Informative Circular for the attention of the directorates and personnel of the National Education, the directorates of the institutions and personnel of the Public Service, the directorates and personnel of the State enterprises, the employers and personnel of the private sector and the Citizens.

Before applying government measures, including measures emanating from the highest levels of the state, every civil servant, every company director, every citizen, must ensure that these measures respect fundamental human rights and the Constitution of France. No unconstitutional measure, violating fundamental human rights, imprescriptible, inalienable, inalterable, guaranteed by the Constitution, can be submitted to the contradictory debate, vote and promulgated law.

The President of the Republic is the guarantor of the Constitution : « The President of the Republic shall ensure compliance with the Constitution (...) He shall be the guarantor of national independence, territorial integrity and compliance with treaties ». (Art. 5 - Constitution of 4 October 1958). This means that he has the duty to oppose any measure violating this Constitution and cannot promulgate any law violating this Constitution, international laws or treaties ratified by France.

The constitution is the rule of conduct of a state. It is the body of fundamental laws that all laws voted on and passed must respect. In a democracy, it is validated by the people in its entirety and can only be changed after the people have been consulted for agreement.

Violating the Constitution is an attack on the integrity of French institutions and therefore on the security of the State. It is a crime of high treason since any anti-constitutional action is a coup d'état that puts an end to a democratic state based on the rule of law.

« A coup d'état is the seizure of power in a state by a minority through unconstitutional means, imposed by surprise using force. The perpetrators of a coup, or coup plotters, usually rely on all or part of the military, have the support of at least part of the political class and civil society. » Encyclopedia La Toupie (https://www.toupie.org/Dictionnaire/Coup_etat.htm)

« Any society in which the guarantee of rights is no longer assured, nor the separation of powers determined, has no Constitution. » (Art. 16 - Constitution of 4 October 1958)

By putting in place administrative measures violating fundamental human rights (obligation to wear a mask, obligation to submit to medical experimentation, sanitary pass, discriminatory measures, all of which are crimes against humanity, all violations of article 212-1 of the Penal Code), imprescriptible, inalienable, inalterable, guaranteed by the Constitution, the Macron Government has destroyed the French State. This is indeed a crime of treason since it is a violation of the national sovereignty exercised by the people and a violation of their fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution of 4 October 1958 and by the UN Charter.

« When a government violates the rights of the people, insurrection is, for the people and for each portion of the people, the most sacred of rights and the most indispensable of duties. (Art. 35 - Constitution of 24 June 1793 - https://www.conseil-constitutionnel.fr/les-constitutions-dans-l-histoire/constitution-du-24-juin-1793) The right to resist oppression is a right also guaranteed by the Constitution of 1789 : « The aim of all political association is the preservation of the natural and imprescriptible rights of Man. These rights are Liberty, Property, Security and resistance to oppression. » (Universal Declaration of Human Rights - Art.2), and therefore by the French Constitution of 4 October 1958 which guarantees it.
Since the people are the sole sovereign in France, it is therefore their duty to take back their institutions from any hostile occupying force and to impose on the servants of the State, who are at their service and not at the service of a dictatorial or foreign minority, to respect the Constitution as well as the inalienable and sacred rights of everyone.

If, in a democratic regime, it is the duty of every citizen to exercise his or her sovereignty in order to safeguard the integrity of his or her institutions and territory, it is the duty of every civil servant to exercise his or her duty of disobedience when orders he or she receives are manifestly illegal, in accordance with Article 28 of the Lepors Law. Every civil servant is criminally responsible for his or her actions and cannot pass them on to anyone else.

Article 28 - Law on the rights and obligations of civil servants, known as the Lepors Law n° 83-634 of 13 July 1983

« All civil servants, whatever their rank, are responsible for the execution of the tasks entrusted to them. They must comply with the instructions of their superior, except in cases where the order given is manifestly illegal and of such a nature as to seriously compromise a public interest. He is not relieved of any of his responsibilities by the responsibility of his subordinates. »

It is worth remembering that the sovereign French state, therefore the people, guarantees freedom of opinion (Chapter II, Art. 6 - Lepors Act No. 83-634 of 13 July 1983) to all civil servants and protects them from any form of discrimination (Chapter II, Art. 6 and 6 ter - Law says Lepors no 83-634 of 13 July 1983 and Articles 6 and 8 of Law 2016-1691 of 9 December 2016 on transparency, the fight against corruption and the modernisation of economic life) in compliance with the constitution. « The official shall treat all persons equally and respect their freedom of conscience and dignity. » (Art. 25, Law says Lepors no 83-634 du 13 juillet 1983)

Any official, any citizen, who forces another citizen to act against his or her will or compels him or her to comply with a law, especially if this « law » is an illegal and unconstitutional measure, violates the rule of Equality, apostasizes the principle of right and justice and activates the right of self-defence of the one on whom the constraint is exercised. Indeed,

Article 122-5 of the Penal Code states : « The person who, faced with an unjustified attack on himself or others, performs, at the same time, an act required by the need for self-defence or the self-defence of others, is not criminally responsible, unless there is a disproportion between the means of defence used and the seriousness of the attack. » or Article 122-7 « A person is not criminally liable if, faced with a present or imminent danger which threatens him or her, another person or property, he or she performs an act necessary to safeguard the person or property, unless the means employed are disproportionate to the gravity of the threat. »

Code of laws for the police, gendarmerie and other security-related professions, transport and health personnel.

Public Security Code (https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/codes/section_lc/LEGITEXT000025503132/LEGISCTA000025505851/#LEGISCTA000025507875)

Chapter IV : Ethics of the national police and gendarmerie (Articles L434-1 A to L434-1)

Article L434-1 A

Création LOI n°2021-1109 du 24 août 2021 - art. 2

« Before taking up their duties, all officers of the national police force or the national gendarmerie solemnly declare that they will serve the Republic, its principles of liberty, equality and fraternity and its Constitution with dignity and loyalty by taking an oath. »

Article R. 434-3 - Nature of the code of ethics and scope of application

I - The rules of conduct set out in this Code derive from the Constitution, international treaties, in particular the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the general principles of law, and the laws and regulations of the Republic.

They define the duties incumbent on police officers and gendarmes in the exercise of their internal security missions on or off duty and apply without prejudice to the statutory rules and other obligations to which they are respectively subject.

They are the subject of initial and ongoing training for police officers and gendarmes to enable them to perform their duties in an irreproachable manner.

II - For the purposes of this code, the term « police officer » refers to all active personnel of the national police force, as well as personnel working in a service of the national police force or in a public establishment contributing to its missions, and the term "gendarme" refers to officers and non-commissioned officers of the gendarmerie, as well as volunteer assistant gendarmes.

Article R. 434-14 - Relations with the public

The police officer or gendarme is at the service of the population.

His relationship with the latter is marked by courtesy and requires the use of formal address.

