On Saturday 5 February 2022 lawyers gave their opening statements at the Grand Jury Proceeding by the People’s Court of Public Opinion, an international natural law court. Attorney at Law Dipali Ojha from India gave an opening statement on the experimental injections, informed consent and suppression of treatments.
Below is the video of Ojha’s opening statement and the transcript.
Let’s not lose touch…Your Government and Big Tech are actively trying to censor the information reported by The Exposé to serve their own needs. Subscribe now to make sure you receive the latest uncensored news in your inbox…
Transcript (links contained within the text below are our own)
Good afternoon everyone.
I am advocate Dipali Ojha from India. It’s a matter of great honour for me to present my opening statement to the Grand Jury of the People’s Court of Public Opinion. I thank Judge Rui Fonseca and all my learned colleagues for their thoughtful and insightful presentations.
In the March of 2020, most of us were caught unawares as the governments worldwide endorsed the onset of a pandemic, supposedly created by a novel SARS-CoV-2 virus that possibly originated from Wuhan, China. Upon declaration of a pandemic there were series of announcements which were truly unprecedented, unheard of by most of us, like: closing of international borders; complete halt of international flight services; compulsory use of face masks; observance of social distancing; and, the deadlier measures like lockdowns. In India the railway services came to a grinding halt for the first time in their history of 167 years. Each country swiftly endorsed similar measures, supposedly to prevent and control the spread of infection.
In that prevailing state of chaos, panic, shock, uncertainty and fear most of us relied on mainstream media as a source of authentic information around this virus and the resultant havoc it wreaked upon us humans. One of the prominent aspects of communication constantly received from global governments and health authorities was that: there is no known cure for this SARS-CoV-2 virus.
In several countries patients who were sick were refused admission in hospitals and were sent back home stating that there is no cure for this disease. During this phase there were honest physicians and frontline doctors who treated patients with repurposed drugs, which is certainly not a new phenomenon, with the allopathic stream of medicine. And some physicians devised their own protocols for treatments based on their vast and rich clinical experience.
While the physicians perform their solemn duties of saving their patients’ lives in the best possible manner – using repurposed drugs with proven safety profiles in combination with supplements like zinc, vitamin C, vitamin D etc – we witnessed a vehement opposition from the very same health authorities that were at the helm of designing the response to the pandemic. The unrest caused to these people at the helm was very conspicuous through their acts of dismissal of any information that revealed how the early treatments were effective and that there existed alternative therapies to treat Covid-19 patients.
Now, any person of ordinary intelligence would have found this to be unreasonable in the sense that saving lives would obviously be the first and the foremost objective and especially when the physicians, based on their clinical expertise, claimed that they were able to cure patients through early treatment drugs.
I will digress here for a moment to share with you something from the perspective of my country, India. In India we have a rich tradition of alternative systems of medicines like Ayurveda, Siddha, Yunani and other systems of healing like naturopathy and homeopathy. In fact, there is a dedicated ministry under the Government of India by the name “AYUSH” which is an acronym for Ayurveda, Yoga and naturopathy, Yunani, Siddha and homeopathy. The recognised doctors who are trained to practice these alternative systems of medicines have successfully treated Covid-19 patients.
However, after the rollout of these experimental vaccines – we should not be calling these as “vaccines” in fact, these are injections which would be an appropriate description – now, after roll out of these experimental injections, the blocking of any discussion around alternative treatments seems to have become more pronounced. That included dismissal of doctors who advocated for early treatments of it or the ones who proclaimed that early treatments were indeed safe and effective. Some doctors have even faced disciplinary actions from their medical wards. Some were publicly ridiculed and faced the threat of cancellation or suspension of their medical licenses. Such an [acidic] response from the health authorities, governments and medical boards was itself a red flag that something somewhere was wrong and amiss. It is worthwhile to note that most of the persons who were dictating the country’s Covid-19 responses, worldwide, were not even treating the Covid-19 patients. But they did not pay any heed to the honest and diligent physicians who were actually treating patients on the ground with early treatments.
As my learned colleague has already pointed out that the possible reason for the blocking of any information around effectiveness of early treatments was the Emergency Use Authorisation [EUA] which is granted only when there is no drug that is adequate, number one, approved and available for treatment. The claim that there is no cure for Covid-19 made it possible for the vaccine manufacturers to apply for EUA. Besides, there is immunity that the pharmaceutical companies enjoy while EUA is granted to them.
I wish to inform here, at this juncture, that in India there are no specific provisions like the ones laid down by US FDA around the grant of Emergency Use Authorisation. And therefore, until recently, alternative treatments or early treatment drugs were part of India’s national Covid management protocol.
Ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine were included in our national protocol until late September 2021. In fact, states like Uttar Pradesh and Goa in India rose to prominence globally for the successful demonstration of the use of ivermectin in controlling the spread of Covid-19 and in curing the patients speedily. However, these success stories have been deliberately undermined and suppressed by all those compromised persons and media platforms which have invested heavily in vaccine businesses or who have vested interest in some form or the other in not letting the success of these early treatment drugs known to all people. Conspicuous absence of any scientific debate around the effectiveness of early treatments combined with the muzzling of voices that try to spread the word around effectiveness of early treatment drugs is a clear sign that the governments and health authorities worldwide are pushing the vaccine as the only solution and as the only cure for Covid-19.
Now, another aspect which is specific to India is that there is no immunity to vaccine manufacturers in India. And this has been confirmed on affidavit filed by the Government of India in our Apex Court in the Supreme Court of India.
