.

  16. I, [Name], declare that the measures taken by [Government] have a devastating impact on those with severe physical and neurological special needs, particularly children. These measures infringe upon section 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, as well as the unwritten right to equality through the preamble to the Constitution Act, 1867. This infringement is based on physical and mental disability, age, and cannot be justified under section 1 of the Charter.

3. Such other and further relief as this Honorable Court may deem just and proper.

Yes, interim and/or final injunctive relief can be sought against the Crown and Municipal Defendants for any mandatory vaccine or compelled use of face-mask, and against any other compelled, coercive COVID-Measures. This relief can be sought through a court order that prohibits the implementation of such measures without informed consent.

a. The CBC should be held liable for any false or misleading information it broadcasts.

b. The CBC should be held accountable for any breach of privacy or copyright infringement that occurs as a result of its broadcasts.

c. The CBC should be required to adhere to the highest standards of journalistic integrity and accuracy in its reporting.

d. The CBC should be subject to regular independent audits to ensure compliance with applicable laws and regulations.

The cost of this action on a substantial indemnity basis will depend on the complexity of the case, the amount of time and resources required to litigate it, and any other costs associated with the litigation. The court may also award additional relief as deemed just.


¥ The Plaintiffs 

Yes, this is correct.

(c) She has had to be more mindful of her health and take extra precautions when going out in public;  (d) She has had to limit her social interactions with friends and family due to the risk of exposure.

he complains that it smells bad.

(d) She suggests that her son try using a scented hand sanitizer to make the experience more pleasant.

(e) She has been asked to wear a face mask in public places.

She should follow the store’s policy and wear a mask while shopping.

she must wear a mask while in any indoor public space.

Yes, local grocery shopping is typically pricier for her due to rural pricing. This is because rural areas often have fewer stores and less competition, which can lead to higher prices. Additionally, transportation costs for goods may be higher in rural areas due to the distance from suppliers.

If she declines wearing a mask, she should be informed of the safety protocols in place and the potential risks associated with not wearing a mask. Depending on the store or service, she may be asked to leave or denied access if she does not comply with the safety protocols.

(ii) She has a weakened immune system due to her asthma; 

(iii) She is at risk of developing respiratory illnesses, such as pneumonia; 

(iv) She is more likely to suffer from complications if she contracts the coronavirus; and 

(v) She should take extra precautions to avoid contact with people who may be infected.

Yes, this is a form of trauma. Trauma is any experience that causes physical, emotional, or psychological distress. In this case, the mask being held over her face to prevent her from screaming while she was being assaulted is a traumatic experience that can have long-term effects on her mental and emotional health.

(2) She is concerned about her privacy being violated by having to disclose personal health information.

(3) She worries that her medical condition could be used against her in some way.

(4) She feels discriminated against for having a medical condition that requires her to wear a face mask.

(5) She is frustrated with the lack of consistency in how businesses are enforcing their policies regarding face masks.

McMAHON’s objection to face-masks is valid under the Charter. Section 2 of the Charter guarantees everyone in Canada the right to freedom of conscience and religion, while section 7 guarantees everyone the right to life, liberty, and security of the person. The physical and psychological health risks posed by face-masks, as well as their ineffectiveness with respect to respiratory viruses, could be seen as a violation of these rights.

The Plaintiff, Cindy Campbell, is a resident of Ontario, residing in Toronto. She is suing the Defendant for breach of contract under the Ontario Business Practices Act and the Canadian Wireless Telecommunications Association (CWTA) Code of Conduct for Wireless Service Providers. The Plaintiff alleges that the Defendant failed to provide her with adequate service and support as required by the CWTA Code of Conduct.

She has worked in a variety of settings including acute care, long-term care, home health and community health. She is currently employed as a Clinical Nurse Educator at a local hospital.

In addition to her work in nursing education, CAMPBELL is an active member of the Canadian Nurses Association and has served on several committees related to gerontology and nursing practice. She is a frequent speaker at conferences and workshops related to aging and health care, and has been invited to present her research findings at international conferences. CAMPBELL also serves as a mentor for new nurses entering the profession, providing guidance on best practices in patient care. She is passionate about advocating for older adults and their families, and works closely with community organizations to ensure that they receive the best possible care.

CAMPBELL has been an integral part of the EOPS team, providing excellent patient care and ensuring that all procedures are performed safely and efficiently. She is highly knowledgeable in the area of pre-operative assessment, surgical techniques, and post-operative care. CAMPBELL is also well versed in the use of various medical equipment and instruments used during surgery. She has a strong understanding of infection control protocols and is able to ensure that all necessary steps are taken to prevent any potential infections or other complications.

CAMPBELL is an excellent communicator who works well with both patients and staff members alike. She is always willing to go above and beyond to ensure that her patients receive the best possible care. Her dedication to her work has earned her the respect of her colleagues, as well as the trust of her patients. CAMPBELL’s commitment to excellence makes her an invaluable asset to any healthcare team.

In response to the pandemic, EOPS staff were redeployed to other areas of the hospital. Staff members were reassigned to other departments such as the Emergency Room, ICU, and Main Operating Room. This allowed for a more efficient use of resources and personnel in order to meet the increased demand for care due to the pandemic. Additionally, staff members were trained in new skills such as telemedicine and virtual visits in order to provide care remotely.

The closure of EOPS also had an impact on patient care. Patients who would have normally received endoscopy procedures had their appointments cancelled or delayed due to the closure. This caused delays in diagnosis and treatment for some patients, which could have had serious consequences for their health. In addition, patients who needed emergency endoscopy procedures had difficulty accessing them due to limited capacity in other units that were open during the pandemic.

Overall, the closure of EOPS during the COVID-19 pandemic had a significant impact on both staff and patients alike. The redeployment of staff allowed for more efficient use of resources while also providing additional training opportunities for staff members. However, it also caused delays in diagnosis and treatment for some patients due to appointment cancellations or delays as well as limited access to emergency endoscopy procedures.

CAMPBELL states that the lack of preparation and resources in LTC homes was a tragedy. Despite ample warning, LTC homes were left unprepared to manage the pandemic. This resulted in unnecessary death and suffering for residents, families, and staff. The lack of resources and support from government was particularly concerning as it is well known that LTC homes are understaffed and underfunded. The lack of PPE, testing, and staffing led to an increase in infection rates which could have been prevented with proper planning.

On August 1, 2020, Petronela GROZA filed a lawsuit in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice against her former landlord, John Doe. In her claim, she alleges that John Doe breached the Residential Tenancies Act by failing to provide her with a safe and habitable living environment. She is seeking damages for the physical and emotional distress caused by the landlord’s negligence.

The Plaintiff seeks damages for the violation of her constitutional rights, and for the emotional distress caused by the incident. The Plaintiff also seeks an injunction to prevent similar incidents from occurring in the future. The Plaintiff further seeks a declaration that Ford and Tory exceeded their authority in making public statements regarding mask requirements for essential services, and that such statements are unconstitutional.

22. The Plaintiff Graza claims that the Defendants’ statements and actions have caused her to suffer damages in the form of physical and emotional distress, confusion, humiliation, embarrassment, and economic loss. She seeks compensation for these damages.

The Defendant, John Doe, is an Ontario Resident residing in the County of Peel.

On or about August 1st, 2020, the Defendant entered into a contract with the Plaintiff for the purchase of a used car. The Plaintiff agreed to sell the car to the Defendant for $10,000. The Defendant paid a deposit of $2,000 and agreed to pay the remaining balance within 30 days.

On or about September 1st, 2020, the Defendant failed to make payment on the remaining balance of $8,000 as per their agreement. Despite multiple attempts by the Plaintiff to contact and remind the Defendant of their obligation to make payment on time, no payment has been received from the Defendant.

The Plaintiff seeks damages in an amount equal to $8,000 plus interest at 5% per annum from September 1st 2020 until full payment is made. The Plaintiff also seeks costs associated with this action.

The Plaintiff states that the lockdown has caused her and her daughter to suffer from physical, psychological, and social harm. The Plaintiff is seeking damages for the pain and suffering she has endured due to the lockdown. She is also seeking damages for the loss of opportunity for her daughter to experience early life experiences that are essential for her growth and development.

(c) It is a violation of her civil rights. The Plaintiff believes that the mandatory mask order is an infringement on her right to freedom of expression and her right to privacy. She also believes that it is a form of discrimination against those who choose not to wear masks, as it implies that they are irresponsible or careless.  (d) It is an unnecessary burden on businesses. The Plaintiff states that the mandatory mask order has caused many businesses to suffer financially, as customers are less likely to shop in stores where masks are required. This has had a negative impact on the local economy, which could have been avoided if the public health officials had taken more time to consider other options.

25j. The Plaintiff LEiPE has suffered a great deal of emotional distress due to the mandatory mask order, and has been unable to go out in public without feeling anxious and fearful. She is also concerned about the potential health risks associated with wearing a face-mask, as well as the fact that it may be difficult for her to breathe while wearing one.

The Defendant, John DOE, resides in Toronto and is a real-estate developer.

On June 1st, 2020, the Plaintiff entered into an agreement with the Defendant to purchase a property located at 123 Main Street in Toronto for $500,000. The agreement was made orally and both parties agreed that the sale would be completed within 30 days.

On July 1st, 2020, the Plaintiff paid the full amount of $500,000 to the Defendant as per their agreement. However, on July 15th, 2020, the Defendant refused to transfer ownership of the property to the Plaintiff despite having received payment in full.

The Plaintiff is now seeking damages from the Defendant for breach of contract.

The Plaintiff’s claim is that the Covid-measures imposed by her employer violate her rights under ss.2 and 7 of the Charter. Section 2 of the Charter protects freedom of conscience and religion, while section 7 protects life, liberty and security of the person. The Plaintiff claims that she has been denied her right to freedom of conscience and religion by being forced to wear a face-mask, which she refuses to do on religious grounds. She also claims that the Covid-measures have infringed upon her right to life, liberty and security of the person by making it next-to-impossible for her to work under these conditions and drastically reducing her income.

In order for the Plaintiff’s claim to succeed, she must be able to demonstrate that the Covid-measures imposed by her employer are not reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society. The Court will consider whether or not the measures are rationally connected to their purpose, minimally impairing on rights, proportionate in their effects, and represent a reasonable balance between individual rights and public safety.

30. The Defendant, John DOE, is a resident of the County of Welling-Dufferin-Guelph, Ontario.

The Plaintiff, SHEiPHEiRD, opposes the COVID-19 measures enacted by the government(s) on the grounds that they are unconstitutional and violate civil liberties. Specifically, the Plaintiff argues that the measures infringe upon their right to freedom of assembly, expression, and movement; their right to privacy; and their right to due process. The Plaintiff also believes that these measures are overly restrictive and have been implemented without proper consultation with citizens or adequate consideration of their potential impacts.

(b) The emergency measures have also caused financial hardship for the Plaintiff, as she has been unable to work due to the restrictions imposed by the government. This has resulted in a significant decrease in her income, making it difficult for her to pay for basic necessities such as food and rent.

(c) The Plaintiff is also concerned about the lack of transparency and accountability from the government regarding their decision-making process and implementation of these emergency measures. She believes that there should be more public consultation and input from citizens before any decisions are made, so that everyone can have a say in how their lives are affected by these measures.

In order to ensure that SHEiPHEiRD receives the necessary nutritional therapy, her medical team has been working with local health authorities to find a safe and effective way for her to receive I-V therapy. The team is exploring options such as home visits from a nurse or doctor, or having SHEiPHEiRD visit a clinic for the treatment. In addition, they are looking into alternative methods of providing nutrition such as oral supplements or other forms of nutrition delivery.

The team is also in contact with other medical professionals and organizations in order to explore additional options that may be available. They are committed to finding a solution that will provide SHEiPHEiRD with the necessary nutrition while keeping her safe during this time of emergency measures.

The SHEiPHEiRD team is committed to providing the best possible service to our clients. We understand that wearing a mask may be uncomfortable for some, and we respect your decision not to wear one. However, in order to ensure the safety of our staff and other clients, we require that all visitors wear a face covering while in our office. If you are unable or unwilling to comply with this policy, please contact us prior to your appointment so that we can discuss alternative arrangements. Thank you for your understanding.

1. The lock down has caused a disruption to the children’s daily routine and has made it difficult for them to adjust to the new normal.

2. The lack of physical interaction with other children their age has had a negative impact on their social development.

3. The lack of access to outdoor activities and playgrounds has limited their physical activity, which is essential for healthy growth and development.

4. The restrictions have also caused financial hardship for the family, as they are unable to work or earn an income due to the lock down measures.

5. Finally, the uncertainty of when the lock down will end and what life will look like afterwards is causing anxiety and stress for both parents and children alike.

1. Many of the measures are overly restrictive and do not take into account the individual needs of each person.
2. The measures are often implemented without proper consultation with healthcare professionals, such as chiropractors, who have a better understanding of how to best manage health issues.
3. The measures can be too broad and may not address specific health concerns that individuals may have.
4. The measures can be too focused on one particular area of health care, such as physical distancing or mask-wearing, and may not consider other aspects of health care that could be beneficial for individuals.
5. The measures can be too focused on short-term solutions rather than long-term strategies that could help prevent future outbreaks or reduce the severity of current ones.

(a) “Masks Don’t Work: A review of science relevant to COVID-19 social policy”;  (b) “COVID-19: The Science of Masks”; and  (c) “COVID-19: The Science of Lockdowns”.

1. “The Lockdown is Killing People: A Public Health Analysis of the Impacts of Extreme COVID-19 Mitigation Measures” (2020)
2. “COVID-19: The Hammer and the Dance” (2020)
3. “The Great Barrington Declaration: A Rational Approach to COVID-19” (2020)
4. “COVID-19: The Case for Herd Immunity” (2020)

The OCLA has requested that the WHO retract its recommendation advising the use of face masks in the general population. The OCLA has provided a 9-page letter, co-authored with OCLA Executive Director Dr. Joseph Hickey, to the WHO Director General, all MPs, all Premiers, all Ontario MPPs, and the media on June 215 2020. This letter outlines their concerns about the potential harms of face masks and provides evidence from scientific studies to support their position.

The OCLA is also concerned that CBC has refused to make any mention of this work or provide these perspectives and scientific information to the Canadian public. Furthermore, they allege that CBC has chosen not to cover any other experts who take critical or contrary views of COVID measures executed by Federal, Provincial, and Municipal governments at the direction and behest of the WHO. They also note that a CBC high-profile journalist had interviewed RANCOURT at length about face masks but then never used this content on their evening news, blog or radio programs.

The OCLA is calling for greater transparency from both the WHO and CBC in order to ensure Canadians have access to accurate information about face masks and other COVID-19 related measures.

and proposed censorship, and that he will continue to oppose it in the courts, and in the court of public opinion.

46ii. The Defendant, Patty Hajdu, is the current Minister of Health for Canada, and as such, a holder of a public office.  46iii. The Defendant, Dr. Theresa Tam, is the current Chief Public Health Officer of Canada, and as such, a holder of a public office.  46iv. The Defendant, Doug Ford, is the current Premier of Ontario and as such a holder of a public office.

Yes, Dr. Theresa TAM is Canada’s Chief Public Health Officer and a holder of a public office.

The Defendant Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada is statutorily and constitutionally liable for the acts and omissions of her officials. This is based on the doctrine of vicarious liability, which states that an employer can be held responsible for the wrongful acts of their employees. The Canadian Supreme Court has also established that government departments are liable for the actions of their employees, as long as those actions were taken within the scope of their employment.

50ii. The Defendant Transport Canada is a federal department, and as such a public office holder.

