Biological Weapons: The Truth Trial #1 The Issues

COVID-19 vaccines are countermeasures that are scientifically comparable to biological weapons. Their deployment is not a mistake but the result of a deliberate plan, made possible by a massive psychological operation. They have caused harm that can be likened to genocide. These are the allegations made by the plaintiffs in two civil lawsuits filed by Dutch citizens against their government and sixteen other defendants, including prominent figures from politics, the pharmaceutical industry, the medical community, and the media.

These proceedings began in the northern Netherlands, at the civil court in Leeuwarden. A total of about ten plaintiffs, divided between two separate cases, claim to be victims of modified RNA Covid injections. These two cases challenge the liability of seventeen prominent figures suspected of orchestrating fear of the pandemic and the experimental vaccination campaigns.

The Initial Case

The first complaint in this case was filed on July 14, 2023, by attorneys Arno van Kessel and Peter Stassen, on behalf of seven Dutch citizens—one of whom has since passed away—who suffered adverse effects related to the Pfizer vaccine. This is a civil liability lawsuit in which the plaintiffs accuse the seventeen defendants of breaching their duty of care.

The parties summoned to appear, referred to as defendants, fall into several categories^[1]:

• the Dutch government,

six political figures,

• Mark Rutte, Prime Minister of the Netherlands at the time of the events, now Secretary General of NATO,
• Hugo de Jonge and Ernst Kulpers, successive ministers of health,
• Cora van Nieuwenhuizen, Minister of Infrastructure,
• Sigrid Kaag, Minister of Foreign Affairs,
• Wopke Hoekstra, Minister of Finance,

5 medical officials,

• Dr. Jaap van Dissel, virologist,
• Dr. Everhard Hofstra, “panel” physician
• Dr. Diederik Gommers, “panel” physician
• Dr. Marion Koopmans, microbiologist, “panel” scientist
• Agnes Kant, director of Lareb, responsible for pharmacovigilance,

2 representatives from non-governmental organizations

• Bill Gates, president of the Gates Foundation and GAVI, developer and supplier of the vaccines,
• Feike Sijbesma, Special Envoy for COVID-19,

1 representative from the pharmaceutical industry,

• Albert Bourla, CEO of Pfizer,

2 media executives,

• Giselle van Cann, Editor-in-Chief of NOS,
• Paul Jansen, Editor-in-Chief of De Telegraaf

As a U.S. citizen, Bill Gates had initially challenged the jurisdiction of the Leeuwarden court. However, he was forced to submit to the proceedings following a ruling on October 16, 2024, which confirmed the court’s jurisdiction.

All defendants are being sued for the narrative they fabricated, promoted, or supported during the Covid crisis. A narrative that claimed vaccination was the only way out of the pandemic, that everyone had to get vaccinated to protect the most vulnerable, and that the vaccines were safe and effective.

The plaintiffs state that it was because of these assertions, and in the absence of a public debate with opposing views, that they were vaccinated^[2]. They placed their trust in the defendants due to their social standing, their qualifications, and the positions of responsibility they held. The plaintiffs believe they were misled about the risks and benefits of the injections, explains attorney Peter Stassen:

“The defendants in this case, as implementers of the Covid-19 project, misled our clients in order to persuade them to get vaccinated against Covid-19. We demonstrate this in the summons, through more than 100 pieces of evidence. They are therefore all liable for the damages caused to our clients.”^[3]

But the alleged victims are not only seeking personal compensation for the harm they have suffered. They want this trial to also serve as a trial of a system that has failed in its duties, so that the truth may come to light publicly.

The Great Reset in the Dock

“The central argument of this proceeding,” explains Attorney Stassen^[4], “is that Covid-19 is not a disease but a project.” A global project for the radical transformation of society, which Klaus Schwab describes in the book he co-authored with Thierry Malleret, “Covid-19: The Great Reset.” This argument implies that the pandemic was merely a pretext for launching a military operation, comprising a psychological component designed to deceive the public, a social component to push society toward a technocratic and globalized control model, a pharmaceutical component with countermeasures likely to lead to depopulation, and a component of economic and financial reorganization. Finally, what makes this case unique is that it exposes the Covid project from the perspective of a suppression of the truth.

The “reality they prefer”

One of the key arguments, repeatedly cited in this case, is the observation that reality has been hijacked. The plaintiffs denounce a transfer of sovereignty to transnational entities that impose dystopian agendas, such as the United Nations’ Agenda 21 or 2030. Among the documents in the case file is this 2018 warning from Marine General Frank van Kappen regarding the military methods deployed to reshape what we accept as reality:

“We are in an era where we are facing an information operation, an information war… Yes, that is what it is called today. It is an activity of strategic importance, which consists of manipulating facts and events in order to present the reality we prefer to our own population, to our adversary, and to international public opinion. We are right in the middle of it.”^[5]

The defendants stand their ground

Moreover, the defendants do not deny either their statements or their actions. They scrupulously reaffirm the official narrative, even asserting the government’s prerogative to use psychological tactics to gain public support, and to label any challenge to its statements as disinformation.

That is why, for their part, the plaintiffs are requesting a cross-examination of the evidence. To this end, they have appointed their own experts, all of whom have submitted a written report and video testimony to the judge, which are available for review^[6]. However, in a November 2025 ruling, the judge ruled against the request for a preliminary hearing of these experts.

