COVID tests, the Belgian trials

Between a civil party fixated on the legal definition of harassment and defendants denouncing a State vendetta, the criminal hearing in Mons looked like a trial turned upside down. While two officials of the FAMHP (the Belgian medicines agency), acting in a personal capacity, are trying to invoke the law to punish attacks on social media, the defence is hitting back by laying bare the workings of a case in which the initial accusations are collapsing one after another. With repeated searches, administrative obstruction and a string of acquittals, the court finds itself at the heart of a paradox: what if the real campaign of harassment is not the one the prosecution claims to be judging? A question all the more burning because this courtroom face-off is not the end of the story, but the start of a wider counter-offensive, as new legal actions and parliamentary inquiries, backed by new evidence, are about to take over.

Hearing report: complaint by Messrs Thierry Kestemont and Hugues Malonne (FAMHP) against Doctor David Bouillon, Frédéric Baugniet and Cécile Gremez (United People) for harassment, before the criminal chamber in Mons:

We were before the criminal chamber in Mons on Thursday morning, where Mr Thierry Kestemont, an FAMHP inspector, and its director general, Hugues Malonne, were prosecuting Doctor David Bouillon and the couple Frédéric Baugniet and Cécile Gremez for harassment.

The courtroom is packed: some fifty people fill the public benches, while another twenty or so have to stand.

The presiding judge reads out the charges in the complaint of the civil parties, Messrs Kestemont and Malonne, and the level 2 type of sentence attached, then calls the defendants and, as is customary, reads out any entries on their criminal records: a six-month suspended prison sentence for the bankruptcy of Doctor Bouillon’s non-profit association. Dr Bouillon cannot help interrupting the judge to point out that this judgment is under appeal before the Court of Cassation. The judge then asks the defendants to refrain from going back over cases already judged, but the defendants make it clear that they will not be able to do without providing context and background, as we will see in this highly charged session.

The judge then recalls the terms of the harassment law and sets out the context of the complaint filed by Messrs Kestemont and Malonne. They were repeatedly named in videos posted on social media by the defendants Baugniet and Gremez between 3 October and 2 November 2020. Regarding Doctor Bouillon, the charge rests on an email and a video. The judge specifies that a single act, without repetition, may be enough to constitute harassment, and adds that it is the feelings of the person concerned that must be taken into account.

From online harassment to suspicions of a rigged contract

She then questions the defendants: “Did you vilify Messrs Kestemont and Malonne in your videos?”. These are videos from 2020 whose exact wording nobody remembers, and which are said to be missing from the file. The exchanges on whether or not transcripts of these videos are in the file remain confused.

Mr Baugniet then tells the court that an insult does not constitute an act of harassment and that what matters is the reason behind it. He points out in passing that they were fully cleared of 30 charges that stemmed directly from the actions of Messrs Kestemont and Malonne within the FAMHP. Indeed, when the judge asks why they did not attack the institution rather than its staff, the answer is that these individuals are personally responsible: they allegedly rigged the public contract for COVID tests by sabotaging the company and the MEDAKIT test, which the defendants had offered to the FAMHP and the government, and which Doctor Bouillon used in caring for his patients. This was allegedly done to favour the DiaSorin test. Independent laboratories such as the Institut Pasteur established the superiority of MEDAKIT, and the French army had used it extensively. Mr Baugniet insists that his test had obtained the best evaluations and the CE mark, while DiaSorin did not yet have it and posted the worst results, last in a list of 18 tests, whereas MEDAKIT came first. United People submitted MEDAKIT to the government on 27 September. Five days later, on 2 October, Baugniet and Gremez were taken into custody and charged, their assets were seized, and they could no longer do anything to prevent the public contract from being awarded to DiaSorin. It was after their release, on 3 October, that they began speaking out on social media to denounce the injustice done to them and to accuse Kestemont and Malonne of wrongdoing, sometimes in colourful terms.

Questioned in turn by the judge as to whether she had named Messrs Kestemont and Malonne in her videos, Cécile Gremez answers yes. She points out, however, that this was not harassment, but a reaction to the harassment they themselves had suffered. Her statement suggests that the defendants are facing a reversal of accusation, illustrated by judicial harassment through malicious prosecutions, launched by the searches carried out with Mr Kestemont, the FAMHP inspector, and vexatious, since they all collapsed on 12 September 2025 with a general acquittal.

As for Doctor Bouillon, the incriminating items are an email sent to the FAMHP on 26 October 2020, copied to the Crown prosecutor, and a video in which Mr Kestemont is mentioned only once. He argues that there is no harassment in this message, in which he simply announced that he had all the evidence and “that they were going to have to pay”.

Next it is the turn of Nicolas Bonbled, lawyer for Messrs Kestemont and Malonne, to speak, in the absence of his clients. He reproaches the defendants for having used social media to “throw their names to the wolves” instead of taking action before the courts. According to counsel, Mr Kestemont was just an ordinary inspector doing his job, so badly affected by this case that he was put on sick leave for burnout in July 2021. The lawyer tries to draw a distinction between determination and harassment. His clients are claiming 500 and 1,000 euros in damages from the defendants, as well as an end to the defendants’ actions. Bad luck! On the strength of new evidence, that very morning before the hearing, United People, Baugniet and Gremez had filed a request with the Mons prosecutor’s office to reopen the case, dismissed without further action, concerning the conduct of Messrs Kestemont and Malonne in the awarding of the public contract.