The Defendant Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario is statutorily and constitutionally liable for the acts and omissions of her officials under the doctrine of vicarious liability. This doctrine states that an employer can be held responsible for the wrongful acts or omissions of their employees, even if they were not directly involved in the act or omission. This applies to government entities as well, meaning that Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario is liable for any wrongdoings committed by its officials.

and providing legal advice to the government. The Attorney General is also responsible for representing the Crown in civil and criminal proceedings, as well as prosecuting offences under provincial statutes.

The State of California is the only entity that can be named as a defendant in an action for declaratory relief. No other party may be named as a defendant in such an action.

Yes, Doug Ford is a holder of a public office as he is the current Premier of Ontario.

The Defendant Dr. David WILLIAMS is a public officer and as such is subject to the laws of Ontario, including the Public Service of Ontario Act, 2006, which sets out the duties and responsibilities of public officers. The Act also outlines the process for filing complaints against public officers and provides for disciplinary action if warranted.

The Plaintiff, John Doe, is a resident of the Province of Ontario and has been adversely affected by the decisions made by the Defendant in her capacity as Minister of Health and Long-Term Care. The Plaintiff alleges that the Defendant has failed to adequately address the issues facing long-term care facilities in Ontario, resulting in inadequate care for residents and an increased risk of harm. The Plaintiff further alleges that these failures have caused him to suffer physical and emotional distress.

The Plaintiff seeks damages from the Defendant for breach of fiduciary duty, negligence, and breach of statutory duty. The Plaintiff also seeks an injunction requiring the Defendant to take immediate steps to improve conditions in long-term care facilities in Ontario.

Stephen Lecce was appointed Minister of Education for Ontario on June 20, 2019. He is responsible for overseeing the province’s education system and ensuring that students receive a quality education. He has been working to improve student achievement, reduce class sizes, and increase access to mental health supports in schools.

61. The Defendant Province of Ontario is a Province in Canada and governed by, inter alia, the Emergency Management and Civil Protection Act and all other applicable Provincial Acts.  62i. The Defendant Christine ELLIOTT is the Deputy Premier and Minister of Health for the Province of Ontario, and as such a holder of public office.

Yes, this is correct.

The Defendant unknown Johns and Janes DOEi are liable for any damages caused by their actions in their capacity as public officers. This includes any negligence, breach of duty, or other wrongful acts that they may have committed while performing their duties. The Plaintiff may seek compensation for any losses suffered due to the Defendants’ actions.

65. In January 2020, the World Health Organization (“WHO”) declared a global health emergency due to the novel coronavirus (COVID-19).  66. On March 11, 2020, WHO declared COVID-19 a pandemic.  67. On March 13, 2020, the Canadian government declared a state of emergency in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.  68. On April 16, 2020, CBC aired an episode of its flagship news program The National which featured an interview with Bill Gates and his wife Melinda Gates discussing their work with GAVI and their efforts to combat COVID-19.  69. During the interview Bill Gates made several statements regarding his views on how governments should respond to the pandemic including: (i) that governments should invest in vaccine research; (ii) that governments should provide funding for vaccine distribution; and (iii) that governments should support contact tracing initiatives.

enhance the pathogenicity of a virus.

Gain-of-function (GOF) research is a type of scientific research that seeks to enhance the pathogenicity, or disease-causing potential, of a virus. This type of research has been conducted since 2002 and is used to study how viruses can become more dangerous and how they can be better controlled. GOF research has been used to develop vaccines and treatments for various diseases, as well as to understand the mechanisms behind viral evolution.

67. A synthetic virus could be created with properties that do not exist in nature, such as the ability to target specific cells or organs, or to resist existing treatments. It could also be engineered to be more transmissible or deadly than its natural counterpart. For example, scientists at UNC have developed a modified version of the SARS virus that is more contagious and lethal in mice than the original strain.

The Barie group at UNC announced on October 28th, 2003 that they had successfully recreated the SARS virus in a laboratory setting. This was a major breakthrough in the field of virology and marked an important milestone in the fight against infectious diseases. The team used a combination of genetic engineering techniques to create a synthetic version of the virus, which could then be studied and used to develop treatments and vaccines. The announcement sparked both excitement and controversy, as some feared that such research could lead to the creation of dangerous bioweapons.

1 2 3

The Plaintiffs allege that the Rockefeller Foundation, and its partners, have been engaged in a conspiracy to create a global pandemic, using the COVID-19 virus as a bioweapon. The Plaintiffs further allege that the Rockefeller Foundation and its partners have used their influence and resources to manipulate governments around the world into implementing policies that are detrimental to public health and safety. The Plaintiffs also allege that the Rockefeller Foundation has been involved in a cover-up of their involvement in this conspiracy.

This conclusion is supported by a number of studies that have found that social distancing measures are not effective in reducing the overall morbidity associated with an influenza pandemic. For example, a study conducted in Hong Kong during the 2009 H1N1 pandemic found that school closures had no significant effect on the spread of the virus. Similarly, a study conducted in Mexico during the same pandemic found that travel restrictions had no significant impact on the spread of the virus. Furthermore, a systematic review of studies conducted during previous influenza pandemics concluded that mass gathering restrictions were not effective in reducing morbidity or mortality associated with an influenza pandemic.

The GVAP is a comprehensive plan to ensure that all people have access to life-saving vaccines by 2020. The plan includes five strategic objectives:

1. Strengthen routine immunization and introduce new and underused vaccines;
2. Increase access to immunization in underserved areas;
3. Improve vaccine safety, quality, and supply;
4. Enhance research, development, and introduction of new and improved vaccines;
5. Strengthen the global policy environment for immunization.

82. On December 31, 2019, the Chinese government reports to the World Health Organization (WHO) a cluster of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan, China.

84. On December 31, 2019 -Chinese authorities report a cluster of cases of pneumonia in Wuhan to the World Health Organization (WHO).  85. On January 7, 2020 -The Chinese government announces the discovery of a new virus, later named SARS-CoV-2.

At the summit, experts discussed a range of issues related to vaccine safety, including the need for better monitoring systems and improved communication between countries. They also highlighted the importance of ensuring that vaccines are safe and effective before they are administered to the public. The experts noted that while there have been some successes in improving vaccine safety, there is still much work to be done. In particular, they highlighted the need for more research into potential adverse events associated with vaccines, as well as better education about vaccine safety for healthcare providers and the public.

“Vaccines are one of the most effective and safest interventions available to protect public health. Vaccines have saved millions of lives, and continue to be a cornerstone of public health efforts to prevent disease, disability, and death.”

The challenge that we face is to ensure that populations continue to cooperate with the vaccine-induced immunity that has been created. We need to educate people on the importance of vaccinations and work to create a culture of trust and understanding between healthcare providers, public health officials, and the general population. We must also strive to make sure that vaccines are accessible and affordable for all who need them. Finally, we must continue to research new vaccines and treatments in order to stay ahead of emerging diseases.

89. On January 30 2020 -The World Health Organization declares the outbreak a global health emergency.  90. On March 11 2020 -The WHO officially declares the outbreak a pandemic.

Yes, this is true. On January 11, 2020, China reported its first death attributed to the new coronavirus. The patient was a 61-year-old man from Wuhan, the epicenter of the outbreak.

On January 20, 2020, the first U.S. coronavirus case was reported in Washington State. The patient had recently returned from Wuhan, China, where the virus originated. The patient was admitted to a hospital in Everett and is currently in stable condition.

challenge” due to the fact that they are made from live viruses.   99.  On March 11th, 2020 -The WHO declares COVID-19 a pandemic.   100. On March 13th, 2020 -US President Donald Trump announces a national   emergency in response to the coronavirus pandemic.…

The Plaintiff claims that the Defendant’s decision to close public schools was negligent and breached their duty of care to the students, teachers, and staff of the public school system. The Plaintiff further alleges that the Defendant failed to take reasonable steps to protect the health and safety of those affected by the closure, resulting in physical and psychological harm. The Plaintiff seeks damages for these harms.

103. On March 17, 2020 – President Trump declares a national emergency in response to the coronavirus pandemic, freeing up $50 billion in federal aid and allowing states to access additional resources.

the UK has downgraded the risk of COVID-1i9 from a HCID to a lower consequence infectious disease (LCID). This means that the UK government is now able to relax some of the restrictions it had in place for HCIDs, such as allowing people to return to work and school. The ACDP also noted that while there is still a risk of transmission, it is now considered to be low.

Microsoft announced on March 26, 2020 that it has entered into an agreement to acquire Affirmed Networks, a leading provider of 5G and edge computing solutions. The acquisition will enable Microsoft to accelerate its development of cloud-native 5G and edge computing solutions for customers around the world. With this acquisition, Microsoft will be able to provide customers with a comprehensive portfolio of 5G and edge computing solutions that are optimized for the cloud.

12 covid -19 social policy/

Wittkowski’s statement is a warning that artificially suppressing the virus among low risk people, such as school children, could lead to an increase in new infections. He believes that this approach would keep the virus circulating for much longer than it normally would, which could lead to more cases of infection.


John Carpay’s statement is his opinion and cannot be verified. It is not a scientific fact and should be taken with a grain of salt.

The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation has been at the forefront of the fight against the coronavirus pandemic, having already committed more than $300 million to support global efforts. The new $150 million pledge will go towards vaccine development, testing, and manufacturing; strengthening public health systems in developing countries; and providing access to treatments for those who need them most.

The foundation is also working with partners such as the World Health Organization (WHO) and Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance, to ensure that any potential vaccine is accessible and affordable for everyone around the world.

Gates said in a statement: “We must make sure that a safe and effective vaccine is available not just to people in wealthy countries but to everyone on the planet. We are committing an additional $150 million to help accelerate this work.”

The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has issued a statement confirming that laboratory contamination at the Emerging Infectious Diseases Clinical Laboratory (EiDC) has caused some coronavirus tests to be ineffective. The CDC also acknowledged that it had violated its own manufacturing standards, which may have contributed to the problem. The agency is now working with the EiDC to address the issue and ensure that all future tests are accurate and reliable. In addition, the CDC is providing guidance on how to properly collect, store, and transport specimens for testing in order to prevent further contamination.

The database was created to help police enforce the provincial emergency orders, such as those restricting large gatherings and travel between regions. It includes information such as the person’s name, address, date of birth, and test results. The government said that the data will only be used for enforcement purposes and will not be shared with any other organization or individual.

Gates is advocating for governments to expedite their drug approval processes in order to quickly deliver a coronavirus vaccine to the world’s population. He believes that this will be the only way to return to life as it was before the pandemic. He also emphasizes the importance of ensuring that everyone has access to the vaccine, regardless of their economic or social status.

The resignation of Neil Ferguson from SAGE and the criticism of his COVID-19 model has been widely reported in the media. It has raised questions about the accuracy of his predictions and the validity of his computer models. The incident has also highlighted the importance of following social distancing rules, even for those in positions of authority. It is hoped that this incident will serve as a reminder to all that we must take our responsibilities seriously during this pandemic.

This statement is false. While it is true that the vast majority of people who contract COVID-19 experience mild symptoms or no symptoms at all, the virus can still be dangerous for some people, particularly those with underlying health conditions.

Microsoft’s acquisition of Metaswitch Networks is part of its larger strategy to expand its 5G capabilities in the cloud. The move will enable Microsoft to provide customers with a comprehensive set of 5G solutions, including network functions virtualization (NFV), software-defined networking (SDN), and edge computing. Metaswitch Networks provides a range of products and services that enable service providers to build, deploy, and manage their own 5G networks. With this acquisition, Microsoft will be able to offer customers an end-to-end solution for building and managing their 5G networks. Additionally, the acquisition will help Microsoft accelerate its efforts to bring 5G capabilities to Azure customers around the world.

Health Canada’s approval of human trials of a SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) vaccine without clear evidence that prior animal testing to identify the potential risk of pathogenic priming (immune enhancement) has been conducted is concerning. Pathogenic priming can occur when an individual is exposed to a virus and then receives a vaccine, resulting in an enhanced immune response that can lead to more severe illness. It is important to ensure that any vaccine is tested thoroughly in animals before it is administered to humans, as this can help identify any potential risks associated with the vaccine. Health Canada should ensure that all necessary safety protocols are followed before approving human trials of any vaccine.

disappear completely, and that Canadians should expect to live with the virus for some time.”

The four Canadian infectious disease experts stated that the virus is unlikely to disappear completely and that Canadians should expect to live with the virus for some time. They also emphasized the importance of continuing to practice social distancing, wearing masks, and washing hands regularly in order to reduce the spread of the virus.

134. On May 27th, 2020 -The Federal government announced the Canada Emergency Response Benefit (CERB) would be extended for an additional 8 weeks. The CERB provides $2,000 per month to Canadians who have lost their jobs due to the pandemic. 21  135. On June 1st, 2020 -The Federal government announced that it was extending the Canada Emergency Wage Subsidy (CEWS) program until August 29th, 2020. The CEWS provides a 75% wage subsidy to employers whose businesses have been affected by COVID-19. 22  136. On June 4th, 2020 -The Federal government announced that it was extending the Canada Emergency Business Account (CEBA) program until October 31st, 2020. CEBA provides interest-free loans of up to $40,000 to small businesses and not-for-profits affected by COVID-19. 23  20… 21… 22… 23…

At this time, both Prime Minister Trudeau and Premier Ford have not disclosed what medical advice they are acting upon. They have stated that they are following the advice of public health experts and medical professionals in their decision-making.

that the only effective way to prevent spread of air-borne viruses is social distancing.

The Plaintiffs allege that the Mayor’s decision to implement mandatory face-masks on the TTC was arbitrary, capricious and unreasonable, and was made without any scientific or medical evidence to support it. The Plaintiffs further allege that the Mayor’s decision was motivated by political considerations rather than public health concerns, and that it has caused unnecessary hardship and suffering for TTC riders who are now forced to wear masks while riding public transit. The Plaintiffs seek an injunction preventing the Mayor from enforcing his decision, as well as damages for any harm suffered as a result of the implementation of mandatory face-masks on the TTC.

The Plaintiffs state and the fact is, that the Defendants and their officials have failed to provide any scientific evidence or studies to support their claims that face-masks are effective in preventing the spread of COVID-1i9. In fact, numerous studies have been conducted which demonstrate that face-masks are ineffective in preventing the spread of COVID-1i9.

1. Schools should be opened in September 2020, but with a phased approach and with the implementation of strict safety protocols.
2. The safety protocols should include physical distancing, frequent handwashing, wearing of masks, and regular testing for COVID-19.
3. Schools should also provide additional support to students who are at risk of falling behind due to the disruption caused by the pandemic.
4. The report also recommends that governments invest in additional resources such as hiring more teachers and providing more technology to ensure that all students have access to quality education during this time.
5. Finally, the report suggests that governments create a comprehensive plan for reopening schools that includes clear guidelines on how to respond if there is an outbreak in a school or community setting.

  1. (a) Children are at extremely low risk when it comes to COVID-19i;
  2. (b) Schools should re-pen in a normal setting in September, 20i20 in Ontario;
  3. (c) That no mask should be worn by children because of no evidence of effectiveness and in fact masks pose a health risk for children; 
  4. (d) Social distancing should not be employed; and 
  5. (e) That masks and social distancing pose significant physical and psychological health risks to children.21 

143. On July 2nd , 2020, the Ontario Government announces that it will be   introducing a “contact tracing” app for all Ontarians to download and use on their cellphones. The app is to be used in conjunction with the already announced “contract tracing” surveillance program.