Respectful of the dignity of individuals, he/she shall ensure that he/she behaves in an exemplary manner in all circumstances, so as to inspire respect and consideration in return.

Article R. 434-15 - Wearing of the uniform

Police officers and gendarmes shall perform their duties in uniform. This principle may be departed from according to the rules of each force.
Except where justified by the service to which he belongs or the nature of the tasks entrusted to him, he shall comply with the requirements relating to his individual identification.

Article R. 434-18 - Use of force

The police officer or gendarme shall use force within the framework set by the law, only when necessary, and in a manner proportionate to the aim to be achieved or to the seriousness of the threat, as the case may be.

He shall only use weapons in cases of absolute necessity and within the framework of the legislative provisions applicable to his own status.

Article R. 434-23 - Principles of control

The national police and the national gendarmerie shall be subject to the control of the authorities designated by law and by international conventions.

In the exercise of their judicial missions, the national police and the national gendarmerie are subject to the control of the judicial authority in accordance with the provisions of the code of criminal procedure.

Article R. 434-24 - Defender of rights

The national police and the national gendarmerie shall be subject to the supervision of the Human Rights Defender in accordance with the role conferred on him by Article 71-1 of the Constitution.

The exercise of this control by the Defender of Rights may lead him to refer to the authority responsible for initiating disciplinary proceedings facts brought to his attention which appear to him to justify a sanction.

Constitution of 4 October 1968 - Article 71-1

Creation Constitutional law n°2008-724 of 23 July... - art. 41

The Human Rights Defender shall ensure that rights and freedoms are respected by State administrations, local authorities, public establishments, as well as by any body entrusted with a public service mission, or in respect of which the organic law assigns him powers.

A matter may be referred to it, under the conditions laid down by the Institutional Act, by any person who considers himself to be aggrieved by the operation of a public service or a body referred to in the first paragraph. It may refer the matter to itself.

The organic law shall define the powers and procedures for intervention of the Human Rights Defender. It shall determine the conditions under which he may be assisted by a college in the exercise of some of his powers.

The Human Rights Defender shall be appointed by the President of the Republic for a non-renewable term of six years, after application of the procedure provided for in the last paragraph of Article 13. His functions are incompatible with those of a member of the Government and a member of Parliament. Other incompatibilities shall be determined by the organic law.

The Human Rights Defender shall report on his activities to the President of the Republic and to Parliament.

The police officer or gendarme shall provide the Defender with the information and documents that the Defender deems useful for the performance of his mission, if requested to do so by the Defender. The police officer or gendarme shall comply with the summons and may be assisted by a person of his/her choice.

Article R. 434-26 - Peer review

Police officers and gendarmes of all ranks to whom the present code applies are its repository. They shall individually and collectively ensure that it is respected.

It is important to remember that only a citizen in possession of the law, i.e. a sworn officer, has the right to require another citizen to respect a law, which must itself respect the French constitution and the texts relating to human rights guaranteed by the UN Charter ratified by France.

Judges who pass sentences and apply penalties, police officers and gendarmes who enforce the law and protect citizens from violations of the law, are the depository of the law.

Security agents are not depository of the law. They cannot, under any circumstances, compel anyone to do anything, even if the person concerned violates a law. In the event of a violation of the law, they must, like any citizen, in accordance with the rule of equality, request the intervention of the forces of law and order, who alone are sworn and have the authority of the law.

Transport Code

Title V: Internal Security Services of the SNCF and the Régie Autonome des Transports Parisiens (Articles R2250-1 to R2252-1)
https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/codes/section_lc/LEGITEXT000023086525/LEGISCTA000023070822/#LEGISCTA000023084165

Article R2251-1
Created Decree n°2019-726 of 9 July 2019 - art.

« This code of ethics applies to agents of the internal security services of the SNCF and the Régie Autonome des Transports Parisiens, hereinafter referred to as « the agent »,  « the service » and «the company » respectively, in the performance of the duties defined in Articles L. 2241-1 and L. 2251-1.

Article L2241-1

Version in force since 01 January 2020

Modified by Order n°2019-552 of 3 June 2019 - art. 10

I - In addition to the officers and agents of the judicial police, the following are responsible for recording offences against the provisions of this Title, the offences provided for in Article 621-1 of the Criminal Code as well as the offences provided for in the regulations relating to the police or safety of transport and the safe operation of rail or guided transport systems:

• 1° Sworn civil servants or agents of the State appointed for this purpose and placed under the authority of the Minister for Transport;

• 2° Sworn agents assigned to the Public Railway Safety Establishment;

• 3° Sworn agents appointed by the rail and guided transport infrastructure manager;

• 4° Sworn agents of the transport service operator or sworn agents of a transport company acting on behalf of the operator;

• 5° Sworn agents assigned to the internal security services of the SNCF and the Régie autonome des transports parisiens;

• 6° Municipal police officers;

• 7° Sworn agents of the subsidiary mentioned in 5° of Article L. 2111-9.

II - Contraventions of the provisions of the orders of the competent State administrative authority concerning the circulation, stopping and parking of vehicles in the station yards are also recorded by :

• 1° (Repealed)

• 2° The deputy judicial police officers ;

• 3° The officers responsible for monitoring the public highway mentioned in 3° of Article L. 130-4 of the Highway Code;

• 4° The sworn agents mentioned in 13° of Article L. 130-4 of the Highway Code.

Article R2251-4
Creation Decree n°2019-726 of 9 July 2019 - art.

The staff member shall carry out his or her duties in accordance with the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen, the Constitution and constitutional principles, international conventions, laws and regulations.

Article R2251-13
Creation Decree n°2019-726 of 9 July 2019 - art.

Agents shall perform their duties in uniform. This principle may only be departed from in compliance with laws and regulations.
They shall respect the company rules on the wearing of uniforms and shall give a good image of the service.

In the performance of his duties, he shall carry his professional card and his sworn agent's card, which he shall be able to produce whenever he is legally required to do so. »

Internal Security Code - Natural or legal persons carrying out private security activities (Articles R631-1 to R631-32 - Regulatory part of Book VI of the Internal Security Code )
https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/codes/id/LEGITEXT000025503132/

« Respect for the law (Article R631-4)

Within the framework of their functions, private security actors strictly respect the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen, the Constitution and constitutional principles, all laws and regulations in force, in particular the highway code and the professional and social legislation applicable to them.

Dignity (Article R631-5)

Private security actors shall refrain, even outside the exercise of their profession, from any act, manoeuvre or behaviour likely to bring it into disrepute.
Professional attitude (Article R631-7)

In all circumstances, private security actors shall refrain from acting contrary to probity, honour and dignity. They shall show discernment and humanity.
They shall act with professionalism and ensure that they acquire and maintain their skills through any required training.

Prohibition of all violence

Except in the case of legitimate defence provided for in articles 122-5 and 122-6 of the Penal Code, private security actors must never use violence, even if it is light.