Recently we have assisted in providing a petition at Bombay high court by a father who lost his daughter to the first dose of these experimental vaccines. He has claimed a compensation of around U$1.3 billion for loss of life of his daughter. And this is the second case that we have assisted in filing.
The first case has been filed in late November 2021. It is filed by a mother who lost her young son to the first dose of these experimental vaccines. In this case the diseased son was compelled to take the experimental vaccine in order to access the public transport system which allowed only vaccinated people to travel as for the administrative order passed by the government official. In addition to monetary compensation for loss of her son’s life to these experimental injections this mother has also sought for an investigation, a probe by premier investigation agency of India, into the role of all persons involved in the chain of events right from: the manufacturers of these vaccines; persons in charge of Covid-19 response here in India; and, all those who claimed that vaccines, these corona vaccines, are 100 percent safe and effective.
We are expecting several cases to be filed across the country in the near future by victims of these medical experimentation.
Now calling these products as vaccines would be inappropriate as vaccines are expected to provide immunity against a disease. While we were promised that corona vaccines would protect us from a supposedly deadly virus. We are witnessing today the fact that these corona vaccines are neither preventing the contracting of the disease nor as stopping the transmission. Besides, these vaccines have shown to have serious side effects including death. So, there is no way one can justify the experimental medical products that neither stop infection nor transmission. Also, the vaccinated persons are required to follow the Covid appropriate behaviour. If there is a lockdown they also have to sit in doors and they also have to wear masks and they also have to follow the social distancing.
Now there is another alarming aspect of the manner in the which these experimental injections are being administered on the global population that I wish to bring to your attention and that is about informed consent – as to how the settled and established laws around informed consent have been openly violated.
In the lawsuits that we have filed here in India, in addition to the judicial precedents specific to India by our courts, High Courts and Supreme Court, we have also cited how the provisions of the Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights (2005) that mandate for giving detailed information to public for getting that informed consent to such medical experimentation – all of these provisions have been breached.
For example, Article 3 of the Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights states that: “Human dignity, human rights and fundamental freedoms are to be fully respected” and “the interests and welfare of the individual should have priority over the sole interest of science or society.”
Also, article 6 of the same declaration states that: “Any preventive, diagnostic and therapeutic medical intervention is only to be carried out with the prior, free and informed consent of the person concerned, based on adequate information. The consent should, where appropriate, be express and may be withdrawn by the person concerned at any time and for any reason without disadvantage or prejudice.”
There is also another landmark judgment which we have cited in the proceedings that we have filed which is the judgment passed by the UK Supreme Court in the case of Montgomery vs [Lanarkshire] Health Board which is of 2015.
Now, as we discuss the crucial points around absence of informed consent and violation of several international codes and agreements in this process of hasty rollout of these experimental vaccines, the other side – “Mr Global” – is usually seen harping on a very flimsy ground to justify these medical experimental products which is: benefits outweigh the risks.
Now, our expert witnesses shall be presenting the evidences that show: the extent of harm these experimental products have inflicted upon the population; the serious adverse effects of these jabs, including deaths; the lack of transparency around the clinical trials data; the under reporting of deaths caused due to these jabs which – unlike all these evidences which our experts would be presenting to the Grand Jury in upcoming hearings – will thoroughly demolish this rationale commonly resorted to push these experimental jabs that: benefits of these experimental injections outweigh the risks.
Now, as I conclude I wish to draw the attention of the Jury to the following: the rationale for authorities declaring that there is no cure for Covid-19 is not clear to date since there has been no scientific debate or discussion between people in charge of the Covid-19 response in countries and those physicians, scientists and doctors who claim to have proven and documented success stories around the effective early treatments.
Secondly, there has been no initiative, no effort, to conduct clinical trials on effectiveness of early treatment drugs on the part of those responsible for designing countries’ official covid response.
There has been blanket denial regarding the natural immunity or the immunity developed after natural infection in spite of several studies being published to this effect.
There is a deliberate censorship by Big Tech of anyone and everyone who chooses to just to talk about how there exist alternative treatments and that these are safer than the experimental injections.
Lastly, the fact that repurpose drugs with extensive data on safety profile are ignored and an experimental medical injection hurriedly rolled out is touted as safe and effective. We know that there is no transparency around the data on clinical trials conducted. Given the number of adverse events being reported globally, daily, these experimental products are anything but safe.
Our expert witnesses shall cover each of these aspects in detail in upcoming hearings and I am very confident that after going through the evidences that is placed on record, the Grand Jury shall be fully equipped for assessing the role and complicity of each person, each entity, each organisation involved in commission of these horrific crimes against humanity.
Thank you for listening
During the Opening Session of the Grand Jury aired live on YouTube, HERE, the following gave their opening statements:
- Judge Rui da Fonseca e Castro, Portugal (opening remarks)
- Attorney at Law Deana Pollard Sacks, USA
- Attorney at Law Dr. Reiner Fuellmich, Germany
- Attorney at Law N. Ana Garner, USA
If the Opening Session (Day 1) of the Grand Jury is removed from YouTube you can watch it on Odysee HERE.
More information about the proceedings can be found on the Grand Jury’s website: www.grand-jury.net
Subscribe now to make sure you receive the latest uncensored news in your inbox…
WE NEED YOUR HELP…
We’re not funded by the Government
to publish lies & propaganda on their
behalf like the mainstream media.
Instead, we rely solely on our support. So
please support us in our efforts to bring you
honest, reliable, investigative journalism
today. It’s secure, quick and easy…