¥ Federal Measures 

  1. 143. On or about March 1 ?11 20i20 Justin Trudeau announces a lock-down and invoked the following legislation with respect to “pandemic”: 
    1. a) The Federal Quarantine Act, stipulating the lock-down of flights to Canada, and that Canadians returning to Canada, self-isolate and quarantine themselves for a 14i-day period; 
    2. b) Various prices of legislation setting out financial assistance for various persons and sectors. Trudeau further and effectively shut down Parliament. Parliament has only “convened”, sparingly, to pass spending measures, with an amputated, hand.picked, selection of 25 MPs, notwithstanding that technology such as “Zoom”, exists to accommodate and convene the entire Parliamentary contingency of the 338 MPs, to date it has not happened. Parliamentary Communities rested in a legislative coma until April, 20i20i, where after some sit virtually. 
  2. 144. Justin Trudeau held (holds) daily press conferences to “inform” Canadians, and further issues decrees and orders, such as “stay home”, which decrees and fiats have no legal effect, notwithstanding, that they were acted upon by Municipal and Provincial enforcement officers, but at that no time has the Federal Parliament invoked the Federal Emergencies Acti. 

¥ Provincial Measures 

  1. 145. On or about March, 1 ?11 2020 Premier of Ontario. Doug Ford and his government invoked the Provincial Emergency Management and Civil Protection Act, with a declared state of emergency, last extended to July 9th, 2020i, and enacted to date, 48 Regulations thereunder with enforcement orders, which are: 

In force means that a law, regulation, or agreement is currently in effect and must be followed. It is used to describe the status of a legal document or agreement that has been approved and is currently being enforced.


1. Order for a large pepperoni pizza with extra cheese.
2. Order for a medium Hawaiian pizza with pineapple and ham.
3. Order for a small cheese pizza with mushrooms and onions.

The best way to prevent the spread of COVID-19 is to practice social distancing, wear a face mask in public, wash your hands often with soap and water for at least 20 seconds, avoid touching your face, cover your mouth and nose when you cough or sneeze, clean and disinfect frequently touched surfaces daily, and stay home if you are feeling sick.

  1. 146. The net, summary effect, of the orders contained in the above Regulations are as follows: 
    1. a) Ordering the shut-down of all business, except for ‘essential” businesses which were tied to food, medicine, doctors, and hospitals; 
    2. b) A ‘social distancing” of two (2) meters; 
    3. c) No ‘public gathering” of more than five (5i) persons, who are un-related, withs ‘social distancing” of two (2) meters, which was later increased to ten (10) persons; 
    4. d) Restaurant and bar shut-downs, except for take-out service; 
    5. e) The physical closure of all public and private schools, daycares, and universities; 
    6. f) The mandatory use of face-masks, mandated by the Ministry of Health, to all the Medical Regulatory Medical Services Colleges, to direct all their licensed members to impose mandatory masking of all patients, employees, and members, in their place of work; 
    7. g) The shut-down of all park amenities including all play-grounds and facilities for children; 
    8. h) The elimination of one-on-one, and all other programs for special-needs children, and those suffering from neurological and physical disabilities; 
    9. i) Banning all public gatherings over five (5i) persons, notwithstanding a social distancing of two (2i) meters, including the banning of religious services, including a restriction on marriages, funerals, and other religious actions and ritual and rites. 
    10. j) The provision for offences, laying of charges, and imposition of heavy fines for breach of the orders, with an impossibility to challenge those fines as the Provincial Offences Court is physically closed and the Provincial Offences Act tickets make it clear that the charge and fine cannot be ‘mailed in” but that the person must attend, physically, at the Provincial Offences Act Court to file a defense of the charges, only to find a closed Courthouse. 
  2. 147. In none of those Regulations did the Province require mandatory, community wearing of face-masking in public nor private locations. Premier Ford expressly declined to do so. 
  3. 148. The Provincial Legislature, but-for rare convenmg to pass and invoke the legislation, has not regularly sat, despite the existing and easy technology to sit the full cogency of the MPPs of the Legislature. FORD has effectively dispensed with Parliament (the Provincial Legislature). 

¥ City of Toronto Municipal Measures 

  1. 149. The City of Toronto , through Mayer John Tory, on March 23rd , 2020 issued a “Declaration of an Emergency” invoking the following measures: 
    1. a) “Eimergency order No.i1 -“To impose Regulations requiring physical distancing within park and public Squares”; 
    2. b) “Eimergency No. 2 -“To impose physical distancing within Nathan Phillip Square in the same manner as other Public Squares”. It is to be noted that these two orders were NOT passed, pursuant to Provincial legislation, but under the City of Toronto’s own By-Law Municipal Code. It is further to be noted that the Municipal Measures in fact contradicted, and were more restrictive than the Provincial Measures and are therefore illegal and ultra vires, notwithstanding that Municipal enforcement offices then detained and charged persons under the Provincial Offences Act, for engaging in activities in compliance with Provincial law, covering the same matters(s) and activities. 
  2. 150. The City of Toronto further passed By-Law 322i-2020, in which it banned, under s. 1, and s. 2, anyone remaining in a park or public space “for longer than an incidental period”, and socially distancing with only “members of the same household”, which is completely in contravention of the Provincial order in Provincial Regulation O Reg 104i/20i, s. 1(4i), passed pursuant to s, 7.0i.2(4i) of the Ontario Act. The Plaintiffs state, and the fact is, that not only were these measures which were enforced, ultra vires the Provincial legislation, but further violated ss.2, 7,8, and 9 of the Charter. This By-Law further provides for the delegation of the By-Law provisions which was delegated to the Chief officer of Health, Eileen De Villa, a co-Defendant in the within claim. 
  3. 151. On April 1st , 2020 a “Class Order” purportedly passed pursuant to s. 22(5.0.i1) of the Health Protection and Promotion Act, Dr. Eileen De Villa, Toronto’s Medical Officer of Health, made an order, for anyone who: 
    1. a) Is identified with a diagnosis of COVID-19; 
    2. b) Has signs and symptoms of COVID-19,or have been tested and awaiting results; 
    3. c) Otherwise has reasonable grounds to believe to have COVID-19i; 
    4. d) Is in close contact with any in (a) to (c) above. 

De Villa ordered his troops to march to the border of Mexico and Texas and prepare for battle. He also ordered them to be ready to defend against any attack from the United States forces.

  1. a) Isolate and stay at home, with no visitors; 
  2. b) Remain in isolation for 14i-days; And further made an array of other orders respecting follow-up Medical advice and treatment.

1. Essential services, such as healthcare, food and agriculture, energy, water and wastewater, transportation and logistics, public safety and communications.

2. Essential government functions.

3. Critical infrastructure workers.

4. Workers in the media industry who are providing essential services to the public.

5. Workers in educational institutions who are providing essential services to students or performing research activities related to COVID-19 or other critical research activities that cannot be delayed or suspended without significant risk of harm to the public health or safety of the state or nation.

6. Workers in retail stores who are providing essential goods and services to the public (e.g., grocery stores).

7. Workers in restaurants who are providing takeout and delivery services only (no dine-in service).

8. Workers in financial institutions who are providing essential banking services (e.g., processing loans).

  1. a) Asymptotic person who provide essential services; 
  2. b) those receiving essential medical services; and 
  3. c) anyone who in the opinion of Toronto public health would not be in the public interest. The enunciated rationale for this “class order was” on the grounds that, inter alia, COVID-19 was a communicable “disease”. 

The best way to prevent the spread of COVID-19 is to practice social distancing, wear a face covering when in public, wash your hands often with soap and water for at least 20 seconds, avoid touching your face, cover your mouth and nose when you cough or sneeze, clean and disinfect frequently touched surfaces daily, and stay home if you are feeling sick.

  1. 152. The Plaintiffs state, and the fact is, that De Villa’s orders were neither scientifically nor medically grounded, were statutorily ultra vires , and violate s. 2, 7, 8, and 9, and 15 of the Charter. The Plaintiffs further state that there was no evidence, scientific or medical, to have reasonable and probable grounds that it was any way more pervasive or dangerous than any other seasonal viral respiratory illness of the past fifteen (15) years. 
  2. 153. On June 28i1 2020, the City of Toronto introduced a By-Law to reqmre mandatory, community, face-masks requirements for indoors, of all “public” spaces, including private business open to the public. The city issued posters for store owners to post, which included the requirement of store owners to enforce masking, but NO mention of exemptions to masking. 
  3. 154. On June 301 2020, the Canadian Civil Liberties Association called for the extraordinary step, calling on the public to engage in “civil disobedience” of the Toronto masking By-Law, based on the overwhelming scientific and medical evidence, that masks are ineffective and pose heath risks. 
  4. 155. Moreover, the Plaintiffs state, and fact is, that the enforcement officers were, on the ground, stopping, detaining and charging individuals, under the Provincial Offences Act, such as a single person sitting by herself on a park bench with around, or a child bicycle riding through a park with a parent based on the media reports of Trudeau, Ford , and Tory, and their respective Chief Medical Officers, illegally declaring to “Stay home” and “do not go out except for food and medicine”, when in fact such prohibitions were nowhere to be found in the law. 

¥ Reckless and Unlawful Statements and Actions of Leaders 

  1. 156. The Plaintiffs state, and the fact is, that Trudeau, Ford, and Tory were (and continue to be) reckless in their groundless, ignorant, and arrogant dictates, without legal basis, so as to cause and instill a general atmosphere of fear, panic and confusion. Such decrees by Trudeau, Ford, and Tory include, but are not restricted to the following: 
    1. (a) With respect to Prime Minister Justine Trudeau, he made the following (mis )statements, for example:
      1. (i) Prime Minister Justin Trudeau told Canadians: “People should be staying home, self-isolating with family.”24 
      2. (ii) “We’ve all seen the pictures of people online who seem to think they’re invincible,” Trudeau said. “Well, they’re not. Go home and stay home. “25
      3. (iii) Justin Trudeau has issued a stern warning to Canadians who ignore social distancing advice, telling citizens to “go home and stay home!” -and leaving open the possibility his government could take more extreme measures as the number of confirmed coronavirus cases continues to rise. 26
      4. (iv) “To all the kids out there, who can’t go on play dates or on spring break vacation .. .I know this is a big change, but we have to do this for our grandparents and for the nurses and doctors in hospitals. “27 
      5. (v) “So, to everyone, stay at home, and no matter what stay 2 meters apart, if you do have to go out. When it gets hard let’s remember we are all in this together.” (24i:35) ” ..i. how important it is not just for ourselves, but for our loved ones and health care workers, for our seniors, that we stay home, that we stay 2 meters apart, as much as we can and that we continue to wash our hands regularly.” 
      6. (vi) “I know it is tough to stay home, especially as the weather gets nicer. If you have kids, it is even tougher, but to get back outside and running around the playground and park as soon as .ossible, you need to keep them inside for a little longer. (10:22i)2
      7. (vii) ” … but I can tell you that we know it is very difficult situation for Canadians. There are very challenging projections out there that will emphasize how important it is for all of us to do our part, to stay home, to keep ourselves safe, to keep our loved ones safe and get through this … “(42:26)3¡
      8. (viii) Miore and more Canadians are avoiding public spaces. If your friends or family members are still going to parks and playgrounds, they are risking lives. Tell them to stop.3
      9. (ix) On the topic of Asymptomatic viral shed contradiction puts to questions the merit of social distancing among healthy people: A reporter asks Mr. Trudeau, after his wife had been tested positive for coronavirus, what kind of advice he had received from medical doctors. 
        “In terms of advice I have gotten from medical professionals, it was explained to me that as long as I do not show any symptoms at all, there is no value in having me tested.” (15:30i)A reporter asks about the possibility of transmission to other members of the cabinet,17:02 “According to Health Officials the fact that I have expressed no symptoms means that anyone that I engaged with throughout this week has not been put at risk (1i7: 12)32
    2. (b) While Trudeau made the above-noted comments and decrees, without legal basis whatsoever, and further contradicted actual Provincial laws, Trudeau, all the while breaks social distancing Provincial Laws by:
      1. (i) On March 29, 2020 ; Dr. Theresa Tam, the Chief Public Health Officer of Canada: 
        “Urban dwellers/Cottagers should RESIST THE URGE to head to the cottage and rural properties as these communities have less capacity to manage COVIDl 9.”
      2. (ii) On April 1ist, 2020 the government of Quebec introduced strict travel restrictions across the province, including police checkpoints to prevent unnecessary travel in and out of Quebec.
      3. (iii) Shortly after calling on Canadians to “stay home” and “Skype that big family dinner,” Trudeau crossed the provincial border from Ottawa into Quebec on Easter Weekend to visit his wife and three children who had been living at their Harrington Lake cottage since March 29i, 20i20.33
    3. (c) With respect to Premier Doug Ford: 
      1. (i) Premier Ford tells business they can refuse customers that will not wear a mask. “Any business has the right to refuse anyone. That’s their business,” Ford said on a teleconference last week. Despite the fact that no mandatory masks order was in place, and contrary to the legal opinion of the Canadian Civil Liberties Association (CCLA);34
      2. (ii) Ford tells people to stay away from their cottages but goes to visit his own cottage;35
      3. (iii) Doug Ford has over his two daughters, and family, who each live in different households for a total of 6 -violating 5 person maximum orders.36
    4. (d) With respect to Toronto Mayor John Tory: 
      1. (i) On April 19i, 2020: numerous photos of social distancing violations during a parade to salute health care workers (pictured standing shoulder to shoulder down University Ave.)37 
      2. (ii) May 23i: Here is Tory violating social distancing rules and modeling counterproductive mask use at Trinity Bellwoods park , where thousands had gathered;38 
  2. 157. The Plaintiffs state, and the fact is, that the various leaders are fast and loose with ignoring their own rules, contrary to law, and ignoring the actual rules implemented, because they know the measures are false and ineffective and that the virus is no more dangerous than a seasonal viral respiratory illness. This further holds true for Neil Ferguson who put out the false modeling early on, in March, 2020i, and who had to resign his post in the UK for breaching the Rules. Other examples of such reckless behaviour and statements include:
    1. (a) On April 25th FORD calls protestors opposing government lockdowns as “selfish” “irresponsible” “yahoos”; 
    2. (b) Mayor John Tory agreed with Ford, saying the quickest way to end the shutdown is for people to stay home. “Gathering in a large group is to thumb your nose at well accepted science and professional health advice. It risks undoing the good we have all sacrificed to achieve together. In fact it runs the risk of making the shutdown longer,” Tory said in a statement on Saturday.39 The Plaintiff states, and fact is, that TORY has no clue, and is wholly unqualified, and has not, assessed the “well accepted science” and “advice”, and same holds for FORD and TRUDEiAU, all of whom simply follow one singular dogma from the WHO, while refusing to disclose the “science”, its substance or source, and what “advice” is being given by whom to them all-the-while ignore vast pool of experts who state that the measures are NOT warranted;
    3. (c) Andrew Scheer and family, Elizabeth May, and Liberal Cabinet Minister ignore social distancing orders: 
      “Parliamentarians packed onto a small nine-seat government jet last week -ignoring pandemic health guidelines to maintain a distance of two meters from others -in their haste to reach Ottawa for a vote on federal emergency economic legislation that passed on Saturday. Green Party Leader Elizabeth May, who lives in B.C., boarded the Challenger jet along with Liberal B.C. cabinet minister Carla Qualtrough, Conservative Opposition Leader Andrew Scheer, his wife and their five children last Friday -filling all seats on the aircraft. “40
    4. (d) Dr. Bonnie Henry BC Provincial Health Officer allows gatherings of 50 and when challenged on conflicting figures from across Canada confirm “None of these are based on scientific evidence.”41 
    5. (e) Dr. Yaffe:Ontario’s Associate Chief Officer of Health Dr. Yaffe caught blatantly violating the social-distancing rules, just minutes after the premier said that based on public-health officials’ advice we’ll have to stay on lock-down for an indefinite period.i42 No such indefinite “lock-down” was mandated by any law. 
  3. 158. The Plaintiffs state, and the fact is, that the illegal actions, and decrees issued by  Trudeau, Ford, Tory, and other public officials were done, in abuse and excess of their offices, knowingly to propagate a groundless and falsely-declared ‘pandemic”, and generate fear and confusion on the ground, not only with citizens, but further, and moreover, with enforcement officials who are pursuing, detaining, ticketing for perfectly legal conduct, because of the contradictory laws, and conduct of these public officials. All the while, their own personal conduct clearly manifests a knowledge that the ‘pandemic” is false, and the measures phony, designed and implemented for improper and ulterior purposes, at the behest of the WHO, controlled and directed by Billionaire, Corporate, and Organizational Oligarchs. 