When a private security actor, in the exercise of his duties, cannot resolve a dispute amicably with a third party who does not wish to submit to the checks and controls legally carried out, he must call on the police or gendarmerie forces with territorial jurisdiction.

A private security actor who apprehends the perpetrator of a crime or a flagrant misdemeanour punishable by imprisonment pursuant to Article 73 of the Code of Criminal Procedure may not detain the defendant without immediately notifying the territorially competent police or gendarmerie services.

Before being handed over to the police or gendarmerie, the person arrested remains under the supervision and protection of the person who has arrested him or her. They must not be subjected to any violence, humiliation or treatment contrary to human dignity. If the condition of the person stopped requires treatment, private security actors must immediately call on the competent medical services.

Without prejudice to the provisions relating to armament, private security guards shall not carry any object, including jewellery, likely to cause injury to a third party when performing their duties in contact with the public.

Weapons (Article R631-11)

With the exception of those whose law provides that they may be armed, private security actors may not acquire, hold, transport or carry a weapon in the exercise of their mission and shall refrain, in their communication with any potential client, from implying that they would be equipped with weapons, of any category whatsoever, during the execution of their services.

Prohibition on taking advantage of public authority (Article R631-12)

Private security actors must avoid any confusion with a public service, in particular a police service, by their behaviour and their mode of communication.
The use of logos or signs with characteristics and colours similar to those identifying documents issued by public administrations is prohibited, as well as any element that may give rise to or maintain any confusion with a public authority service.

The actors of private security cannot, in their communication towards the public, prevail themselves of a past or present link with a service depositary of the public authority. With regard to third parties, they cannot mention missions or delegations of public administrations which would not have been entrusted to them by these.
They shall refrain from using any equipment, in particular audible and luminous warnings on vehicles, likely to create such confusion.

Instructions and controls (R631-16)

Managers shall refrain from giving their employees, directly or through their executives, orders that would lead them to fail to comply with this code of ethics.

They shall ensure that clear and precise orders and instructions are formulated in order to ensure the proper execution of missions.
The general instructions, circulars and general instructions for private security and those relating to the functions performed, which employees must implement in the performance of their duties, are grouped together in a memorandum, written in French, in an easily understandable style. The employee must read it each time it is modified and must provide proof of this by signing it. The handbook must be made available to employees in the workplace. It may only be consulted by personnel involved in the design and execution of missions and, without delay, by the supervisory agents of the Conseil national des activités privées de sécurité. This memorandum does not contain any specific mention of a client or mission.
The directors ensure that the assignments are carried out properly, in particular by means of regular on-site inspections. In this context, the directors shall establish and maintain a register of internal controls.

Duties of employees

Presentation of the professional card (Article R631-25 )

Employees must be able to present their professional card at any request from clients, principals or authorised authorities and bodies. They shall provide proof of their identity to the authorities that need to know, immediately or, if this is not possible, as soon as possible.
Respect for the public (Article R631-27)

Employees shall behave in all circumstances in a respectful and dignified manner towards the public. They shall act with tact, diplomacy and courtesy. In the performance of their duties, they shall refrain from any familiarity or discrimination towards others, i.e. any distinction based on origin, sex, family status, pregnancy, physical appearance, surname, state of health, disability, genetic characteristics, morals, sexual orientation, age, political or trade union opinions, membership or non-membership, whether real or assumed, of a particular ethnic group, nation, race or religion.

Employees in contact with the public must ensure that their dress is correct and that they wear the distinctive signs and equipment required by the laws and regulations, whatever the circumstances.

The following activities are subject to the provisions of this Title, provided they are not carried out by a public administrative service (Article L611-1) :

• 1° Providing services for the purpose of human surveillance or surveillance by electronic security systems or the guarding of movable or immovable property as well as the security of persons in these buildings.

• 2° To transport and supervise, until their effective delivery, jewellery representing a value of at least 100,000 euros, funds, except, for employees of La Poste or credit institutions authorised by their employer, when their amount is less than 5,335 euros, or precious metals, as well as to ensure the processing of the funds transported.

• 3° To protect the physical integrity of persons

Art. 53 - Flagrant offence

« A crime or misdemeanour that is currently being committed, or has just been committed, shall be deemed to be flagrant. A crime or misdemeanour is also considered to be flagrant when, in the immediate vicinity of the action, the suspected person is pursued by public clamour, or is found in possession of objects, or presents traces or clues, which suggest that he has participated in the crime or misdemeanour.

Following the discovery of a crime or a flagrant offence, the investigation conducted under the supervision of the public prosecutor under the conditions provided for in this chapter may continue without interruption for a period of eight days.

When investigations necessary to establish the truth in respect of a crime or offence punishable by a sentence of five years' imprisonment or more cannot be deferred, the public prosecutor may decide to extend the investigation, under the same conditions, for a maximum period of eight days.

The right of apprehension

In cases of flagrant crime or flagrant offence punishable by imprisonment, any person is entitled to apprehend the perpetrator and bring him before the nearest judicial police officer.
When the person is brought before the judicial police officer, his or her placement in police custody, where the conditions for this measure provided for in this Code are met, is not obligatory if he or she is not required under duress to remain at the disposal of the investigators and has been informed that he or she may leave the police or gendarmerie premises at any time. The present paragraph shall not apply, however, if the person has been taken, under constraint, by the police force to the judicial police officer.

Life is short, art is long, opportunity is fleeting, experience is deceptive, judgment is difficult. (Hippocrate)

Public Health Code - General health protection (Articles L1110-1 to L1545-4)
https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/codes/id/LEGISCTA000006125345/

Article L1110-1

Created by Law n°2002-303 of 4 March 2002 - art. 3 () JORF 5 March 2002

« The fundamental right to health protection must be implemented by all available means for the benefit of all persons. Health professionals, health establishments and networks, health insurance bodies or any other bodies involved in prevention and care, and the health authorities shall contribute, together with users, to developing prevention, guaranteeing equal access for each person to the care required by his or her state of health and ensuring continuity of care and the best possible health security.

Article L1110-2 (Created by Law n°2002-303 of 4 March 2002 - art. 3 () JORF 5 March 2002)

The sick person has the right to respect for his dignity

Article L1110-3

Modified by LAW n°2018-1203 of 22 December 2018 - art. 52 (V)

No person may be discriminated against in access to prevention or care. A health professional may not refuse to treat a person on one of the grounds referred to in the first paragraph of Article 225-1 or Article 225-1-1 of the Criminal Code or on the grounds that he or she is a beneficiary of the complementary health protection provided for in Article L. 861-1 of the Social Security Code, or of the right to assistance provided for in Article L. 251-1 of the Social Action and Family Code.

Any person who considers himself to be the victim of an illegitimate refusal of care may refer the matter to the director of the local health insurance body or the president of the territorially competent council of the professional association concerned of the facts which lead to the presumption of its existence. This referral is equivalent to filing a complaint. It is communicated to the authority which has not received it. The recipient acknowledges receipt to the author, informs the health professional concerned and may summon him or her within one month of the date of registration of the complaint.