The public prosecutor then takes the floor to recall the provisions of Article 237 of the Criminal Code on harassment. He asks for a finding of guilt, without however seeking financial compensation.

The floor is given to Philippe van Langendonck for the defence of his clients. He stresses that six years after the events, the reasonable time requirement is no longer being met. He adds that the facts surrounding the award of the public contracts for the tests are the subject of an investigation into organised crime. For the defendants’ lawyer, Messrs Kestemont and Malonne used the justice system to sabotage MEDAKIT in order to protect the DiaSorin test. DiaSorin was allegedly sold at a premium and billed to social security at more than 80 euros, whereas MEDAKIT cost barely more than 3 euros. DiaSorin is “a bad test, garbage sold at a premium” van Langendonck declares, recalling that even the RTBF had tested MEDAKIT and reported on its effectiveness. The lawyer ends by pointing out that Mr Kestemont slandered his clients by declaring that MEDAKIT was a scam.

Dr Bouillon before the court: between self-defence and searches

The judge gives the floor to Doctor Bouillon, who conducts his own defence, without a lawyer. The doctor recalls his Hippocratic oath, as well as his oath to the King, the Constitution and the laws of the Belgian people for his term as a municipal councillor in the city of Mons in 2018 (which he left in 2021, disgusted by politics). He embarks on a long account of the facts showing that his only concern was to save lives and ensure the care of patients, especially the elderly, at a time when a circular instructed them no longer to go to hospital. Following this, Doctor Bouillon had taken the Belgian State and the Wallonia-Brussels Federation to court over this circular, which he described as deadly, a crime against humanity, more concerned with hospital management than with human life. Judge Collignon, himself fairly elderly, had ruled in his favour.

It was after this victory that his troubles began. He describes several searches of his home and his practice by numerous police officers accompanied by Mr Kestemont, all without masks or social distancing at the height of the health crisis, while patients waiting for care were sent away. He mentions the seizure of the MEDAKIT tests and a farcical accusation of drug trafficking based on the presence of alcohol in the product. Doctor Bouillon recalls having been smeared in the press several times and called a charlatan who refused to apply the State’s protocols. No answer was ever given to his many warnings, emails and appeals to the government and the FAMHP. Although Doctor Bouillon was acquitted of more than 40 charges, he is keen to point out that his six-month suspended sentence for the bankruptcy of his non-profit is still under appeal before the Court of Cassation. Having no recourse other than social media to inform people about the State’s failings, he says he acted out of necessity. Finally, he regrets that the investigations were conducted solely for the prosecution and that the charges were split into several proceedings, contributing to the exhaustion and ruin of the defendants and amounting to the judicial harassment they suffered, all without any compensation to date.

At the end of Doctor Bouillon’s plea, part of the public unfortunately saw fit to applaud, followed, it seems, by a few police officers in the room who were apparently unaware that taking sides or expressing oneself in a courtroom is forbidden. The presiding judge, who had already given a warning, naturally took this opportunity to suspend the hearing while the police cleared the room. After a few short minutes, the proceedings resumed partly behind closed doors, with a smaller public on their honour to keep quiet and a few journalists.

No sooner were the doors closed than Frédéric Baugniet told the court he still had things to say. The floor was, however, first given to the civil party’s lawyer for “two or three micro arguments” on harassment. He insists that the accusations made by the defendants against his clients were dismissed in 2023. As he refers to mere intentions to seek a reopening, Cécile Gremez steps in to confirm that the request was filed with the prosecutor’s office that very morning.

Mr Bonbled then cites a few points of case law and points to the many aggressive remarks made against private individuals acting in the course of their duties, accusing the defendants of having called on the public, through every channel, to “rot” the civil parties. In passing, he takes a swipe at Doctor Bouillon for having said: “You deprived me of my freedom, you are going to pay for it”. Recalling that the FAMHP must be able to carry out its duties calmly, counsel concludes by insisting that the defendants should have used legal channels rather than resorting to assaults on his clients.

It is the turn of Mr van Langendonck to argue in conclusion that the cases cannot be separated. He recalls that investigating judge Guisset had confirmed that all registrations and certifications were perfectly in order, before taking up Doctor Bouillon’s words that the defendants were facing a “mafia-like organisation”. The lawyer directly accuses Messrs Malonne and Kestemont of belonging to an “order of bandits” who used their position as sworn inspectors, the lawyer stressing in passing that the “sentence [is] doubled”, and who, having seen MEDAKIT’s performance, allegedly did everything to stop it, search their premises and persecute his clients so as to prevent them from tendering. He praises the defendants’ civic drive, thwarted in his view by “dirty mafia tricks”, adding that proof of this will be provided, which provokes a sharp reaction from the civil party.