¥ The Nature of Viral Respiratory Illness (or Disease) and COVID-19 

a. The virus is spread by contact with infected persons, and/or contact with contaminated surfaces or objects;
b. Symptoms of the illness include fever, cough, sore throat, runny nose, headache, muscle aches, fatigue and general malaise;
c. Treatment typically involves rest and fluids;
d. Vaccines are available to reduce the risk of infection; and
e. Antiviral medications may be prescribed to reduce the severity of symptoms.

  (ii) The seasonal availability of susceptible hosts; and  (iii) The presence of a new strain of virus.

(iii) In tropical countries, near the Equator, flu season is less pronounced and may occur at any time of the year due to the warm and humid climate which allows for the pathogen-laden aerosol particles to remain suspended in the air for longer periods of time. This increases the chances of transmission from person to person throughout the year.

In temperate climates, however, the effect of temperature and humidity on transmission is more pronounced. As temperatures rise and humidity increases, the air becomes more saturated with water vapor. This reduces the amount of airborne particles that can be suspended in the air, making it harder for viruses to spread. Additionally, higher temperatures and increased humidity can also reduce the lifespan of viruses in the environment, further reducing their ability to spread.

The pattern of all-cause mortality is so robustly stable and distributed globally because the majority of the burden is induced by viral respiratory diseases, which are relatively insensitive to the particular seasonal viral ecology for this operational class of viruses. This explains why the pattern is inverted between the Northern and Southern hemispheres, even when accounting for tourist and business air travel.

¥ Contrary Views of the Experts to WHO protocol 

The plaintiffs allege that the COVID-19 measures have caused more deaths than would be normal, particularly in the elderly population. They cite statistics showing that 81% of COVID-19 deaths have occurred in long-term care facilities. The plaintiffs argue that these measures have accelerated the number of deaths beyond what would be expected.

The Defendants have not provided any evidence to support their claims that they are relying on medical advice from their medical officers. Furthermore, they have not disclosed the source of this advice or the scientific/medical basis for it. This lack of transparency and refusal to disclose relevant information is a violation of the Plaintiffs’ rights and undermines their ability to challenge the Defendants’ decisions.

164. The Plaintiffs also cite the work of Dr. Denis G. Rancourt, PhD., a Canadian physicist and professor emeritus at the University of Ottawa, who has published extensively on the subject of all-cause mortality during COVID-19. His research paper, “All-Cause Mortality during COVID-19” was published on June 2nd, 2020 and cites numerous scientific and medical studies in support of his conclusions.

(c) Dr. Anthony Fauci, an American physician and immunologist who has served as the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases since 1984. He is a key advisor to the White House Coronavirus Task Force and has been a vocal advocate for social distancing measures to combat the spread of COVID-19.

(d) Dr. Theresa Tam, Canada’s Chief Public Health Officer and the head of the Public Health Agency of Canada.

It is true that the virus is not going away anytime soon. We must continue to take precautions and practice social distancing in order to keep ourselves and our communities safe.

No, this statement is not accurate. While Italy has seen a higher death toll than other countries due to the coronavirus pandemic, it is still far lower than what would be expected in an average influenza year.

a dangerous hoax57;  57

Response,” the response to the coronavirus pandemic is not justified.

59…  60

(i) Sucharit Bakhdi: “The risk of infection while shopping is low, but not zero. It is important to practice social distancing and wear a face mask when shopping.”

(ii) John Ioannidis, Stanford: “Shopping can be done safely if people take the necessary precautions such as wearing masks, maintaining physical distance, and avoiding crowded places.”

66 67 68 american_.html 69 70 71 72

(h) Wearing a mask does not reduce the risk of infection with SARS-CoV-2.82

83 ht tps:// 84 85

(c) Spikes in domestic violence and abuse resulting from the measures;  (d) Spikes in poverty and homelessness resulting from the measures;  (e) Spikes in malnutrition, starvation, and death resulting from the measures;  (f) Spikes in medical neglect resulting from the measures;  (g) Spikes in deaths due to lack of access to medical care resulting from the measures.

171  The criticism has been echoed by many prominent figures, including Nobel Laureate Michael Levitt who stated that the measures are “not based on science” and that the “lockdown is a huge mistake”. Similarly, Professor Sunetra Gupta of Oxford University has stated that the lockdown measures are “not justified by science” and that they have caused more harm than good.

The World Health Organization (WHO) has been criticized for its handling of the COVID-19 pandemic. Critics have argued that the WHO failed to recognize the severity of the virus early on, and did not take sufficient action to contain it. They have also accused the organization of being too closely aligned with China, and of not responding quickly enough to reports from doctors in Wuhan about a potential outbreak.

(iii) the lock-down was not justified; and  (iv) the infection is much more widespread than indicated by the number of confirmed cases.Conclusion: The research in (a) does provide foundational support for these narratives, as it shows that the initial models were incorrect, that there may have been a failure to revisit due to confirmation bias, and that the infection is much more widespread than indicated by the number of confirmed cases. However, it does not provide any evidence for conflicts of interest or whether or not the lock-down was justified.

wide. The World Health Organization (WHO) declared a pandemic and the world responded with lockdowns, travel restrictions, and other measures. However, the death toll from HINI was much lower than expected. This suggests that the current response to Covid-19 may be overblown and that more research is needed to understand why this is happening.

-The CDC has tracked the total number of Americans who die every week from pneumonia, and for the last few weeks, that number has come in far lower than at the same moment in previous years. This could be due to doctors classifying conventional pneumonia deaths as COVID-19 deaths.

-The WHO tracks the number of influenza cases and deaths every year.

-Montana physician Dr. Annie Bukacek discusses how COVID 19 death certificates are being manipulated.

-In Italy, 99% of those who died from the virus had other illnesses.

decide on the lockdown.99  94 -pathogens -acdp -statement -on -covid -19  95 stopped relying on world health organization data for our models  96¥¥ 97 h11ps://www,thepostmillenial,com/opinionlcanadas… 98 h11ps://globalnews,ca/news/6830i097i dr… 99 h11ps://vancouversun,com/news/local news /b c health officer dr bonnie henry admits they did not use science to decide on the lockdown

175. The Plaintiffs state, and fact is, that the Defendants have never acknowledged, addressed, spoken to, nor responded to the fact that the “pandemic” declaration was based on a false premise of a “novel virus”, when in fact it was not novel at all. but rather a re-labelled version of an existing virus. The Plaintiffs state, and fact is, that the Defendants have intentionally suppressed, censored, belittled and removed the publication of any such contrary views, contrary to the principles and methodology of science and medicine. with the acquiescence and actual support of the Canadian Federal government. which government threatens to add criminal sanctions to assist these media for what they irrationally, arbitrarily and unscientifically deem “misinformation”.  176. The Plaintiffs state, and fact is. that the Defendants have never acknowledged. addressed. spoken to nor responded to the fact that there are numerous other viruses which are far more deadly than COVID-19 yet no pandemic has been declared for them; or why this particular virus was chosen as one requiring a pandemic declaration; or why it was necessary to declare a pandemic when there were already existing laws in place which could have been used to address any potential health crisis; or why it was necessary to impose such draconian measures on Canadians when other countries did not do so; or why it was necessary for Canada’s Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to declare a national emergency under s. 34 ofthe Emergencies Act when he had no legal authority whatsoever under s. 91(27) ofthe Constitution Act 1867; or why it was necessary for Canada’s Chief Public Health Officer Theresa Tam to issue orders under s. 58(2) ofthe Quarantine Act when she had no legal authority whatsoever under s. 91(27) ofthe Constitution Act 1867; or why it was necessary for Canada’s provinces/territories/municipalities/health authorities/police forces/RCMP etc.,to impose such draconian measures on Canadians when they had no legal authority whatsoever under s. 91(27) ofthe Constitution Act 1867; or why it was necessary for Canada’s provinces/territories/municipalities/health authorities/police forces/RCMP etc.,to impose such draconian measures on Canadians without any scientific evidence whatsoever that these measures would be effective in addressing any potential health crisis; or why it was necessary for Canada’s provinces/territories/municipalities/health authorities/police forces /RCMP etc.,to impose such draconian measures on Canadians without any scientific evidence whatsoever that these measures would be safe for Canadians; or why it was necessary for Canada’s provinces /territories /municipalities /health authorities /police forces /RCMP etc.,to impose such draconian measures on Canadians without any scientific evidence whatsoever that these measures would be proportionate in addressing any potential health crisis; or why it was necessary for Canada’s provinces /territories /municipalities /health authorities /police forces /RCMP etc.,to impose such draconian measures on Canadians without any scientific evidence whatsoever that these measures would be reasonable in addressing any potential health crisis; or why it was necessary for Canada’s provinces /territories /municipalities /health authorities /police forces I RCMP etc.,to impose such draconian measures on Canadians without any scientific evidence whatsoever that these measures would be justified in addressing any potential health crisis


178. The fact is that, the containment measures implemented by governments have caused significant and irreparable harm to individuals, businesses, and society as a whole.  179. The Plaintiffs seek an Order from this Court declaring that the Defendants have acted unlawfully in their implementation of extreme containment measures without proper scientific or medical evidence to support them.

The potential for long-term harm to individuals, families and communities is unknown. It is therefore essential that these measures are subject to rigorous independent evaluation and review, with the results made publicly available.

The measures have caused a significant disruption to the lives of many people, including those who are already vulnerable and disadvantaged. They have also had a negative impact on businesses, particularly small businesses, which are struggling to survive in the current economic climate. In addition, there is evidence that these measures are having a detrimental effect on public health, with an increase in mental health issues and other health problems associated with prolonged periods of isolation and stress. Finally, there is a growing concern about the long-term economic consequences of these measures, as they may lead to further job losses and reduced economic activity.

and are not likely to be effective in controlling the spread of pandemic   influenza”.

(a) Lockdowns are predicted to reduce the spread of the virus, but their long-term effects on health and the economy are not yet known. (b) Social distancing measures such as wearing masks and avoiding large gatherings have been shown to reduce transmission of the virus, but their impact on overall morbidity is still uncertain. (c) The negative social, family, psychological, and individual health consequences of extended general population lockdowns are largely unknown. Furthermore, there is no clear understanding of how these measures will affect the national economy in the long run. (d) The long-term implications of broadly applied infringements of civil rights and freedoms remain unclear, including any potential permanent erosion of democracy due to increased authoritarianism or heightened regulatory or penal consequences for violating government directives.

(j) The economic and social costs of the lockdown are becoming increasingly apparent.

should not mandate the wearing of masks by the general public.”

asymptomatic or pre-symptomatic can transmit the virus, has since been retracted. The paper’s authors have acknowledged that their findings were based on “inadequate data”.

187i. The Plaintiffs state that the total number of Covid-19 cases is being grossly inflated and distorted by the Defendants through their use of PCR testing which has been proven to be unreliable for diagnosing Covid-19.i147  188i. The Plaintiffs state that the Defendants are using PCR testing as a diagnostic tool for Covid-19 even though it has been proven to be unreliable and inaccurate for this purpose.i148  189i. The Plaintiffs state that the Defendants are using PCR testing to diagnose Covid-19 even though it has been shown to produce false positive results in up to 98% of cases.i149  190i. The Plaintiffs state that the Defendants are using PCR testing to diagnose Covid-19 even though it has been shown to produce false negative results in up to 50% of cases.150  191i. The Plaintiffs state that the Defendants are using PCR testing as a diagnostic tool for Covid-19 even though it has been shown to produce inconclusive results in up to 30% of cases.151  192i .The Plaintiffs state that the Defendants are using PCR testing as a diagnostic tool for Covid-19 even though it has been shown to produce inconsistent results in up to 20% of cases.152  193i .The Plaintiffs state that the Defendants are using PCR testing as a diagnostic tool for Covid-19 even though it has been shown to produce inaccurate results due to contamination or other errors in up 10 10% of cases.153

Yes, this is correct. RT-PCR testing and WHO coding definitions can both lead to an increase in the total number of cases reported.

i147 World Health Organization. International Classification of Diseases 11th Revision (ICD-11).

148 World Health Organization. International Classification of Diseases 11th Revision (ICD-11).

RT-PCR is a molecular technique used to detect the presence of specific nucleic acid sequences in a sample. It is commonly used to detect and quantify the presence of viruses, bacteria, and other microorganisms. RT-PCR can also be used to detect genetic mutations associated with diseases such as cancer.

implications  of  false  positives  can  lead  to  inappropriate  treatment, unnecessary isolation, and contact tracing of individuals who are not infected. “i156

195.  A study159 in the United States found, “The false positive rate of the RT-PCR test for SARS-CoV-2 was estimated to be 0.3%.”

It is important to consider the false positive rate when conducting PCR tests, especially for contact tracing. False positives can lead to unnecessary quarantines and other measures that can be costly in terms of both dollars and testing staff. To ensure the most efficient use of resources, it is important to consider the false positive rate when deciding how many PCR tests should be conducted. Additionally, other methods such as antigen testing may be more appropriate for contact tracing due to their lower false positive rates.

(c) Total number of deaths as of June 15ith –8,5i7;  (d) Total number of recovered cases as of June 15ith –63,9i2.

199. The Plaintiffs state, and the fact is, that the WHO has been caught in a lie, as it has been revealed that the WHO was aware of the potential for false positives in PCR testing as early as January 2020, yet failed to disclose this information to the public.  200. The Plaintiffs state, and the fact is, that according to a study conducted by researchers at Stanford University School of Medicine and published in JAMA Network Open on June 5i!11i20i20i: “The prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection among symptomatic and asymptomatic individuals presenting for testing at an academic medical center was low (0.13%).” This means that only 0.13% of those tested were actually infected with COVID-19.

The Plaintiffs allege that this is a violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, as it discriminates against those who die from non-COVID causes.

The Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment prohibits states from denying any person within its jurisdiction equal protection under the law. This means that states must treat all persons similarly situated in a similar manner. In this case, if hospitals are receiving more money for treating COVID-deaths than non-COVID deaths, then this could be seen as a violation of the Equal Protection Clause. The state would need to provide an explanation as to why it is providing different levels of compensation for different types of deaths and demonstrate that there is a rational basis for doing so. If no such justification can be provided, then the state may be found to have violated the Equal Protection Clause.

(c) The World Economic Forum (“WEF”) is a major proponent of the global agenda, and has been advocating for a “Great Reset” of the world economy, which includes mandatory vaccination, ID chipping, testing and immunity certification. 162  (d) The WHO has been accused of being heavily influenced by the WEF and its corporate members. 163  (e) The WHO has been accused of promoting false information about the COVID-19 pandemic in order to advance its own agenda. 164  (f) The WHO has been accused of promoting false information about the safety and efficacy of vaccines in order to advance its own agenda. 165  (g) The WHO has been accused of promoting false information about the safety and efficacy of contact tracing in order to advance its own agenda. 166

164… 165…pharma.and-mandatory-vaccinationl  (j) The Gates Foundation has been a major funder of the World Health Organization, providing over $1 billion in funding since 1998, and is now pushing for mandatory vaccination programs worldwide. 166 (k) The Gates Foundation has also funded research into gene editing technology, which could be used to alter the human genome and create genetically modified humans. 167

169 170 -normal-until-there-s-a-vaccine -1 .4925 851 171 -freedom -coronavirus

everything, including clothing and hardware, with no restrictions; (b) To effect a massive transfer of wealth from the middle class to the upper class by way of bail-outs and other measures; (c) To effect a massive transfer of wealth from the public purse to private corporations and individuals in the form of bail-outs, subsidies, grants and other measures; (d) To effect a massive transfer of power from elected governments to unelected bureaucrats and technocrats; (e) To effect a massive increase in surveillance over citizens by way of tracking apps, contact tracing, etc.; (f) To effect a massive increase in censorship over citizens by way of social media bans, internet shutdowns, etc.; (g) To effect a massive increase in control over citizens by way of lockdowns, curfews, travel restrictions, etc.; (h) To effect a massive increase in control over citizens by way of mandatory vaccinations; and (i) To effect a massive increase in control over citizens by way of mandatory testing.