Any person who believes that he or she has been the victim of an unlawful refusal of care may refer the matter to the director of the local health insurance body or to the president of the territorially competent council of the professional association concerned, on the basis of the facts which give rise to a presumption of its existence. This referral is equivalent to filing a complaint. It is communicated to the authority that has not received it. The addressee acknowledges receipt to the author, informs the health professional concerned and may summon him or her to a meeting within one month of the date of registration of the complaint.

If the territorially competent council fails to act within three months, the director of the local health insurance body may impose a sanction on the health professional under the conditions laid down in Article L. 162-1-14-1 of the Social Security Code.

Except in the case of an emergency and where the health professional fails in his duties of humanity, the principle set out in the first paragraph of this article does not prevent a refusal of care based on a personal or professional requirement that is essential and determining for the quality, safety or effectiveness of care. Continuity of care must be ensured whatever the circumstances, under the conditions provided for in Article L. 6315-1 of this Code. The detailed rules for the application of this Article shall be laid down by regulation.

Article L1110-5

Amended by LAW n°2016-87 of 2 February 2016 - art. 1

Every person has, in view of his state of health and the urgency of the interventions that this requires, the right to receive, throughout the territory, the most appropriate treatment and care and to benefit from therapies whose effectiveness is recognised and which guarantee the best possible health security and the best possible alleviation of suffering in the light of proven medical knowledge. The preventive, investigative or treatment and care measures must not, in the light of medical knowledge, involve risks disproportionate to the expected benefit. These provisions shall apply without prejudice to the safety obligation of any supplier of health products or to the application of Title II of this Book.

Every person has the right to a dignified end of life with the best possible relief of suffering. Health professionals use all the means at their disposal to ensure that this right is respected.

Article L1110-8

Modified by LAW n°2016-41 of 26 January 2016 - art. 175

The patient's right to free choice of practitioner and health establishment and of the mode of care, whether ambulatory or at home, in particular when he or she is receiving palliative care within the meaning of Article L. 1110-10, is a fundamental principle of health legislation. Limitations to this principle by the different social protection schemes can only be introduced in consideration of the technical capacities of the facilities, their pricing system and the criteria for authorisation to provide reimbursable care to the socially insured.

Article L1111-2

Modified by Order n° 2020-232 of 11 March 2020 - art. 1

I - Everyone has the right to be informed about their state of health. This information shall relate to the various investigations, treatments or preventive measures proposed, their usefulness, their possible urgency, their consequences, the frequent or serious risks normally foreseeable which they entail, as well as the other possible solutions and the foreseeable consequences of refusal. He or she is also informed of the possibility of receiving, when his or her state of health so permits, in particular when he or she is in palliative care within the meaning of Article L. 1110-10, care in an outpatient setting or at home. Account is taken of the person's wish to receive one of these forms of care. When, after the investigations, treatments or preventive actions have been carried out, new risks are identified, the person concerned must be informed, unless it is impossible to trace him or her.

This information is the responsibility of all health professionals within the framework of their competence and in compliance with the professional rules applicable to them. Only in cases of urgency or impossibility of providing information may he/she be exempted. This information is provided during an individual interview. A person's wish to be kept in ignorance of a diagnosis or prognosis must be respected, except when third parties are exposed to a risk of transmission.

Article L1111-4

Modified by Order n° 2020-232 of 11 March 2020 - art. 2

Every person makes decisions about his or her health together with the health professional, taking into account the information and recommendations provided by the health professional.

Everyone has the right to refuse or not to receive treatment. However, the patient's care remains the responsibility of the doctor, including palliative care.

The doctor is obliged to respect the person's wishes after having informed him or her of the consequences of his or her choices and their seriousness. If the person's decision to refuse or interrupt any treatment puts his or her life in danger, he or she must reiterate this decision within a reasonable time. He or she may call on another member of the medical profession. The entire procedure is recorded in the patient's medical record. The doctor shall safeguard the dignity of the dying person and ensure the quality of his or her end of life by providing the palliative care mentioned in Article L. 1110-10.

No medical procedure or treatment can be carried out without the free and informed consent of the person and this consent can be withdrawn at any time.

When the person is incapable of expressing his or her wishes, no intervention or investigation may be carried out, except in an emergency or where this is impossible, without the trusted support person provided for in Article L. 1111-6, or the family, or failing that, one of his or her close relatives having been consulted.

When the person is incapable of expressing his or her wishes, the limitation or cessation of treatment likely to result in his or her death may not be carried out without having respected the collegiate procedure mentioned in Article L. 1110-5-1 and the advance directives or, failing that, without the trusted person provided for in Article L. 1111-6 or, failing that, the family or close friends having been consulted. The reasoned decision to limit or stop treatment is recorded in the medical file. The consent, mentioned in the fourth paragraph, of the minor, if necessary under guardianship, must be systematically sought if he or she is capable of expressing his or her wishes and participating in the decision.

The consent, referred to in the fourth paragraph, of the adult subject to a legal protection measure with representation of the person must be obtained if he or she is capable of expressing his or her will, if necessary with the assistance of the person responsible for his or her protection. Where this condition is not met, it is for the person responsible for the legal protection measure with representation of the person to give his or her authorisation, taking account of the opinion expressed by the protected person. Except in emergencies, in the event of disagreement between the protected adult and the person responsible for his or her protection, the judge shall authorise one or the other to take the decision.

If the refusal of treatment by the person with parental authority or by the guardian if the patient is a minor, or by the person in charge of the legal protection measure if the patient is an adult subject to a legal protection measure with representation relating to the person, is likely to have serious consequences for the health of the minor or of the protected adult, the doctor shall provide the necessary care.

The examination of a sick person in the context of clinical teaching shall require his/her prior consent. Students receiving such instruction should be informed in advance of the need to respect the rights of patients as set out in this Title. The provisions of this Article shall apply without prejudice to the specific provisions concerning the consent of the person for certain categories of care or interventions.

Article L1111-6

Modified by Order n° 2020-232 of 11 March 2020 - art. 3

Any adult may designate a trusted person who may be a parent, a relative or the attending physician and who will be consulted in the event that he or she is unable to express his or her wishes and to receive the information necessary for this purpose. He or she reports on the person's wishes. His/her testimony prevails over any other testimony. This designation is made in writing and co-signed by the designated person. It may be revised and revoked at any time. If the patient wishes, the trusted support person accompanies him/her in his/her steps and attends medical meetings in order to help him/her in his/her decisions.