Doctor Bouillon then speaks again to denounce the irony of it and to recall the many letters sent to the authorities, showing the legal channels he never stopped using. He describes the favourable course of his hearings before investigating judge Guisset and regrets having been constantly hampered and subjected to more than five searches, when he could have saved many more lives. Finally, he confirms that an investigation for crimes against humanity is currently under way.

The Baugniet indictment: from the MEDAKIT scandal to promises of criminal evidence

The judge then asks Mr Baugniet whether he confirms what his lawyer said. He agrees, but warns that he still has a great deal to explain. His announced “five minutes” will keep the room spellbound for more than half an hour.

Before talking about the future and the counter-offensive, he goes back over his discovery of MEDAKIT in February 2020, a test giving a result in 45 seconds to 5 minutes, compared with two to three days for PCR tests. He is proud to have had this test evaluated by the Institut Pasteur and by military hospitals, recalling that it was used successfully on board the aircraft carrier Charles de Gaulle and recognised as the best in the world. According to him, thanks to the solution offered by United Belgium, there would have been no need to lock down and vaccinate the entire population: MEDAKIT would have revealed the presence of antibodies in citizens, thus avoiding unnecessary injections. The device’s effectiveness was established as early as 19 May 2020, well before the period covered by the prosecution.

For Mr Baugniet, MEDAKIT’s performance was deliberately concealed by Messrs Kestemont and Malonne. He therefore holds them responsible for the side effects suffered by everyone who was vaccinated unnecessarily. He then talks about his past life, his former lifestyle, but also his altruism, stressing that he gave away 450,000 euros’ worth of tests to the most deprived. He states that Covid is a “military parasite” against which antiparasitics such as ivermectin have proved effective, something he says was even recognised by the WHO, adding that his test made it possible to measure the evolution of virulence over 19 days. For six months, he appealed in vain to the Education Minister (remember the access conditional on the Covid Safe Ticket) and to the FAMHP to propose his solution, without ever receiving a reply.

Mr Baugniet continues by recalling his past as a paratrooper, the determination forged during his missions, notably in Lebanon in 1991 for the ICMC (International Catholic Migration Commission), and the necessary or radical methods needed to deal with critical situations. Today he has lost everything, and his family blames him for having “squandered the whole family fortune”. A ruin he attributes directly to the complainants, whom he calls “two scumbags”, accused of having rigged their evaluations through a family laboratory and of having “wanted to make a pile of money with tests that didn’t work” and lacked the CE marking required for their distribution. He claims that PCR tests, still in use, have already cost the State more than 9 billion euros.

The compensation he hopes to obtain in the coming proceedings is to be used, he explains, to fund the opening of analysis laboratories, in particular to test tap water, which “is killing us”, referring to cadmium pollution. He points in passing to the positions Mr Malonne once held at Merck and Abbott, “they’re all pals”, and accuses the two complainants of being directly responsible for his mother’s death, and for the deaths and vaccine injuries suffered by some citizens, pointing to Lucy and Pierre, who had come to attend the hearing.

Considering Mr Malonne to be the “best friend of Frank Vandenbroucke” he finds it inconceivable that this man, famous for “having burned banknotes in his garage”, was placed in a position and on a contract most exposed to corruption. Mr Baugniet also lashes out at the “inept” sitting/standing rules of the Covid period and maintains that of the four series of vaccine batches distributed, the one bearing the number 4 on your vaccination card was a deadly product. According to him, it would have been possible to avoid a vaccination campaign and health restrictions that cost Belgians 100 billion euros. He concludes by recalling his “royal acquittal” on all the previous charges and announces that criminal proceedings are under way, claiming to be able to trace the financial flows. For him, the verdict is clear: the defendants had the solution, and the complainants bear responsibility for thousands of deaths.

Ms Cécile Gremez is the last to speak, closing the proceedings. She recalls how badly their reputation was destroyed by the media, stressing that it took her partner, Frédéric Baugniet, being charged to finally be able to clear his name in court. She points out that the RTBF had MEDAKIT evaluated on 7 April 2020, five months before the searches, after obtaining samples in Spain and having them tested at the CHU Saint-Pierre hospital^[1]​ which confirmed that the test was indeed effective. MedaKit had emerged as the best test in a study of some twenty tests examined^[2]​. Finally, she mentions an investigation by determined members of parliament directly targeting Hugues Malonne, director general of the FAMHP. To be continued!

We gathered the reactions of Mr Van Langendonck and of Frédéric Baugniet and Cécile Gremez as they left. Watch our report (in French).

Réginald de Potesta de Waleffe for BAM!
__________________________________________________

Statements by Frédéric Baugniet and Cécile Gremez (United People), and by Doctor David Bouillon before the hearing, as well as by Mr Van Langendonck as they left the court:
https://youtu.be/6DC5CSByr-w

Statement by Frédéric Baugniet before the hearing:
https://youtu.be/4d-CGapBP-I

Reactions of Frédéric Baugniet and Dr David Bouillon as they left the hearing:
https://youtu.be/Wdt_Ur7JHng

​