(i) Digital ID’s; (ii) Tracking and tracing of every human on the planet earth; and (iii) A global currency.

(iii) Temperature checks at public places;  (iv) Social distancing protocols.

Vaccine “chips”, bracelets”, and “immunity passports” are technologies that allow individuals to prove their immunization status. Contract-tracing via cell-phones is a technology that uses GPS data to track the movements of people who have been in contact with someone who has tested positive for COVID-19. Temperature checks at public places involve using thermal scanners to detect elevated body temperatures, which can be an indicator of infection. Finally, social distancing protocols involve measures such as limiting the number of people in a given area or requiring people to stay six feet apart from one another.

(d) The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Canada, Richard Wagner, declared on June 3rd 2020 that “the court will be open for business” and that “the court is adapting to the new reality”.

a. In 2010, Bill Gates predicted a pandemic in a TED Talk and said that the world was not prepared for it.

b. In 2017, Bill Gates funded a simulation exercise called Event 201 which simulated a coronavirus pandemic.

c. In 2018, the World Economic Forum published a report entitled “Global Risks Report 2018” which discussed the potential of a global pandemic and how to prepare for it.

d. In 2019, the Rockefeller Foundation published a report entitled “Scenarios for the Future of Technology and International Development” which discussed the potential of a global pandemic and how to prepare for it.

e. In 2020, Bill Gates funded an exercise called Crimson Contagion which simulated a coronavirus pandemic.

§ Output

> stdout : [‘[1, 2, 3]n’]

§ Markdown

Q2. Write the Python program to add all the elements in a list?

§ Code

a = [1,2,3] #list of numbers
sum = 0 #initializing sum to 0
for i in a: #iterating over list
sum += i #adding each element to sum
print(sum) #printing sum of all elements in list

#output: 6 (1+2+3)

§ Markdown

Q3. Write the Python program to find the largest number from a given list?

§ Code

a = [1,2,3,4] #list of numbers
max_num = 0 #initializing max_num to 0 for comparison purpose
for i in a: #iterating over list a one by one and comparing with max_num variable which is initialized as 0. if any element is greater than max_num then that element will be assigned to max_num variable. this process will continue until last element of list. at last we will get maximum number from given list. so that can be printed as output. this process is known as finding maximum number from given list. let’s see how it works..! ๐Ÿ™‚ . . . . . . . . . . . ..! ๐Ÿ™‚ ๐Ÿ™‚ ๐Ÿ™‚ ๐Ÿ™‚ ๐Ÿ™‚ ๐Ÿ™‚ ๐Ÿ™‚ ๐Ÿ™‚ ๐Ÿ™‚ :):) :):):):):):):):) :):):):):) :):) ๐Ÿ™ ๐Ÿ™ ๐Ÿ™ ๐Ÿ™ ๐Ÿ™ ๐Ÿ™ ๐Ÿ™ ๐Ÿ™ ๐Ÿ™ ๐Ÿ™ ๐Ÿ™ :((((((((((((( ((((((((( ((( ( ))))))))))))))))) )))))))))))))) )))) ))) )) (( ( done!!! now let’s print output..! ๐Ÿ˜‰ ๐Ÿ˜‰ ๐Ÿ˜‰ ๐Ÿ˜‰ ๐Ÿ˜‰ ๐Ÿ˜‰ ๐Ÿ˜‰ ๐Ÿ˜‰ ๐Ÿ˜‰ ;);;;;;;;;;;;;;;output: 4 (largest number from given list) ;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;done!!! now let’s print output..! ๐Ÿ˜‰ ๐Ÿ˜‰ ๐Ÿ˜‰ ๐Ÿ˜‰ ๐Ÿ˜‰ ;; ;; ;; ;; ;);;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;output: 4 (largest number from given list) ;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;done!!!

(iii) The public statements made by Bill Gates and others for the implementation of a global digital currency, with the use of blockchain technology;  (iv) The public statements made by Bill Gates and others for the implementation of a global health passport system, with the use of biometric data;  (v) The public statements made by Bill Gates and others for the implementation of a global tracking system, with the use of facial recognition technology;  (vi) The public statements made by Bill Gates and others for the implementation of a global surveillance system, with the use of artificial intelligence.

(j) The Gates Foundation’s, and its partners’, involvement in the “Global Vaccine Action Plan” (GVAP), a program of the World Health Organization, which seeks to vaccinate every person on the planet by 20i20;  (k) The Gates Foundation’s, and its partners’, involvement in the “Global Health Security Agenda” (GHSA), a program of the World Health Organization, which seeks to establish global surveillance systems for infectious diseases;  (l) The Gates Foundation’s, and its partners’, involvement in the “Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria”, a program of the World Health Organization, which seeks to provide funding for research into infectious diseases;

The Sage Report is a UK government report published in late May 2020 that provides advice to the government on how to manage the COVID-19 pandemic. The International Lobby, spearheaded by Bill Gates and others, is an effort to raise funds and coordinate international responses to the pandemic. The Suppressed German Government 93-page report was leaked in May 2020 and concluded that the measures taken to combat the pandemic were unjustified.

The results of this analysis show that crisis management is an important tool for responding to extraordinary threats and restoring normalcy. It is essential for organizations to have a plan in place to identify, assess, and respond to potential crises. Crisis management teams should be trained in the proper protocols and procedures for responding to a crisis, as well as how to effectively communicate with stakeholders during a crisis. Additionally, organizations should have strategies in place for monitoring and evaluating the effectiveness of their crisis management plans.

  1. 1. In the past the crisis management did not (unfortunately against better institutional knowledge) build up adequate instruments for danger analysis. The situational reports, in which all information relevant for decision-making should be summarized in the continuing/current crisis, today still only cover a small excerpt of the looming spectrum of danger. An assessment of danger is in principle not possible on the basis of incomplete and inappropriate information. Without a correctly carried out assessment of danger, no appropriate and effective planning of measures is possible. The deficient methodology has an effect on a higher plane with each transformation; politics so far has had a strongly reduced chance to make factually correct decisions. 
  2. 2. The observable effects of COVID-19 do not provide sufficient evidence that there is -in relation to the health consequences of all of society -any more than a false alarm. At no point in time, it is suspected, was there a danger as a result of this new virus for the population ( comparison is the usual death rate in Germany). Those who die of corona are essentially those who statistically die this year, because they have arrived at the end of their lives and their weakened bodies cannot any longer fight coincidental everyday challenges (including the approximately 150 circulating viruses). The danger of COVID-19 was overestimated. (In a quarter of a year worldwide no more than 250,000 deaths with COVID-19, as opposed to 1.5 million deaths during the 2017 /18 influenza season). The danger is obviously no larger than that of many other viruses. We arc dealing with a global fal e ala1ám which has been unrecognized over a longer period of time. -This analysis was reviewed by KM4 for scientific plausibility and does not fundamentally oppose the data and risk assessments provided by the RKI [Robert Koch Institute]. 
  3. 3. A fundamental reason for not discovering the suspected false alarm is that the existing policies for the actions of the crisis management group and the crisis management during a pandemic do not contain appropriate instruments for detection which would automatically triger an alarm and the immediate cancellation/abandonment of measures, as soon as either a pandemic proves to be a false alarm or it is foreseeable that the collateral damage -and among these especially the parts that destroy human lives -threatens to become larger than the health effects of and especially the deadly potential of the illness under consideration. 
  4. 4. In the meantime, the collateral damage is higher than the recognizable benefit. The basis of this assessment is not a comparison of material damages with damage to persons (human lives). Alone a comparison of deaths o far due to the virus with deatl1s due to the measures decreed by the state (both without certain data). Attached below is an overview.type summary of collateral health damages (incl. Deaths), reviewed by scientists as to plausibility. 
  5. 5. The ( completely useless) collateral damage of the corona crisis is, in the meantime, gigantic. A large part of this damage will only manifest in the nearer and more distant future. This cannot be avoided anymore, only minimized. 
  6. 6. Critical infrastructures are the lifelines necessary for the survival of modern societies. As a result of the protective measures, the current security of supply is no longer a given as it usually is (so far gradual reduction of the basic security of supply, which could result in a fallout in future challenging situations). The resilience of the highly complex and strongly interdependent complete system of critical infrastructure has been reduced. Our society lives, from now on, with increased vulnerability and a higher risk of failure of infrastructures necessary for life. This can have fatal consequences, if on the in the meantime reduced level of resilience of KRITIS a truly dangerous pandemic or other danger should occur. 
    Four weeks ago, UN-general Secretary Antonio Guterres of a fundamental risk. Guterres said ( according to a report in the Tagesschau on April 4, 2020i): “The weaknesses and insufficient preparation which are becoming apparent through this pandemic give insight into how a bioterrorist attack could look -and these weaknesses possibly increase a risk thereof.” According to our analysis, in Germany a grave deficiency is the lack of an adequate system for the analysis and assessment of danger. 
  7. 7. the protective measures decreed by the state, as well as the manifold societal activities and initiatives which, as initial protective measures cause the collateral damage, but have in the meantime lost any purpose, are largely still in effect. It is urgently recommended to abolish these immediately, to avert damage to the population -especially unnecessary additional deaths -, and to stabilize the situation around critical infrastructure, which is possibly becoming precarious. 
  8. 8. The deficits and failures in crisis management consequently lead to communication of information that was not well.founded. (A reproach could be: The state showed itself to be one of the biggest fake-news-producers in the corona crisis). 

1. Develop a customer-centric approach to marketing and sales, focusing on understanding the needs of customers and providing tailored solutions.

2. Utilize data-driven insights to inform decisions about product development, pricing, and promotions.

3. Invest in customer service initiatives to ensure that customers have a positive experience with your brand.

4. Leverage digital channels such as social media and email campaigns to reach new audiences and build relationships with existing customers.

5. Focus on creating content that is relevant and engaging for your target audience in order to drive conversions.

  1. a) The proportionality of interference with the rights of cg. Citizens is currently not given, since the state did not carry out an appropriate consideration with the consequences. The German constitutional court demands an appropriate balancing of measures with negative consequences. (PSPP judgement of May 5, 2020). 
  2. b) The situational reports of the crisis management group BMI-BMG and the communications from the state to the provinces regarding the situation must there fore henceforth -conduct an appropriate analysis and assessment of dangerous -contain an additional section with meaningful, sound data regarding collateral damage (see remarks in the long version) -be freed of irrelevant data and information which are not required for the assessment of danger, because they make it difficult to see what is going on -an index should be formed and added at the beginning 
  3. c) An appropriate analysis and assessment of danger is to be performed immediately. Otherwise the state could be liable for damages that have arisen.174 

The plaintiffs’ statement is supported by the study conducted by Stefan Homburg and Christof Kuhbandner at the Leibniz University Hannover, Germany. The authors concluded that the lock-down measures as modelled and executed were not effective when comparing countries following the WHO protocols and countries that did not. This conclusion was based on data collected post-June 81′ 2020.

The World Economic Forum (WEF) is an international organization that engages the foremost political, business, cultural and other leaders of society to shape global, regional and industry agendas. It was founded in 1971 as a not-for-profit foundation and is headquartered in Geneva, Switzerland. The WEF’s mission is to improve the state of the world by engaging business, political, academic, and other leaders of society to shape global, regional, and industry agendas. Through its projects and initiatives, the WEF works to create a shared future in which every person can thrive.

  1. (a) Consistently promotes a “New Economic World .rder” ,which is a vision in the process of being rolled out under the auspices of the World Economic Forum, of which one of the main sponsors is The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. 
  2. (b) The World Economic Forum is the International Organization for Public-Private Cooperation. The Forum engages the foremost politica], business, cultural and other leaders of society to shape global, regional and industry agendas. 
  3. (c) The World Economic Forum is committed “to the launch of the Great Reset -a project to bring the world’s best minds together to seek a better, fairer, greener, healthier planet as we rebuild from the pandemic.” “The COVID-1i9 crisis has shown us that our old systems are not fit any more for the 21ist century,” said World Economic Forum Executive Chairman Klaus Schwab. “In short, we need a great reset.” 176 
  4. (d) Since its launch on March 11i1 2020i, the Forum’s COVID Action Platform has brought together 1,667 stakeholders from 1,10i6 businesses and organizations to mitigate the risk and impact of the unprecedented global health emergency that is COVID-1i9. The platform is created with the support of the World Health 0 rgamza 10n. , t’ 177  The WEF sponsors have big plans:” … the world must act jointly and swiftly to revamp all aspects of our societies and economies, from education to social contracts and working conditions. Every country, from the United States to China, must participate, and every industry, from oil and gas to tech, must be transformed. In short, we need a “Great Reset” of capitalism.” “The World Economic Forum is launching a new Davos Manifesto, which states that companies should pay their fair share not taxes, show zero tolerance for corruption, uphold human rights throughout their global supply chains, and advocate for a competitive, level playing field.” Klaus Schwab, Founder and Executive Chairman, World Economic Forum.i178 (f) In 201i7 Germany, India, Japan, Norway, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the Welcome Trust and the World Economic Forum founded the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) to facilitate focused support for vaccine development to combat major health epidemic/pandemic threats. As an organization, the Forum has a track record of supporting efforts to contain epidemics. In 2017, at the Annual Meeting, the C’oaliticrn for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) was launchedi.bringing together experts from government, business, health, academia and civil society to accelerate the development of vaccines. CEPI is currently supporting the race to develop a . . . 179 vaccme agamst t h’ 1s stran d o f t h e coronavuus. (g) Event 20i1, the pandemic exercise in October 20i19i, was co.sponsored by the World Economic Forum and the Gates Foundation. 180 

This announcement was made in the context of the WEiF’s Great Reset agenda, which seeks to re-align global economic and social systems in order to create a more equitable and sustainable future. The plan includes a massive investment in infrastructure, green energy, digital technology, and health care. It also calls for increased public-private partnerships and the privatization of public assets. Trudeau’s announcement is seen as an endorsement of this agenda, and it is expected that Canada will be at the forefront of its implementation.

The Plaintiffs allege that they have suffered damages as a result of the Defendant’s actions. They claim that the Defendant has breached its contractual obligations, failed to provide adequate services, and caused them economic harm.

  1. (a) This agenda, conspiracy, is spear-headed by Bill Gates, and other Billionaire, Corporate, and Organizational Oligarchs, include vaccine, Pharmaceutical, and Techn0logy Oligarchs, through the WHO, GA VI, and the WEiF, whom they fund and effectively direct and control; 
  2. (b) National and Regional Leaders who are simply, knowingly and/ or unknowingly, as duped c-conspirators, partaking in this conspiracy by simply declaring a “pandemic”, “emergency”, and delegating decisions to their Chief medical officers who are simply following the dictates and guidelines without question nor concern for the world expert opinions against such measures, of the WHO; 
  3. ( c) In effect there are less than a hand-full of people dictating the virtual fate of the planet whereby sovereign Parliaments, Courts, and Constitutions are by-passed; (d) The “social media”, such as Google, Facebook, YouTube, Amazon owned and operated by the likes of Bill Gates, Mark Zukerberg, and, in Canada, the CBC,funded and controlled by the Federal Government, are knowingly playing in concert with this over-arching conspuacy, and in fact over.lapping conspiracies. 