Article L1111-7

Modified by LOI n°2021-1017 of 2 August 2021 - art. 14

Any person shall have access to all information concerning his or her health held, in whatever capacity, by health professionals, by health establishments, by health centres, by the armed forces health service or by the National Invalids Institution, which is formalised or has been the subject of written exchanges between health professionals, in particular examination results, consultation, intervention, exploration or hospitalisation reports, protocols and therapeutic prescriptions implemented, monitoring sheets, correspondence between health professionals, with the exception of information mentioning that it has been collected from or concerning a third party not involved in the therapeutic management.

Article L1122-1

Modified by Order n°2018-1125 of 12 December 2018 - art. 21

Prior to the performance of research involving the human person, information shall be given to the person participating in the research by the investigator or by a medical practitioner representing him. Where the investigator is a qualified person, this information shall be provided by the investigator or by another qualified person on his behalf. The information shall include :

• 1° The objective, methodology and duration of the research ;

• 2° The expected benefits and, in the case of research mentioned in 1° or 2° of Article L. 1121-1, the foreseeable constraints and risks, including in the event of termination of the research before its completion;

• 3° In the case of research mentioned in 1° or 2° of Article L. 1121-1, any medical alternatives;

• 4° In the case of research mentioned in 1° or 2° of Article L. 1121-1, the arrangements for medical care planned at the end of the research, if such care is necessary, in the event of premature termination of the research, and in the event of exclusion from the research;

• 5° The opinion of the committee mentioned in Article L. 1123-1 and the authorisation of the competent authority mentioned in Article L. 1123-12;

• 6° Where applicable, the prohibition to participate simultaneously in another research project or the period of exclusion provided for by the protocol and his or her registration in the national file provided for in Article L. 1121-16;

• 6° bis For research with a commercial purpose, the arrangements for payment of compensation in addition to the additional costs associated with the research, where applicable, under the conditions laid down in Article L. 1121-16-1 ;

• 7° Where applicable, the need to process personal data in accordance with the provisions of Article 69 of Law No. 78-17 of 6 January 1978 relating to information technology, files and freedoms.

The person whose participation is sought shall be informed of his or her right to have access, during or after the research, to information about his or her health held by the investigator or, where appropriate, the physician or qualified person representing him or her.

The person whose participation is sought or, where applicable, the persons, bodies or authorities responsible for assisting, representing or authorising the research shall be informed of his or her right to refuse to participate in the research or to withdraw consent or, where applicable, authorisation at any time, without incurring any liability or prejudice as a result.

When non-interventional research concerns the compliance with a treatment and when its implementation responds to a request from the National Agency for the Safety of Medicines and Health Products, the High Authority for Health or the European Medicines Agency, the objective of the research, its methodology and its duration may be the subject of only brief prior information provided that the research does not present any foreseeable serious risk. The project mentioned in Article L. 1123-6 shall mention the nature of the prior information transmitted to the persons undergoing the research.

Where the research involving the human person concerns the field of dentistry, the investigator may entrust a dental surgeon or a doctor with the task of communicating the above-mentioned information to the person who is to be the subject of the research and of obtaining his consent.

The purpose of psychological research, as well as its methodology and duration, may be the subject of only brief prior information, provided that the research does not present any foreseeable serious risk. Full information on this research shall be provided to the persons who have undergone it at the end of the research. The project mentioned in Article L.1123-6 shall mention the nature of the prior information transmitted to the persons undergoing the research. Exceptionally, when in the interest of a patient the diagnosis of his or her disease could not be revealed to him or her, the investigator may, in the interest of the patient's trust, withhold certain information related to that diagnosis. In this case, the research protocol must mention this possibility. The information provided shall be summarised in a written document given to the person whose consent is sought. At the end of the research, the person who has consented has the right to be informed of the overall results of the research, as specified in the information document.

Article L1122-1-1

Modified by Order n°2016-800 of 16 June 2016 - art. 2

No research mentioned in 1° of Article L. 1121-1 may be carried out on a person without his or her free and informed consent, obtained in writing, after the information provided for in Article L. 1122-1 has been given. Where it is impossible for the person concerned to express his or her consent in writing, it may be attested by the trusted third party provided for in Article L. 1111-6, by a family member or, failing that, by one of the persons close to the person concerned, provided that this trusted third party, this member or this person close to the person is independent of the investigator and the sponsor.

No research mentioned in the second paragraph of Article L. 1121-1 may be carried out on a person without their free, informed and express consent.

No research mentioned in the third paragraph of Article L. 1121-1 may be carried out on a person if he or she has objected to it.

In the event that the person undergoing research has withdrawn his or her consent, such withdrawal shall not affect the activities carried out and the use of the data obtained on the basis of the informed consent expressed before it was withdrawn.

Article L1126-1

Modified by Order n°2016-800 of 16 June 2016 - art. 6

As stated in Article 223-8 of the Penal Code, reproduced below :

« The fact of carrying out or having carried out on a person a research study mentioned in 1° or 2° of Article L. 1121-1 or a clinical trial mentioned in Article L. 1124-1 of the Public Health Code without having obtained the free, informed and, where applicable, written consent of the person concerned, of the holders of parental authority or of the guardian or of other persons, authorities or institutions. 1124-1 of the Public Health Code without having obtained the free, informed and, where applicable, written consent of the person concerned, of the holders of parental authority or of the guardian or of other persons, authorities or bodies designated to consent to the research or to authorise it, in the cases provided for by the Public Health Code or by Articles 28 to 31 of Regulation (EU) No 536/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 April 2014 on clinical trials on medicinal products, shall be punishable by three years' imprisonment and a fine of €45,000.

The same penalties shall apply where research is carried out after consent has been withdrawn. The same penalties shall apply where non-interventional research is carried out with the objection of the person.

The provisions of this Article shall not apply to the examination of a person's genetic characteristics or to his or her identification by genetic fingerprints carried out for scientific research purposes. »

Mandatory masking, Sanitary Pass, medical experimentation, are crimes against humanity, falling by Article 212-1 of the French Penal Code and Article 7 of the Rome Statute

The obligation to wear a mask (torture and crime of discrimination), the coercion of medical experimentation (endangerment of life) and the imposition of a health pass (crime of discrimination) are violations of fundamental human rights, imprescriptible, inalienable, unalterable, in this case violations of the right to physical integrity, the right to free movement, the right to privacy, the right to free opinion, the right to life, and are three crimes against humanity punishable by life imprisonment (Article 212-1 of the Criminal Code and Article 7 of the Rome Statute).

Any citizen forced by another citizen to wear a mask, to inject a substance, whatever its nature, or to use a health pass, including if this citizen is a law enforcement officer (see Code of Ethics of Internal Security), therefore sworn by the State, is entitled to consider himself the victim of an aggression since his fundamental rights are violated and that these three measures (the obligation to wear a mask, the experimental « vaccination » obligation, and the health pass) are unconstitutional crimes and therefore, for each person forced to carry them out, « unjustified attacks on himself or others (his children or parents for example) » (Art 122-5 of the Criminal Code) and a « present danger that threatens himself or others (her children or parents for example) » (Art. 122-7 of the Penal Code) since wearing a mask has deleterious effects on the health of those who wear it and obtaining a health pass, a discriminatory measure, is subject to the injection of an RNA or messenger DNA product, whose harmlessness in the short, medium and long term, as well as the absence of reprotoxic and carcinogenic effects, has not yet been scientifically proven since the substances are currently undergoing phase III trials test, i.e. in the experimental stage.