A second proceeding seeks the hearing of experts

In March 2025, a second proceeding was filed with the same court, with the assistance of the same attorneys and against the same suspects, by three other Dutch citizens, who were also victims of the Covid injections. Although the legal argument is identical, this time it is not a criminal complaint but a procedure specific to the Dutch legal system: a motion for the public examination of evidence. This allows for a preliminary presentation of testimony with cross-examination, which is intended to inform the next steps regarding the charges.

“These plaintiffs want to know what the injections they received actually are,” explains Peter Stassen^[7]. They are therefore demanding a public hearing of the five expert witnesses named in the initial complaint, who challenge the official narrative behind which the accused figures are hiding. The plaintiffs hope that a debate between experts from both sides can finally take place, so that the truth comes to light in a courtroom, and those responsible are forced to take accountability.

Five experts ready to testify

The five experts selected by the plaintiffs are the same ones whom the judge presiding over the complaint proceedings refused to hear. Their qualifications are recognized in their respective fields of expertise, and they have many years of professional experience.

Mike Yeadon, a former vice president at Pfizer, presents arguments to demonstrate that the very design of the Comirnaty injections does not guarantee either their safety or their efficacy.

Sasha Latypova, a former research and development manager in the pharmaceutical industry, has taken a particular interest in drug safety. She argues that the Covid injections are comparable to biological weapons, that they were deployed as military countermeasures, thereby bypassing strict drug regulations. This leads her to conclude that their adverse effects were predictable.

Katherine Watts, an American lawyer, has focused particularly on corporate corruption as well as the history of infectious disease law and the history of biological products. She accuses those who deployed the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines of war crimes and torture, according to the criteria of the Geneva Convention.

Catherine Austin Fitts, who publishes the Solari Report, was an executive at a Wall Street investment bank and Secretary of State in the first Bush administration. For many years, she has been warning about the billions of dollars “disappearing” from the U.S. budget. She views the Covid crisis as a veritable financial coup d’état.

Finally, psychologist Joseph Sansone can not only testify to psychological manipulation but can also discuss Professor Francis Boyle’s research on legislation regulating biological weapons. Boyle, in fact, passed away shortly after agreeing to testify as an expert himself.

However, the defense attorneys immediately objected to this public hearing of experts named by the plaintiffs. They argued that the individuals named have already extensively expressed their views on social media, and that such a hearing could interfere with the other ongoing proceedings.

Arrest of one of the lawyers

But it was ultimately an entirely different matter that interfered with the two ongoing proceedings. In the early hours of June 11, 2025, lawyer Arno van Kessel was arrested at his home by a special task force and incarcerated in a high-security prison^[8], as part of an operation targeting eight individuals suspected of being sovereignist activists willing to resort to violence against the authorities. Held in pretrial detention until February 20, 2026^[9], he is now under electronic monitoring. His arrest caused quite a stir and raised many questions, as he is still awaiting an indictment and a trial date. He has nevertheless been suspended from the bar.

At the hearing on August 20, 2025, Peter Stassen thus found himself alone before the judge in Leeuwarden, arguing for the hearing of experts, and his request for a public examination of evidence was rejected. The appeal of this decision will be heard on March 9 by the Amsterdam Court of Appeal, as the Leeuwarden Court of Appeal recused itself due to conflicts of interest.

The March 9 hearing

The Amsterdam Court of Appeal has informed both parties that the March 9 hearing will focus on the legal admissibility of this appeal and not on the content of the testimony. The judge will hear arguments from both parties regarding the validity of the appeal. Nevertheless, Sasha Latypova, Catherine Austin Fitts, and Joseph Sansone have announced that they are traveling to Amsterdam for the occasion and are prepared to testify if given the opportunity.

Even if civil proceedings may seem complex, or even outdated given the nature of the complaint. Even if these two cases never result in compensation for the victims. The Dutch plaintiffs are fighting above all to ensure that the truth is heard by the courts. If their experts are heard, that alone will be a significant victory.

Jim Ferguson, a British citizen journalist, masterfully summarized the stakes of this proceeding in an interview with Djamila Le Pair^[10]. If the Dutch courts were finally to allow a substantive debate among experts and agree to hear allegations of the use of biological weapons, war crimes, or genocide, this trial could become “the spark that ignites a fire, which will spread around the world to demand justice.”

Karo for BAM! & Essentiel News

• BAM! and Essentiel News will be in Amsterdam to attend the hearing and give experts a platform.
• A livestream of the hearing (in Dutch) will be available on Monday, March 9, between 11 a.m. and 4 p.m.: Livestreams | Rechtspraak
• The length of the proceedings is draining the plaintiffs’ resources. The Recht Oprecht Foundation is providing them with financial support. Those wishing to make a donation to support these proceedings can click on this link.

---

[1] https://rechtoprecht.online/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/Dagvaarding-rechtbank-Engels_Geredigeerd.pdf

[2] https://rechtoprecht.online/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/Dagvaarding-rechtbank-Engels_Geredigeerd.pdf

[3] Peter Stassen: The Great Reset on Trial

[4] Peter Stassen: The Great Reset on Trial

[5] Litigation – Leeuwarden, Netherlands

[6] District Court of the Northern Netherlands

[7] Peter Stassen: The Great Reset on Trial

[8] Hundreds protest for release of COVID-skeptic lawyer arrested in sovereign citizen probe | NL Times

[9] Court releases “sovereign” citizens to stand trial for radical attack plot targeting police | NL Times

[10] Dutch lawyer dismisses ‘preferential reality’ in lawsuit against Rutte, Gates, Bourla, and others