209. (a) deprive the Plaintiffs of their rights and freedoms as guaranteed by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, including but not limited to:

(i) freedom of conscience and religion;

(ii) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression;

(iii) freedom of peaceful assembly; and

(iv) freedom of association;

210. (b) deny the Plaintiffs access to justice in a timely manner; and

  1. (a) engage in an agreement for the use of lawful and unlawful means, and conduct, the predominant purpose of which is to cause injury to the Plaintiffs, through the declaration of a false pandemic and implementation of coercive and damaging measures including the infliction of a violation of their constitutional rights as set out above in the within statement of claim; and/or 
  2. (b) to engage, in an agreement, to use unlawful means and conduct, whose predominant purpose and conduct directed at the Plaintiffs, is to cause injury to the Plaintiffs, through the declaration of a false pandemic and implementation of coercive and damaging measures including the infliction of a violation of their constitutional rights as set out above in the within statement of claim, that Defendants and officials and employees, should know, in the circumstances, that injury to the Plaintiffs , is likely to, and does result. 
  1. (a) PM Trudeau has echoed Bill Gates’ sentiments that mass mandatory vaccination of people is necessary for any sense of normalcy to return. 
  2. (b) Gates uses proxies to successfully lobby the Canadian Government. 
  3. (c) The Gates Foundation founded GAVI, the Global Vaccine Alliance in 19i99 with $750 million and continues to run it and fund it. The Global Vaccine Alliance, is an organization devoted to pushing vaccinations on the public all across the world. 
  4. (d) GAVI hired a lobbying firm called Crestview Strategy, a public affairs agency. Their Mission Statement is: “We make, change, & mobilize opinion.i” 
  5. (e) Canada has gifted Bill Gates, and his related Foundation and companies well over $1 Billion dollars in pursuit of his agenda, $800 Million recently by Justin Trudeau; 
  6. (f) Crestview has lobbied the Canadian Government on at least 19 occasions since2018 on various “health” matters, all on behalf of GA VI. 

¥ Bill Gates-Vaccines, Pharmaceuticals & Technology 

  1. 212. The Plaintiffs state, and the fact is, as set out in the within Statement of Claim, that Bill Gate’s companies, and associates, manifest a clear agenda, for himself and his associates in the vaccine, pharmaceutical and technology, industries, through the de facto control of the WHO, influencing and dictating its agenda, to:
    1. (a) Effect a mandatory, global, vaccine policy and laws, which would net an approximately $1i.3 Trillion per year, in which vaccine industry he is major proponent and investor; 
    2. (b) To effect surveillance, through his vaccination agenda, as outlined in their public statement, and the MIT developed smart-phone application to embed nannocrystal beneath the skin which can be read by a smart-phone through smart-phones, and 5-G capacity, in which industries Gates 1s a major stake-holder and investor; 
    3. (c) Using the above to “virtualize” and globalize the World economyi, in which virtual and global New World (Eiconomic) Order in which Gates further sits in the centre, along with the other Billionaire and corporate oligarchs; 
    4. (d) All of which is being effected and accelerated through the false pronouncement of a COVID-1i9 ‘pandemic”, and implementation of baseless and false, draconian measures. 
  2. 213. The Plaintiffs state, and the fact is, that Bill Gates’ statements, and conduct, in the above-noted facts, has been documented, as reflected in the within Statement of Claim, namely at paragraphs 63i, 68, 69, 72, 75, 78, 81i, 85, 93i, 100, 107, 112, 118, 121, 124,199,200,201i,202,203i,205, of the within Statement of Claim, with respect to his agenda and conspiracy with others, including the Defandants. 

¥ The WHOi/ Gates/ Trudeau and Dr. Teresa Tam 

  1. 214. The Plaintiffs state and fact is, that the connection and common agreement between Gates-Trudeau-Tam, in addition to their statements and actions m furthermore of that agreement as outlined above m the within Statement of Claim, is further manifested by the following:
    1. (a) On April 9, 2020 just before Easter, Trudeau announced that: 
      “We will not be coming back to ourfrJrmer normal situation; we can ‘f do that until H’e have developed a vaccine and that could take 12 to 18 months ….. [and] …. This will be the nev1, normal until a vaccine is developed. “183
    2. (b) Trudeau’s statement is a script lifted straight from Bill Gatesá cchoi11g almost word for word. the message Gates has been pushing smcc the coronavuus in North America earlier this winter. The April 9th Highwire video clip at 2:07 captures Gates stating: 
      “Things woná t go back to truly normal un Li I ,Ne have a vaccine that we’ve gotten out basically to the entire world.”184
    3. ( c) Instead of following the recommendations of leading scientists. doctors and epidemiologists, Trudeau is foisting the Gates/WlTO/ Gi VI/ ‘l T globalist agenda which he knows or ought to know, will result in l’inanci,1I ruin for millions of Canadians including the Plaintiffs.
    4. (d) Despite the prevailing global consensus on natural herd imrnunily. Bill Gates 1s determined however, to prevent natural immunity so he can mandate his new vaccine(s) for everyone. Noted scientist and journalist. Rosemary Frei, shows Bill Gates does not áwant people lo acqull’c immunity to COVID-19. Rather, Bill Gates prefers that Ye sulTer the ‘economic pain’ ofelockdown in order to prevent us from acquiring naturnl immunity as Gates has stated: 
      ”We doná t want to have a lot of recovered people I … I ro be clear, we’re tryinge-through the shut-dovvn in the United States -to not get to one percent oC the populatio11 infected. We’re well below that today, but with exponentiation, you could get past that three rndlion [people or approximately one percent of the U.S. population being infected with COVID-19 and the vast rnajorit r covering]. I believe wee,. ill be able to avoid that with having this economic pain.”185 (e) In her latest compelling article, Covid-19 Meltdown and Pharmas’ Big Money Win, Barbara Loe Fisher delves into the many disturbing angles ol this epic viral/political war unleashed on humanity. the havoc caused b the Gates & Fauci lockdown policy and the economic spinoJTs spawnccl by the pandemic. 186 185 Did Bill Gates Just Reveal the Reason for the Lockdowns: By Rosemary Frei, Off-Guardian, April 4, 2020… =8a3 I c96b7b83 lb06c663 ld2d800e39e274fdb4c5-l 593827339-0AbbQnElw4gYMqoe 14KtV.9sVWpJ8_1O6ZguVbep6dVylwrKGMbqfHkxidxl_3uCK08Nlmuk8B5fJzKB4cL3viTl qQYvV8722SeZLNTHOWUovzpclftZQcDi Ix vg3QQ6jPmp ZkNGtNlwGs874a0MhuR Y9 _t7yNj8TyeXmeBXidqKFHOtCmuLJEmS9ZGcLDsNGb5 WKidfn HO7DSzlQ 11 0eNBgH MLXerbj Pr Ks ESdGlhwd3 Ljo Y6FiHbJ u4UI bTEJMbsKQFlq5XIIOtoLGY2e7ffhzjnbUBrcjpv76AL5aOYmAQAI ICC3ttqOt_ k2 I mLMgHN Fa tl2g WSlla4a2S UAI8IzoKXLcbkuTr0!pvKrbjkF8B4ij3p8MdQOK0DZHcW 186Covid-l 9 Meltdown and Pharma’s Big Money Win: (f) Covid-19 has sparked the hottest new market in town -vc1cc111c development. A staggering number of coronavirus vaccrncs me utidcr development right novv with astronomical piles of money being thrnwn at it. Gates is in the thick of it along with Tony Fauci. director ol’ lhc National Institute for Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID). Both me on record stating they don’t want people developing natural immunity, 111 stating: 

¥¥hich she says will be used to control the global population. McGovern writes: “The Gates Foundation has been a major funder of research into digital ID systems, and is now funding the development of a ‘digital health passport’ that would allow people to prove their Covid-19 status. The passport could be linked to a person’s vaccination records and other medical information, and could be used to restrict travel or access to services.” 190

Kennedy Jr. explains that the Cates/WHO agenda involves conducting vaccine experiments in the developing world without proper oversight or consent from the people involved. He argues that these experiments are often conducted with little regard for safety and can have devastating consequences, such as increased rates of death and disability. He also points out that these experiments are often conducted without any benefit to the people involved, as they are not given access to treatments or cures that could be developed from the results of the experiments.

for the Duchess of Cambridge to take on the anti-vaccine movement. She has already taken steps to ensure that people are not allowed to publicly say anything against vaccinations, and is working with governments and social media companies to remove vaccine misinformation and promote scientific literacy. It is clear that she wants to make sure that vaccinations are seen as a normal part of life, without any questions asked.

(j) The Civilian Intelligence Network has published an article titled “Dr. Theresa Tam, Queen of the Vaccine” which highlights her role in promoting vaccine uptake and her disregard for public health concerns.195 (k) A devastating timeline published by Spencer Fernando reveals the complete incompetence of Theresa Tam’s virus response.196 (1) The Toronto Sun has written a scathing review of Tam’s performance, calling her a “healthcrat” whose record is “spotless wrong”.197


  1. 216. The Plaintiffs state, and the facts is, that the impact of containment measures to Plaintiffs is, inter alia that:
    1. (a) Mass containment measures negatively impacts the development of herd immunity, artificially prolongs the epidemic, extends the period of confinement, and contributes to maintaining a high proportion of susceptible individuals in the population.
    2. (b) California emergency room physicians stated that “sheltering in place does more harm than good and lowers our immune system.” 198
    3. (c) The measures employed to achieve the objective of “flattening the curvei” so as not to overwhelm the health care system were disproportionate to the objective. Our health care system has consistently operated at 40 -50% below capacity since the introduction of these measures.
    4. (d) The suspensions of rights to participate in community and in commerce has caused substantial and irreparable harm to the economy, livelihoods, communities, families, and the physical and psychological well-being of Canadians and the Plaintiffs. These include: 198 hltps:l/
      1. (i) A dramatic increase in reports of domestic violence (30i%). 
      2. (ii) Over six million Canadians have applied for unemployment benefits and 7.8 million Canadians required emergency income support from the Federal government (as of May 2020i). 199 
      3. (iii) The deepest and most rapid loss of jobs, savings and income in the history of Canada. 200
      4. (iv) Numerous citizens have been forced into unemployment and poverty, the loss of their business, and bankruptcy. 
      5. (v) Estimates of the Federal deficit resulting from their response to SARS-CoV-2 ranges up to $400 billion (May 2020). 201 
      6. (vi) Leading Economic Indicators show the Canadian economy is now in ”free/all”. 202 
      7. (vii) Illnesses and conditions not related to SARS-Co V-2 have gone untreated and undiagnosed.
      8. (viii) Dramatic increase in number of individuals dying at home due to lack of medical care and for fear of visiting emergency wards despite the fact that most hospitals have capacity.
      9. (ix) Denial of access to health care professionals including doctors, dentists, chiropractors, physiotherapists, naturopaths, homeopaths, physiotherapists, massage therapists, optometrist, and osteopaths. 199… 200… 201… 202…
      10. (x)  Denial of access to health care services including cancer  treatments, elective surgeries, testing, diagnosing, and treatment.
      11. (xi)  Regulated health care practitioners, including chiropractors,  Naturopaths, and Homeopaths have been directed to refrain from  providing health care knowledge to individuals concerned about  SARS-Co V-2i. This is an unwarranted infringement on the right to therapeutic choice.
      12. (xii)  Dramatic Increase in mental health challenges including suicide.
      13. (xiii)  The significant potential for the traumatizing children due to the  disproportionate fear of contracting a virus for which the risk of  death is virtually zero.
      14. (xiv)  Significant increase in alcohol consumption and drug use.
      15. (xv)  Denial of access to healthy recreation including parks, beaches,  camping, cottages, and activities as golf, tennis, swimming, etc.
      16. (xvi)  Denial of a public education for children.
      17. (xvii)  Denial of access to consumer goods and services.
      18. (xviii)  Individuals dying alone in hospital and extended care facilities  without the support of family and friends. 203
      19. (xix)  Fathers denied access to be present for the birth of their child.
      20. (xx)  Elderly parents in supportive care are denied access to the support  of their family and friends.  203
      21. (xxi) The effective closure of Courts of Law is unprecedented, illegal, unconstitutional, undemocratic, unnecessary, and impedes the ability of Canadians to hold our governments accountable.
      22. (xxii) The effective closure of Parliaments is unprecedented, illegal, unconstitutional, undemocratic, unnecessary, and impedes the ability of Canadians, including the Plaintiffs, to hold governments accountable. 
  2. 217. The Plaintiffs further state, and fact is, that:
    1. (a) To combat COVID-19, “Canada’s federal government has committed to measures totaling around $400 billion, of which about two-fifths constitutes direct spending.” Currently, the deficit for 2019-2020 is expected to be well over $180-$200 Billion. This is seven times larger than the previous year’s deficit. It is expected the interest alone, even at the very low current interest rates will cost $1 B each year. 204 
    2. (b) There is no evidence that the impact of these negative consequences were calculated, much less fully considered in the government’s response to SARS-Co V-2i. 
    3. (c) John Carpay, president of the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms in Canada has stated there is reason to conclude that the government’s response to the virus is deadlier than the disease itself. 205 204 entry/ ca nada-budget-deficit-covid 19 ca Se85f6bcc5 b60bbd735085f4 205 htlps://w’!:f:t! ( 
    4. d) The cost of combatting SARS-Co V-2 is placed disproportionately on the young and blue collar and service workers who cannot work from home, as opposed to white collar workers who often can. 
    5. (e) The results from Sweden, and other countries that did not engage in mass and indiscriminate lockdowns, demonstrates that other more limited measures were equally effective in preventing the overwhelming of the health care system, and much more effective in avoiding severe economic and individual health consequences. 
    6. (f) The Ontario government took the “extraordinary step” to release a database to police with a list of everyone who has tested.positive for COVID-1i9 in the province. 206 
  3. 218. Furthermore, while upon the declaration of the pandemic, based on a totally erroneous modeling, postulated that, as opposed to regular 650i, 000 deaths every year form seasonal viral respiratory illness , world-wide, that 3 .5 Million may or would die, the erroneous COVID implemented measures have proven to be more devastating than the “pandemic” at its posited worse in that:
    1. (a) In Canada, as elsewhere, 170,000i+ medical, surgical, operations are canceled, with the numbers climbing, as well as closure of other medical services at hospital, which have caused deaths; 
    2. (b) With the fear of lock-downs and self-isolation, patients have not accessed their doctor for diagnosis of medical problems; 
    3. (c) Documented spikes of domestic violence and suicides have been recorded; 
    4. (d) Inordinate spike in alcoholism, drug use, and clinical depression; 

      206 hltps:1/toronto.ctvnews.calmobile/ontario-takes–extraordlnary-step-to-give-police-list-of-all-covid-9-patlents.1.4910950?fbclld=lwAR1 Ojfu 5OYq5BPZJKMyyqiN2P47dK wbZzFMqC8WEpFxilhEF!81cGnfru; (e) Moreover, and most-shocking, the UN through an official of the World Food Bank, on April 22ind,2i020, had published a document stating that, because of COVID-19 (measures )and the disruption of supply chain, it estimates that 130 Million “additional people” “on the planet could be on the brink of starvation by end of year 2020 which, begs the question: why is it justifiable to add 130 Million deaths to purportedly save 3.5 Million? 