Any citizen can therefore, in all legality, assert his right to self-defence, either, in a peaceful manner, by refusing to put on his mask (torture), to be injected with a substance, whatever its nature, or to present a health pass (discriminatory measure), or by lodging a complaint with the public prosecutor for torture, endangering others and discrimination, and therefore for crimes against humanity, against anyone, whether or not they have custodian of the law, who tries to impose one or other, or all three, of these unconstitutional measures.

Any citizen may also, if citizens, whether custodian of the law or not, attempt to impose these unconstitutional measures on him or her by resorting to coercive actions, accompanied by verbal or physical violence, assert his or her right to self-defence, while respecting the rule of proportionality in the context of his or her response (« Is not criminally responsible (...) unless there is a disproportion between the means used and the seriousness of the threat » - Art. 122-7 of the Penal Code). In the context of the coup d'état induced by the so-called unconstitutional health measures taken by the Macron government, every citizen's right to self-defence is reinforced by their right to « resist oppression » (Universal Declaration of Human Rights - Art.2) guaranteed by the Constitution of 4 October 1958.

Any citizen is also entitled to refuse to apply the illegal and unconstitutional COVID measures in any private place open to the public, or not, by invoking the respect of the law, the violation of these laws, in the framework of the COVID measures, exposing him/her to be prosecuted for endangerment of others, discrimination and torture, and thus for crimes against humanity under Article 212-1 of the Criminal Code and Article 7 of the Rome Statute. He can also invoke his fundamental rights, imprescriptible, inalienable, inalterable, guaranteed by the Constitution of October 4, 1958, therefore, by way of consequence, guaranteed by the police, the Gendarmerie and the army (See Code of Internal Security above), the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the UN Charter, the right to private property, to private life, to work, the right to undertake, to worship, to artistic creation, to assembly.

List of fundamental human rights, imprescriptible, inalienable, inalterable, guaranteed by the Constitution of 4 October 1958, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, ratified by France, thus guaranteed by the Constitution of France and its President, as well as by the UN Charter.

Fundamental rights are essentially derived from the following two principles

• Equality : equality of the sexes, equality before the law, equality before taxation, equality before the courts, equality before education, etc

• Freedom : freedom of opinion, freedom of expression, freedom of assembly, freedom of worship, freedom of association, right to strike, freedom of movement, etc.

Fundamental rights can be divided, schematically, into 3 categories.

Individual rights

These are the rights and freedoms, imprescriptible, inalienable, unalterable, guaranteed to each individual, from birth, by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the UN Charter, and therefore by the Constitution of France:

• Dignity of the person (right to dispose of one's body, etc.)

• Right to privacy and intimacy

• Right and freedom to come and go

• Right to property

• Freedom of enterprise

• Freedom of opinion

• Freedom of worship

• Right to strike

• Freedom of artistic creation (Article 1 of the law of 7 July 2016)

• Right to security (presumption of innocence, respect for the rights of the defence, benefit of the protection of the police force, etc.).

Collective rights or freedoms

These are inalienable, unalterable rights and freedoms, guaranteed by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the UN Charter, and therefore by the French Constitution, which each individual can exercise within a community without restrictions or censorship.

• Freedom of assembly

• Freedom of the press

• Freedom of association

• Right to manifest

Social rights

These inalienable, unalterable rights, guaranteed by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the UN Charter, and therefore by the Constitution of France, are benefits that are the responsibility of the State, which guarantees them to the citizen by preserving national sovereignty, using the sums collected by taxes to create infrastructures that are beneficial to all and owned by all:

• Right to employment

• Right to security

• Right to housing

• Right to education (free education) and culture

• Protection of health



• Protection of the environment.

It should be noted that some states have also committed themselves to upholding these rights in the Declaration on the Right to Development - 41-128 (https://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Issues/Development/DeclarationRightDevelopment_fr.pdf) :

« Article 5

States shall take decisive action to eliminate massive and flagrant violations of the human rights of peoples and human beings which result from situations such as those arising from apartheid, all forms of racism and racial discrimination, colonialism, foreign domination and occupation, aggression, foreign intervention and threats to national sovereignty, national unity and territorial integrity, the threat of war, as well as from the denial of the fundamental right of self-determination of peoples.

Article 6

• 1 All States shall cooperate in promoting, encouraging and strengthening universal respect for and observance of all human rights and fundamental freedoms for the benefit of all without distinction as to race, sex, language or religion.
• 
  
• 2 All human rights and fundamental freedoms are indivisible and interdependent; the realization, promotion and protection of civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights must be given equal attention and urgency.
• 
  
• 3. 3. States must take measures to eliminate obstacles to development resulting from the lack of respect for civil and political rights, as well as economic, social and cultural rights.» « No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment » (Universal Declaration of Human Rights - Art.5).

« No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. In particular, no one shall be subjected without his free consent to medical or scientific experimentation. » (Covenant on Civil and Political Rights - https://www.ohchr.org/fr/professionalinterest/pages/ccpr.aspx)

« No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. In particular, no one shall be subjected without his free consent to medical or scientific experimentation. »(Covenant on Civil and Political Rights  -  https://www.ohchr.org/fr/professionalinterest/pages/ccpr.aspx)

With regard to the above-mentioned legal texts, any civil servant, as well as any citizen whatever his or her social status, whether or not he or she is a law enforcement officer, who has applied the unconstitutional COVID measures or forced anyone else to submit to them, is therefore liable to criminal prosecution following the lodging of a complaint with the Public Prosecutor by any citizen who considers that he or she has been the victim of his or her actions, for :

Torture, thus a crime against humanity, in violation of Article 212-1-6 - Also constitutes a crime against humanity and is punishable by life imprisonment if any of the following acts are committed in execution of a concerted plan against a civilian population group as part of a widespread or systematic attack : 6° Torture) of the French Criminal Code and Article 7 of the Rome Statute, for forcing children, adolescents and students to wear a mask in schools, in playgrounds or in the common areas of establishments, throughout the day, forcing public service personnel, users of state enterprises and institutions, and all French citizens - it is a coercion exercised as part of a «widespread and systematic attack» (212-1-6) - to wear a mask in all public places, including outdoors, at their place of work, throughout the day, in violation, in addition to Article 212-1-6 of the Penal Code and Article 7 of the Rome Statute, of Article 3 of the Universal Declaration of Bioethics of 2005 which states : « 1. Human dignity, human rights and fundamental freedoms must be fully respected. 2. The interests and welfare of the individual should prevail over the sole interest of science or society. »

Wearing a mask is a cruel, inhumane and degrading act that has a deleterious effect on the body and psyche of anyone wearing it. It is a torture inflicted in secret Guantánamo-type prisons and an accessory of coercion imposed on slaves. As an instrument of torture, it creates spatio-temporal disturbances that alter the perception of the outside world and the capacity for judgement, and therefore free will, of those who are forced to wear it. It induces a state of submission towards the torturer and puts the tortured person in a vulnerable condition, which predisposes him to be more receptive to other acts of torture applied, subsequently, by gradation of harshness. The mask is used to destructure and annihilate the personality of the prisoners. Used in the school environment, particularly with very young children, the mask is a psychological weapon. Spatial and temporal disorientation is detrimental to the child's psychic and cerebral development, slows down or prevents learning, reifies the child since he or she no longer has control over his or her movements and thoughts, and makes him or her vulnerable to any abuse that the adult in charge of him or her might want to commit. The child is placed under control in order to make him/her adhere to a subversive ideology and to use him/her for political purposes.

« Psychological warfare is directed against enemies and seeks to gain control over their attitudes and behaviour. «Action and psychological warfare have the common characteristic of acting on the individual and collective psyche. ». The hostile occupation forces then put in place a « physical and psychological control of the « Masses » and techniques of material and moral conquest of individuals aimed at the « popular mobilisation » of all » - (Provisional Instruction on the Use of Psychological Weapons - Ministry of National Defence and the Armed Forces - Personnel of the Armed Forces - 5th Division - 29 July 1957)

The obligation to wear a mask is a serious attack on the physical integrity of every individual. It is a violation of the fundamental, imprescriptible, inalienable, unalterable right to control one's own body and of the fundamental, imprescriptible, inalienable, unalterable right to personal dignity. It is a violation of the fundamental, imprescriptible, inalienable, unalterable right to privacy.

Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment - Extracts

« Bearing in mind Article 5 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Article 7 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, both of which provide that no one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment,

Taking into account also the Declaration on the Protection of All Persons from Being Subjected to Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, adopted by the General Assembly on 9 December 1975,

Desiring to increase the effectiveness of the fight against torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment throughout the world

Article 1

1 - For the purposes of this Convention, the term « torture » means any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession punishing him or her for an act he or she or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, intimidating or coercing him or her or a third person, or for any other reason based on discrimination of any kind, where such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. The term does not extend to pain or suffering resulting solely from, inherent in or occasioned by lawful sanctions.

Article 2

1 - Each State Party shall take effective legislative, administrative, judicial and other measures to prevent acts of torture in any territory under its jurisdiction.

2 - No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or threat of war, internal political instability or any other public emergency, may be invoked to justify torture.

3 - An order from a superior officer or a public authority cannot be invoked to justify torture.

Article 4

1 - Each State Party shall ensure that all acts of torture constitute offences under its criminal law. The same shall apply to the attempt to commit torture or to any act committed by any person that constitutes complicity or participation in the act of torture.

Attacks on the Fundamental Interests of the Nation

(https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/codes/section_lc/LEGITEXT000006070719/LEGISCTA000006117602/#LEGISCTA000006117602)

Article 410-1

« For the purposes of this Title, the fundamental interests of the nation include its independence, the integrity of its territory, its security, the republican form of its institutions, the means of its defence and diplomacy, the safeguarding of its population in France and abroad, the balance of its natural environment and the essential elements of its scientific and economic potential and of its cultural heritage. »

Psychological weapons can be used to wage subversive warfare and bring civilian populations under control.

9. Subversive warfare is a war waged within a territory against the existing political authority by a section of the inhabitants of that territory, whether or not assisted and reinforced from outside, with the aim of removing that authority's control over that territory or, at the very least, of paralysing its action.

Subversive wars are usually fought according to the principles and methods of revolutionary warfare :

Revolutionary war is characterized by :

• its objective : the physical and psychological control of the « masses »

• its techniques of material and moral conquest of individuals aiming at the « popular mobilisation » of all
  

• its ideology capable of fanatising the masses to be conquered and of winning their sympathy for their movement

• its evolution which progressively calls for violence.

Provisional Instruction on the Use of Psychological Weapons - Ministry of National Defence and the Armed Forces - Personnel of the Armed Forces - 5th Division (29 July 1957)

A subversive act is in the « Moral, social and political domain ». An act likely to upset or destroy institutions or principles; which threatens the established order. (https://www.cnrtl.fr/definition/subversif)

« It is clear from the definition of subversive warfare as defined by the French Ministry of the Armed Forces that the Macron government's COVID measures are measures of subversive warfare that subject, in violation of the Geneva Conventions, civilian populations, including children and adolescents, to psychological weaponry and torture with the aim of inducing a sense of terror and anguish, sustained, on a continuous basis, by media and institutional propaganda, in order to subject them to psychological and psychological control.»

A government that uses psychological weapons against the citizens it is supposed to protect is not a legal government (see above definition of coup) but a hostile occupying force. In view of the facts described above, this hostile occupying force has seized power in the manner of terrorist cells, « A terrorist cell is a group formed by a few individuals integrated locally into the population and likely to unite when the time comes to carry out acts of destruction of property or persons according to the practices and directives of a terrorist organisation. » (https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cellule_terroriste), and acts in the manner of terrorists, « The following offences constitute acts of terrorism, when they are intentionally connected with an individual or collective enterprise aimed at seriously disturbing public order through intimidation or terror : 1° Intentional attacks on life, intentional attacks on the integrity of the person, kidnapping and sequestration (…). » (Art. 421-1)

The obligation to wear a mask, the injection, by obligation, extortion or blackmail, of substances known as "vaccines", in an experimental medical context, and confinement constitute voluntary attacks on physical integrity, and therefore on the integrity of the person and on life.

« It is an offence to make offers or promises to a person, to offer gifts, presents or advantages of any kind, to threaten him or her or to put pressure on him or her to participate in a grouping or agreement provided for in l'article 421-2-1, or commits one of the acts of terrorism mentioned in Articles 421-1 and 421-2 is punishable, even when it has not been followed by action, of ten years' imprisonment and a fine of €150,000. » (Art. 421-2-4 du Code pénal)

Therefore, offering money or gifts in kind to doctors, pharmacists, shop or restaurant owners, health care workers, hospital managers or anyone else to implement unconstitutional measures is a terrorist act. Threatening citizens with dismiss to submit to unconstitutional measures that violate their fundamental human rights is an act of terrorism. Confining citizens to their homes is an act of terrorism. Forced confinement is an arbitrary, abusive confinement, contrary to the fundamental, imprescriptible, inalienable, unalterable right to free movement.

According to Article 421-2-1 of the Penal Code « It is also an act of terrorism to participate in a grouping formed or a conspiracy established with a view to the preparation, characterised by one or more material facts, of one of the acts of terrorism mentioned in the preceding articles. », accepting a donation, present or benefit, propagating anti-constitutional measures, injecting products into citizens against their will or without warning them of the possible harmfulness of the products injected, forcing them to wear a mask to the detriment of their health are acts of terrorism.