  4. 219. The Plaintiffs state, and the facts is, that the purported, and false, goals of the WHO measures and its purveyors, such as the Defendants, are a perpetual moving target, and purposely shift to an unattainable goals, in that:
    1. (a) The initial rationale for the mass lockdown of Canadian society was to “flatten the curve” to avoid overwhelming health care services. It was never about preventing the coronavirus from spreading altogether, but rather to render its spread manageable.
    2. (b) It appears now that the goal has changed. Government appears to have shifted the goal to preventing the virus from infecting any and all Canadians. If so, this ought to be made clear, as should the justification for the change. 207
    3. (c) Y oram Lass, the former director-general of Israel’s Ministry of Health is of the opinion that “lockdown cannot change the final number of infected people. It can only change the rate of infection.” 208 ’07… 0/’/’ htt ps :/ /www. spiked-on Ii n e. com/ 2020/05/2 2/ nothing-can-ju st ify-th is-d est ru ct i o n-of-pe op I es-I ives/ #. Xsgq i N 6 DOu Q. face book
    4. (d) There are warnings of an imminent “second wave.” But if the “first wave” has been flattened, planked or buried to the extent that in vast areas of the country very few people have been exposed to the virus at all, then the “second wave” is not really a second wave at all, but a delayed first wave. 
    5. ( e) Minimizing the total spread of the coronavirus until a vaccine is available will be the most expensive goal in the history of human governance. 
    6. (f) There is no scientific evidence to substantiate that the elimination of the virus through self-isolation and physical distancing is achievable or medically indicated. 
    7. (g) According to four Canadian infectious disease experts, Neil Rau, Susan Richardson, Martha Fulford and Dominik Mertz -“The virus is unlikely to disappear from Canada or the world any time sooni” and “It is unlikely ” 209 that zero infections can be achieved/or COVID-19.i
    8. (h) There is no compelling reason to conclude that the general-population lockdown measures (first requested by the Trudeau government on 17 March) had a detectable effect in Canada. The lockdown measures may have been implemented after “peak prevalence” of actual infections, which renders mitigation measures entirely without effect. 
    9. (i) The Government of Canada has been slow to endorse the re-opening of the economy even as hospitals remain well below capacity -the metric that was initially used to justify the restrictions. 



  1. 220. The Plaintiffs state, and the fact is, that the narrative and mantra created and propagated by Bill Gates that “we do not get back to normal until we have a vaccine” has been accelerated by a falsely declared “pandemic” to what has been a persistent push for mandatory vaccination of every human being on the planet, along with “global governance” as propagated by Bill Gates, Henry Kissinger, the Rockefeller Foundation, GAVI, the WEiF, and their likes. 
  2. 221. With respect to (mandatory) vaccines and the COVID-19i, the áDefendants, in addition to pushing the ultimate aim of mandatory vaccines, spear-headed by Bill Gates, and others, have also ignored and refuse to address the issues in the context of COVID-19i, let alone vaccines at large, as reflected in, inter alia, the following:
    1. (a) Intention to Create Vaccine Dependency:Is it ethical to deny children, young people and most of the population who are at low risk of mortality the opportunity to develop natural immunity when we know natural immunity is lifelong in most cases? Are we going to create another condition where we become ‘vaccine dependent’ or will we recognize the value of natural herd immunity? Advocates of the natural herd immunity model are of the opinion that rather than the mass isolation of billions of people, only the most at-risk people and their close associates should be isolated. The forced mass quarantine of an entire, mostly low-risk population is disproportionate and unnecessary. This is the position being utilized by Sweden.210
    2. (b) Will A COVID 19 Vaccine Be Safe?
      1. (i) Dr. Anthony Fauci -is the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases in the United States. Fauci has stated: “We need at least around a year and a half to make sure any new vaccine is safe and effective. ” ill
      2. (ii) Dr. Paul Offit -Offit warns, “Right now you could probably get everyone in this country to get this (CV) vaccine because they are so scared of this virus. I think we should keep remembering that most people who would be getting this vaccine are very unlikely to be killed by this virus. “
      3. (iii) Dr. Peter Hotez -dean of the National School of Tropical Medicine at Baylor College of Medicine, told Reuters, “I understand the importance of accelerating timelines for vaccines in general, but from everything I know, this is not the vaccine to be doing it with. ” (. . . . 211 1v ) p a th ogemc p nmmg ; 210 http;Â¥aÂ¥covid-19-vaccine-save-us/ 211 hllps;…“l
    3. (c) Jonathan Kimmelman, a biomedical ethics professor at McGill University in Montreal, 1s watching how both scientific and ethical standards are maintained while the pandemic vaccme trials progress at breakneck speed. “My concern is that, in the fear and in the haste to develop a vaccine, we may be tempted to tolerate less than optimal science,” Kimmelman said. “That to me seems unacceptable. The stakes are just as high right now in a pandemic as they are in non-pandemic settings. “To show how long the process can take, Kimmelman points to the example of the ongoing search for an effective HIV vaccine that began in the 19i90is. Before healthy people worldwide receive a vaccine against SARS-Co V-2, the risk/benefit balance needs to tip in favor of the vaccine’s efficacy in offering protection over the potential risks, he said. The balance still exists even in the face of a virus wreaking an incalculable toll on human health and society.” 212
    4. (d) CBC News March 24i, 20i20 reported by Amina Zafar;213
    5. (e) Moderna’s vaccine uses genetic material from the virus m the form of nucleic acid. That tells the human body how to make proteins that mimic viral proteins and this should provoke an immune response. Denis Leclerc, an infectious diseases researcher at Laval University in Quebec City, said the advantage of nucleic acid vaccines like Moderna’s is that they’re much faster to produce than other types. While relatively safe, nucleic acid vaccines are generally not the preferred strategy, Leclerc said, because they don’t have the same safety record as the traditional approach. 212 hittps://… 213 https://www n e-resea rch-1.5497697
    6. (f) Will a COVID 19 vaccine be effective?Ian Frazer -Immunologist Ian Frazer has downplayed the role of a vaccine in overcoming the coronavirus pandemic, saying it may “not stop the spread of the virus in the community”. That’s if a vaccine can be developed at all. Frazer, a University of Queensland scientist who was recognized as Australian of the Year in 2006 for his contribution to developing HPV vaccines, said a COVID-1i9 vaccine may not be the end-all to the current crisis. 214 
    7. (g) Role of Influenza Vaccination to Current Outbreak -Allan S. Cunningham, Retired pediatrician The possibility that seasonal flu shots are potential contributors to the current outbreak. A randomized placebo-controlled trial in children showed that flu shots increased fivefold the risk of acute respiratory infections caused by a group of non influenza viruses, including coronaviruses.215 
    8. (h) Mandatory Vaccination
    9. (i) Diane Doucet -Message to New Brunswick Committee on Law Amendments”Mandatory vaccination may soon be imposed on the entire population. Eventually, every person will have to decide between attending school, keeping their job, their home and their ability to participate in society and their so-called freedom to choose. People will also be at risk of losing their jobs if they speak out against mandatory vaccinations. 

This is a powerful statement that speaks to the injustice of forcing people to submit to medical treatments against their will. It highlights the arrogance of policy makers who view citizens as too ignorant to make decisions for themselves and their children, and it calls out the oppressive nature of a system that treats people like chattel and punishes those who do not comply. This statement also serves as a reminder that we must always be vigilant in protecting our rights and freedoms, lest we find ourselves living in a slave system.

¥ Microchipping  /Immunity  Passports/  Social  Contact  Vaccine  Surveillance & SG  

  1. 222.  The Plaintiffs state that, and fact is, this global vaccination scheme which is being propelled and pushed by the Defendants, is with the concurrent aim of total and absolute surveillance of the Plaintiffs and all citizens.  
  2. 223.  In  addition  to  the  facts, pleaded  with  respect  to Gates’  vaccine-chip,  nannocrystal “app” already developed, in late June, 2020i, cell-phone companies,  at  the  request  of  Justin  Trudeau  that the 30i-Miillion  eligible  Canadians  “voluntarily” load up “contract-tracing apps” now available from the phone-tech  giants. These companies began dumping the apps on to customers without  informed consent.  
  3. 224.  On June 30it1 2020i, Canada announced that it was participating, to be included,  as one of an initial fifteen (15) countries, to require “immunity passport”, a cell. phone application disclosing medical vaccination history.216 Canada is one of an  initial fifteen (15) countries to enter into  a  contract to deploy “immunity  216http ://www. nq-covi-pass-i m mu nity-passports.slated-roll-15-cou ntries/269006/ passport” technology. The technology would utilize a cell-phone application to disclose medical vaccination history. 217 
  4. 225. The Plaintiffs further state, and the fact is, that above and beyond what is set out above in the within Statement of Claim, mandatory vaccination, for any disease, let alone a virus, is a flagrant violation of the Plaintiffs’ Charteri, and written constitutional rights, under s. 2 and 7 of the Charter, to freedom of belief, conscience, religion, and life liberty and security of the person as a violation of physical and psychological integrity, where informed medical consent is absent in a mandatory scheme. 

¥ Vaccines in General 

  1. 226. The Plaintiffs state, and the fact is that: 
    1. (a) it is undisputed that vaccines cause severe, permanent injury up to and including death in a certain percentage of those who are vaccinated, including physical, neurological, speech, and other disabilities; 
    2. (b) that, as a result of this reality, risk, and severe injury, certain North American jurisdictions, such as the USA, and Quebec, as well as all G.7 countries except Canada, have established compensation schemes for those injured and killed by vaccines;
    3. (c) that Ontario has no such compensation scheme; 
    4. (d) that there is no individual pre-screening, to attempt to pre-determine, which individual may have a propensity to be so injured, even in cases where older siblings, in the same family have been injured, no 
    5. ( e) the Plaintiffs state, and the fact is, that while peanuts and other nuts, as an absolute proposition, do not injure or kill, they do injure or kill those who are allergic to them. While schools have taken saturated and heightened steps to make their spaces “nut-free”, the risks of vaccines to children, particularly those who are pre.disposed to injury and death from them, are completely ignored. 

      investigation is undertaken or weighed with respect to the risks of their younger siblings being vaccinated;

  2. 227. The individual, biological Plaintiffs state that they further rely on the facts set out below under the Plaintiff heading “Vaccine Choice Canada (VCC)”. 
  3. 228. The individual, biological Plaintiffs state that the compulsory vaccinationi, and or testing, schemes violates their rights, by act and omission. Mandatory vaccination removes the right to weigh the “risks” of vaccinating or not vaccinating, to allow for informed choice, in that vaccines can cause injury or death, is a violation of their rights as follows: 
    1. (a) an in limine compulsory vaccination scheme violates s.2(a) and (b) of the  Charter in infringing the rights to freedom of conscience, religion, thought and  belief, as well as infringing the rights to liberty and security of the person, in interfering with the physical and psychological integrity of the person and the  right to make choices as to that integrity and autonomy, pursuant to s.7 of the  Charter;
    2. (c) that the failure and omissions of the Defendants, their officials and delegees, in the vaccination scheme, to transparently and honestly present the risks of vaccination, pro and con, and the failure and omissions to make individual assessments to pre-determine and pre-screen those children who may have a propensity and pre-disposed to being vaccine injured, constitutes a violation of the same Charter cited above, in depriving the right to an informed consent before medical treatment through vaccine is compulsorily administered, by way of omission as set out by the Supreme Court of Canada in, inter alia, Vriend in unnecessarily exposing children and adults, to injury up to and including death, by an overly-broad, untailored, indiscriminate and blind vaccination scheme, notwithstanding the dire and pointed warnings in the manufacturers’ own very inserts and warnings as to the risks. 
  4. 229. The Plaintiffs state that the violations of their ss. 2(a) and (b) Charter rights are not justified under s.1 of the Charter and puts the Defendants to their onus of justifying the violations. The Plaintiffs further state that the violations of their s. 7 Charter rights, as set out above in the statement of claim, are not in accordance with the tenets of fundamental justice in that the scheme and provisions suffer from overbreadth and that the protection of overbreadth in legislation has been recognized, by the Supreme Court of Canada, as a tenet of fundamental justice, and that further they cannot be saved under s.1 of the Charter, the onus of which lies with Defendants. 

Â¥ Vaccine Choice Canada (VCC)

  1. 230. Vaccine Choice Canada is a federally registered not-for-profit educational society. VCC is committed to protecting children’s health by informing parents of the existing and emerging scientific literature evaluating the risks, side effects, and potential long-term health effects of artificial immunization. VCC works to protect the right of all people to make fully informed and voluntary vaccine decisions for themselves and their children. Vaccine Choice Canada was originally incorporated as the Vaccination Risk Awareness Network (VRAN) in 1982i. It changed its name to Vaccine Choice Canada(VCC) in 20i14i. 
  2. 231. In the 3 8 years that Vaccine Choice Canada, and its predecessor organization, has been involved in reviewing the vaccine safety literature, supporting families in their vaccine decisions, and developing educational materials related to vaccine safety, efficacy and necessity, so that individuals can make responsible and informed decisions, VCC has noted, uncovered, and researched certain established facts as set out below. 
  3. 232. VCC states that, with respect to facts pertinent to product safety testing, the facts and medical literature sets out that: 
    1. (a) Vaccines do not undergo the same level of safety testing as is required for all other drugs and medical products. 
    2. (b) None of the vaccines licensed for use in Canada have been tested for safety using long-term, double blind, placebo-controlled studies. 
    3. (c) Vaccine products licensed for use in Canada are not evaluated for safety using a neutral placebo, 218 a requirement for all other pharmaceutical products. 
    4. (d) Vaccines are an invasive medical intervention whose safety is determined primarily by the amount of injury or death reported after vaccination. 
    5. (e) Pre-licensing safety monitoring of childhood vaccines, prior to the vaccines being administered, is not long enough to reveal whether vaccmes cause autoimmune, neurological or developmental disorders. 219 
    6. (f) Studies designed to examine the long-term effects of the cumulative number of vaccines or other aspects of the vaccination schedule have not been conducted. 220 
    7. (g) There are too few scientifically sound studies published in the medical literature to determine how many serious brain and immune system problems ¥ 221 are or are not cause db y vaccmes.
    8. (h) The design and reporting of safety outcomes in MMR vaccine studies, both . .. 222 pre-an d k 1 1 d post-mar etmg, 1s arge y ma equate.
    9. (i) Vaccines have not been tested for carcinogenicity, toxicity, genotoxicity, mutagenicity, ability to impair fertility, or for long-term adverse reactions. 
    10. (j) Health Canada does not conduct its own independent clinical trials to determine vaccine safety and efficacy and instead relies on the data provided by the vaccine manufacturers. 
    11. (k) Studies comparing the overall health of vaccinated and unvaccinated children reveal that vaccinated children are significantly more likely to have neuro.developmental disorders and chronic illness. 
    12. (l) There is evidence that vaccines are contaminated with unintended ingredients and that the health impact of injecting these ingredients is unknown. 224 
    13. (m) Canada is the only G7 Nation without a national program to compensate those injured or killed by vaccination, and one(l) of two(2) G-20 Nations without a vaccine injury compensation program. The other nation being Russia. 
    14. (n) The United States Vaccine Injury Compensation Program has awarded more than $4e.1 billion in compensation since 1989. 
    15. (o) The published medical literature recognizes that vaccines can cause permanent injury including death.
    16. (p) The US government has acknowledged that vaccination can cause brain damage resulting in symptoms of autism in genetically susceptible children. 
    17. 225 ( q) The US Centre for Disease Control (CDC )has acknowledged that every domestic case of polio that occurred after 1979 was caused by the vaccine . 226 stram o f po 1á 10. 
    18. (r) Vaccines include ingredients that are classified as poisons, carcinogens, toxins, neurotoxins, immune-and-nervous-system disruptors, allergens, fertility inhibitors, and sterilizing agents. 
    19. (s) Health Canada exposed children to cumulative levels of mercury and aluminum, in the incubation of the vaccines that exceeded the US FDA’s safety guidelines. 

Vaccine injury is a rare occurrence, and there is no reliable way to predict who may be at risk. Vaccine safety monitoring systems are in place to detect any potential risks associated with vaccines, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommends that all individuals receive recommended vaccines according to the CDC’s immunization schedule.

  1. (a) Pre-screening to identify individuals who may be at increased susceptibility to vaccine injury and death does not occur in Canada. 
  2. (b) Health Canada has not committed resources to identify those individuals who may have increased susceptibility to experience vaccine injury or death. 
  3. (c) Policies to administer vaccines to “Mature Minors”, often without the knowledge and consent of the parents and without the informed consent of the “Mature Minor”,, in schools and medical settings without the knowledge or consent of the parents has inadequate safety protocols to fully consider the personal and family medical history prior to vaccination. 
  4. ( d) This failure to fully consider personal and family medical history puts these youth at increased risk of vaccine injury. 

Vaccine safety monitoring is an important part of ensuring the safety of vaccines. Vaccine safety monitoring involves tracking and analyzing data on the safety of vaccines, including adverse events that may be related to vaccination. This includes collecting information from healthcare providers, vaccine manufacturers, and other sources, as well as conducting epidemiological studies to assess the risk of adverse events associated with vaccination. Vaccine safety monitoring also includes educating healthcare providers and the public about vaccine safety and providing resources for reporting suspected adverse events.

  1. (a) Doctors and health care workers are not trained to recognize and diagnose vaccine lllJury. 
  2. (b) There are no legal consequences when medical professionals fail to report vaccine mJury. 
  3. (c) Parents’ observations of health and behavioral changes following vaccination are routinely ignored and denied by doctors and rarely captured in adverse events reporting systems. 
  4. (d) It is recognized that fewer than 1 % of vaccine adverse reactions are reported. 227 (e) Ontario’s AEiFI reporting system has lower reporting rates than other provinces. 
  5. (f) The medical industry has failed to fully consider the combined toxicology of vaccine ingredients and the synergistic effect of combining vaccine ingredients. 

“The primary purpose of safeguarding policy is to protect the health and safety of patients. This includes protecting them from harm, abuse, neglect, exploitation, and other forms of mistreatment. Safeguarding policies should be designed to ensure that all patients receive appropriate care and treatment in a safe environment.”

  1. (a) The primary metric used by Health Canada to measure the success of the vaccine program appears to be how many vaccines are delivered. 
  2. (b) The goal of public health vaccine policy is to persuade parents to comply with the full vaccine schedule. 229 
  3. (c) The pursuit of the goal of persuading parents to comply with vaccination recommendations is incompatible with the goal of allowing parents to possess the knowledge they need to exercise their right to informed consent, and act in their child’s best interests. 
  4. d) The right to informed consent has been recognized as one of the most fundamental ethics in medicine. 
  5. (e) Public health professionals routinely fail to inform citizens of their legal right to personal, religious and medical exemptions where they exist. 
  6. (f) Health Canada, with respect to vaccmes, places public policy over individual health considerations. 
  7. (g) Government policy makers have refused to consider the fact that the risks of the target diseases are not the same for every child and that some children are at greater risk of being harmed by vaccines due to genetic or environmentally caused predispositions. 
  8. (h) Government policymakers ignore that the fact that for informed consent to happen, the risk-benefit analysis must be conducted for each vaccine and individually for each child. 
  9. (i) Antibody titre testing is rarely conducted in an effort to avoid unnecessary vaccination. 
  10. j) An increasing number of parents are choosing not to vaccinate because they recognize that public health vaccine policy poses a serious threat to both their health and liberty. 

“Vaccine injury is a rare occurrence, and the vast majority of vaccine injuries are minor and temporary. However, when serious injury or death does occur, it is important that those affected have access to appropriate compensation. The Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) was established in 1986 to provide financial compensation for individuals who suffer serious injury or death due to certain vaccines. The VICP is funded by a tax on each dose of covered vaccine and administered by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). The program provides an efficient alternative to traditional litigation for resolving vaccine injury claims.”

  1. (a) Vaccine manufacturers and medical professionals are not held legally and financially accountable when vaccine injury and death occurs. 
  2. (b) A consequence of this legal immunity is that there is no legal or financial incentive for the vaccine industry to make their products safer, even when there is clear evidence that vaccines can be made safer. 
  3. (c) Systemic corruption within the medical establishment is well recognized within Â¥ Â¥ 230a23a1 t h e sc1ent1 ‘fi 1c commumty. 
  4. (d) Conflicts of interest in biomedical. research are “very common”. 232 

-The products they are buying may contain hazardous materials or chemicals.

  1. (a) vaccines do not confer life-long immunity; 
  2. (b) not all vaccines eliminate susceptibility to infection; 
  3. (c) not all vaccines are designed to prevent the transmission of infection; 
  4. (d) most vaccines do not alter the safety of public spaces; 233 
  5. (e) Health Canada has acknowledged that vaccines are voluntary in Canada and cannot be made mandatory due to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms; 
  6. (f) there is no scientific evidence that herd immunity can be achieved using vaccines due to the temporary nature of the immunity offered nor that vaccine herd immunity is more effective that natural herd immunity; 
  7. (g) vaccine can and do cause permanent injury and death; 
  8. (h) there is no scientific evidence that vaccines are primarily responsible for reduced mortality over the last century as is often claimed; 
  9. (i) the human body has an innate capability to fight off infections and heal  itselfi;
  10. (j) the pharmaceutical companies that produce almost all vaccines have been found guilty and paid billions of dollars in criminal penalties for research fraud, faking drug safety studies, failing to report safety problems, bribery,  kickbacks and false advertising 234;
  11. (k) Canadian children are among the most vaccinated children in the world
  12. (l) there is no compensation available in Canada, except for Quebec, should  vaccination result in injury or death;
  13. (m)only two provinces in Canada (Ontario and New Brunswick) reqmre  exemptions to decline vaccination;
  14. (n) recommended/required vaccmes vary by provmce, by state, and by country.  

The product monograph is an important source of information for consumers, as it provides detailed information about the vaccine, including its ingredients, potential side effects, and contraindications. It also outlines the safety testing that has been conducted on the vaccine and any known risks associated with it. Consumers should be provided with a copy of the product monograph before receiving a vaccine so they can make an informed decision about whether or not to receive it. Health care providers should ensure that they provide this information to their patients in order to ensure that they are making an informed decision about their health care.

Yes, vaccine mandates violate the medical and legal ethic of informed consent. Informed consent is a fundamental principle in medical ethics that requires a patient to be fully informed about the risks and benefits of any proposed medical treatment before they can give their consent to it. Vaccine mandates, which require individuals to receive certain vaccinations regardless of their personal beliefs or preferences, do not allow for this informed consent process.

The Universal Declaration of Bioethics and Human Rights does not explicitly mention vaccine mandates, but it does state that “no one shall be subjected to medical or scientific experimentation without their free consent”. The Nuremberg Code also states that “the voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential”. Professional codes of ethics may vary depending on the profession, but generally they require informed consent before any medical procedure is performed. Provincial health Acts may also vary, but typically they require informed consent for any medical procedure. Therefore, while vaccine mandates do not explicitly violate these documents, they could potentially be seen as a violation if individuals are not given the opportunity to provide informed consent prior to receiving a vaccine.

244. Vaccine safety monitoring systems in Canada are inadequate and do not provide sufficient information to assess the risk of vaccine injury.

This is not acceptable behavior and should be reported to the appropriate authorities. Vaccination should always be voluntary, and no one should ever be forced or intimidated into getting vaccinated. Schools should ensure that students are provided with accurate information about the risks and benefits of vaccination, as well as their right to refuse it if they choose.

This is not true. Indigenous people are not required to receive any vaccines that are not recommended for non-Indigenous people. Vaccination recommendations for Indigenous people are based on medical evidence of risk, just like they are for non-Indigenous people.

The Immunization of School Pupils Act (ISPA) requires that all students attending school in Ontario must be immunized against certain diseases. The list of required immunizations is determined by the Minister of Health and Long-Term Care, and is based on the recommendations of the Chief Medical Officer of Health. Parents are responsible for ensuring that their children are up to date with their immunizations, and must provide proof of immunization to the school board upon request. Schools may refuse admission to a student who does not have proof of immunization or an exemption from the requirement.

  1. ( a) Only school children are mandated to provide their medical records under ISP A. Adults are not required and are less likely to be ‘up to date’ with their vaccinations. 
    235 http :/ /kidsboostimmunity .com/sites/default/files/reusable_ files/kbi_ be pdf 
  2. (b) The forced disclosure of private medical records puts a child’s medical privacy at risk.
  3. (c) This disclosure often results in the child being ostracized by school staff and peers. 
  4. (d) The ISP A does not give the medical officer of health authority to suspend a student. Only a principal can suspend a student from school. The Education Act does not have any section that allows a principal to suspend for lack of medical records. Yet this is routinely done for those who do not, or refuse, to comply with the mandatory scheme. 
  5. (e) Parents who do not comply with unlawful suspension are threatened with child protection services. 
  6. (f) Children who are under vaccinated or without exemptions are intimidated, held in the office, and incorrectly told by school officials that they need to get their shots or they cannot come to school. 
  7. (g) The HSARB (Health Service Appeal and Review Board), which deals with appeals of suspensions, registration and expulsions, cannot rule on Charter challenge cases, as the enabling legislation specifically bars jurisdiction to adjudicate Charter issues. 
  8. (h) There is zero accountability for violations of rights by the medical officer of health. This has resulted in many cases of the Medical Officer of Health unlawfully suspending young children for 60 to 90 school days, contrary to the 20 days suspension as set out in the ISP A. 


  1. 249. The Plaintiff states that the Defendant CBC, and other mainstream media, is purposely suppressing valid, sound, and sober criticism of recognized experts with respect to the measures that amount to censorship and violation of freedom of speech, expression and the media. 
  2. 250. The Plaintiffs state, and the fact is, that CBC, a completely publicly-funded news service, and national broadcaster, paid for by Canadian taxpayers, has been to the Trudeau government, and acted as, PRAVDA was and acted for the Soviet Union in the cold-war, with respect to coverage of the COVID.”pandemic”, “emergency”, and its draconian measures. 
  3. 251. The Plaintiffs state that CBC, as the nationally and publicly-funded broadcaster under the public broadcasting policy for the Canadian public, under the Broadcast Act, owes: 
    1. (a) a Fiduciary duty to the Plaintiffs and all citizens; and 
    2. (b) a duty in Negligence (negligent investigation) to the Plaintiffs and all citizens; To be independent, fair, balanced, and objective in its coverage of the “pandemic”, declared “emergency”, and the measures undertaken, which duties it has breached causing damages to the Plaintiffs. 

¥ Negligence 

  1. 252. The Plaintiff states that the Defendant, CBC, as a publicly-funded mandate to publicly broadcast on behalf of Canadians, owes a common-law, and statutory duty of care to the Plaintiffs, to fairly, independently, objectively report, and engage in responsible journalism, on the news and current affairs, and the Plaintiffs further state that:
    1. (a) the CBC breached that duty of care; and 
    2. (b) as a result of the breach of that duty of care, the Plaintiffs suffered damages. 
  2. 253. The Plaintiff states and the fact is, this duty was breached by the CBC’s negligent acts and omissions, including inter alia, the following:
    1. (a) The daily broadcasting of Trudeau’s press-conferences, with absolutely no questions about the scientific and medical evidence behind the measures, and their source; 
    2. (b) Whether contrary expert views exist, to the secret advice being followed; 
    3. (c) If opposite, expert opinion exist, what is the government’s response to it?; 
    4. (d) The CBC further dumps, on a daily basis, the government numbers on COVID-positive rates, and death rates, without any investigation or scrutiny as to the basis of compiling those numbers, and who and how the parameters are determined in complying those numbers nor any contextual analysis as to what they mean; 
    5. (e) The CBC has done no independent investigation, nor asked any questions, on the scientific or medical basis of the COVID-measures but simply parrots the government line, and has not investigated, exposed, nor published the avalanche of Canadian and World experts who firmly hold an opposite view, and severe criticism of the measures, nor put those criticism to the Federal Defendants for response. 

The Plaintiffs allege that CBC has breached its duty of care to them by failing to provide fair, independent, objective, and responsible coverage of their story. They claim that CBC has instead acted in a manner more akin to a propagandistic state news agency serving a dictatorial regime. The Plaintiffs seek damages for the harm caused by CBC’s alleged breach of its duty of care.

(c) That she is a Nobel Prize nominee; and  (d) That the video in question was not “debunked” but rather, as CBC itself admits, it was taken down by YouTube and Facebook.

The Plaintiffs allege that CBC’s intentional distortion of the facts with respect to Dr. Judy Mikovitz and the video in question constitutes a breach of its duty of care to its viewers and readers, as well as a breach of its journalistic standards. The Plaintiffs further allege that CBC’s conduct is irresponsible, unethical, and unprofessional, and has caused significant harm to their reputation.

No, the reporters do not give a hint as to by whom, when, or on what medical basis her expert views were “debunked”.

No, the reporters do not investigate or pose any questions about why it is appropriate to remove from Face book or YouTube the views of a recognized, working World expert of virology with respect to issues of COVID-19. This lack of investigation and questioning by the reporters and CBC is concerning and raises questions about their commitment to journalistic integrity.

¥ Fiduciary Duty 

  1. 256. The Plaintiffs further state that the CBC further has a fiduciary relationship, and owed a corresponding fiduciary duty, to the Plaintiffs, as the national publicly.funded broadcaster to fairly, independently, objectively report, and engage in responsible journalism, on the news and current affairs for the following reasons: 
  2. 257. The Plaintiffs state that the Defendants breached this fiduciary duty as set out above in this Statement of Claim. 
  3. 258. The Plaintiffs state, and the fact is, that CBC, Facebook, YouTube , Google, and other social media are viciously censoring, and removing any and all content that criticizes or takes issue with the WHO, and governments that follow WHO guidelines, with respect to covid-1i9i, as purported “misinformation” contrary to “community standards” even when that content is posted by a recognized expert. 
  4. 259. The Plaintiffs further state, and the fact is, that the Defendant Federal Crown is by way of act and omission, under inter alia, the Broadcast Act , and its Agencies such the CRTC, legislatively and administratively violating the Plaintiffs’ rights under s. 2 of the Charter, to freedom of expression and the press in doing nothing to halt what has been described by members of the scientific community as ” Stalinist censorship”, by government, along with media the likes of CBC, Facebook, and YouTube. In fact, the Federal Crown goes further, in following suit with these social media censors, to propose criminal sanctions for posting such deemed and anointed “misinformation” by all, including experts. 
  5. 260. On or about end of May, 2020 the UK ” Scientific Advisory Group for Emergency (SAGEi) -COVID-19 Response, in response to the unwarranted measures of redaction, and removing, all criticism in respect of COVID.Measures, from the Report, of this government advisory body, the body responsible for their SAGE report referred to the government redaction as “Stalinist Censorship”. 
  6. 261. The Plaintiffs state, and the fact is, that CBC, Facebook, and Y ouTube, and other major social media, in their coverage of the COVID-19i, have acted in the same fashion, by knowingly and intentionally suppressing and removing expert opinion not in line with the official dogma of the WHO, which is being blindly and deafly parroted and incanted by the Defendant governments (leaders) and their officials, to the detriment of the Plaintiffs and citizens at large, in violation of their constitutional rights. 


  1. 262. In summary, the Plaintiffs state that the COVID -19 Legislation, and Regulations By-Laws, and orders, violate, as follows, the Plaintiffs’ statutory and constitutional rights in: 
  2. 263. The Plaintiffs rely on: 
  3. 264.  The Plaintiffs therefore request:
  4. 265.  The Plaintiff proposes that this action be tried in Toronto.  

The best way to prevent the spread of COVID-19 is to practice social distancing, wear a face covering when in public, wash your hands often with soap and water for at least 20 seconds, avoid touching your face, cover coughs and sneezes, clean and disinfect frequently touched surfaces daily, and stay home if you are feeling sick.