It is important to specify that criminal responsibility lies with the person who commits the act as well as with the person who is an accomplice  :  « No one is criminally responsible except for his own actions. » (De la responsabilité pénale. Art. 121-1 - https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/codes/section_lc/LEGITEXT000006070719/LEGISCTA000006136037/) Therefore, in this case, any department head, senior manager, company director, restaurant owner, shop owner, postman, teacher, etc., who imposes the unconstitutional COVID measures on anyone, is criminally responsible for his or her actions and therefore liable to prosecution by anyone who has been a victim.

Consequently, any civil servant, as well as any citizen, whether a law enforcement officer or not, whatever his or her social status, who has applied the unconstitutional COVID measures or forced anyone to submit to them, is liable to criminal prosecution following the lodging of a complaint with the public prosecutor by any citizen who considers that he or she has been the victim of his or her actions, for terrorism.

As a corollary, any civil servant, as well as any citizen, whether a law enforcement officer or not, regardless of his or her social status, who has applied the unconstitutional COVID measures or forced anyone else to submit to them, is liable to criminal prosecution following the lodging of a complaint with the public prosecutor by any citizen who considers that he or she has been the victim of his or her actions, for :

Treason for having transferred, or allowed to be transferred, the sovereignty of France, delivered its institutions and state enterprises to a hostile foreign power by applying the illegal directives, since they do not fall within its prerogatives, of a world organism, of unknown legal nature, called WHO and, consequently, for having exposed French citizens to the hostile acts of this world organism, in particular by subjecting them, on its order, to psychological weapons, in violation of the Geneva Conventions (Art. 2 et 3 - https://www.ohchr.org/FR/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/ProtectionOfCivilianPersons.aspx) and Article 8 of the Rome Statute, by confining them to their homes in violation of Article 9(1) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (https://www.ohchr.org/fr/professionalinterest/pages/ccpr.aspx), « 9-1. Everyone has the right to liberty and security of person. No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest or detention. No one may be deprived of his or her liberty except on such grounds and in accordance with such procedures as are prescribed by law. », by subjecting them to medical experimentation without their consent in violation of Article 6-2 of the Universal Declaration on Bioethics of 19 October 2005 (http://portal.unesco.org/fr/ev.php-URL_ID=31058&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html)), Article 8 of the Rome Statute, and the Geneva Conventions, « Scientific research should only be carried out with the prior, free, express and informed consent of the person concerned. The information should be sufficient, provided in an understandable form and indicate the modalities for withdrawing consent. », all these acts being committed in violation of articles 412-2, 412-3 and 412-4 of the Penal Code dealing with treason : « The fact of maintaining intelligence with a foreign power, with a foreign company or organisation or one under foreign control, or with their agents, with a view to provoking hostilities or acts of aggression against France, is punishable by thirty years' imprisonment and a fine of 450,000 euros. » (412-4 du Code pénal)

WHO, a legal entity of unknown form used as a tool for global governance

The WHO appeared as the World Health Organisation at the International Health Conference held in New York between 19 June and 22 July 1946. 3 texts record its birth: a "constitution", an arrangement concluded between the governments represented at the International Health Conference and a Protocol relating to the International Office of Public Health (Only the latter is published in the UN). All these texts are available in all languages in the Official Journal of Poland. (http://isap.sejm.gov.pl/isap.nsf/download.xsp/WDU19480610477/O/D19480477.pdf)

On reading these texts, it appears that the World Health Organisation, or WHO, is a « global body of unknown legal nature » whose structure is based solely on a « global constitution ». So if we refer to the definition of the legal nature of a constitution, « A constitution is a set of legal texts that defines the institutions of the state and organises their relations. It may also recall fundamental principles and rights. It constitutes the highest rule of the legal order. » (https://www.vie-publique.fr/fiches/19545-quest-ce-quune-constitution-definition-dune-constitution), while not a state or country, the WHO is a privately funded global governance body that is neither a sovereign country nor a subject of international law. Neither an NGO, nor an association, nor a company, it has no legal form defined by statutes. It is therefore a phantom entity, « which is in appearance only what it should be ». (https://www.cnrtl.fr/definition/fantome). WHO cannot act on behalf of the UN, nor on behalf of the governments of sovereign peoples. As it has no legal status, it is an « outlaw » entity.

« The STATES parties to this Constitution declare, in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, that the following principles are fundamental to the happiness of peoples, their harmonious relations and their security. » (Constitution of the World Health Organization - World Health Conference - New York 22 July 1946)

« In accordance with the Charter of the United Nations », this formulation has no legal value. Indeed, according to Article 63 of the said Charter,

- « The Economic and Social Council may enter into agreements with any institution referred to in Article 57, setting out the conditions under which that institution shall be brought into relationship with the Organization. Such agreements shall be submitted to the General Assembly for approval. » - should include in the body of the text of what WHO calls a "constitution", the nature of the agreement between WHO and UN member countries and the date of its approval by the General Assembly. In fact, from a legal point of view, this constitution has no legal value and, consequently, neither does the WHO because, as it has no statutes, it has no legal nature. WHO has not sign an agreement with the UN Economic and Social Council because if an agreement had been reached, the WHO statutes (Statutes which it does not have and which are however essential for the signature of an agreement with the Economic and Social Council - Art. 57 - UN Charter), include the words « Specialised Agency » affiliated to the UN Economic and Social Council as specified in Article 57 of the UN Charter :

1. 1. The various specialized agencies established by intergovernmental agreement and having wide international responsibilities, under their statutes, in the economic, social, cultural, educational, health and related fields, are connect with the Organization in accordance with the provisions of Article 63.

2. The agencies thus connected with the Organization are hereinafter referred to as « specialized agencies ». Furthermore, it is not intended of the UN General Assembly to write and legally validate a text that presents itself as a "World Constitution" validating a global governance that is neither state-based nor subject to international law. The UN is a tool for cooperation between sovereign peoples, « to develop international cooperation in the economic, social, cultural, educational and health fields and to promote the enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms by all without distinction as to race, sex, language or religion » (Art. 13-2). If UN member states, UN subsidiary bodies, UN staff or UN-affiliated specialised agencies were to participate in the creation of global governance, they would be in violation of several articles of the UN Charter, violations that would be grounds for exclusion, temporary or permanent, or sanctions :

Charte de l’ONU

Chapter I: Aims and principles

« Article 2

• The United Nations and its Members, in pursuing the purposes set forth in Article 1, shall act in accordance with the following principles :

• The Organisation is founded on the principle of the sovereign equality of all its Members.

• 4. Members of the Organization shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations.

• 7. Nothing in the present Charter shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state, nor shall it require Members to submit such matters to settlement under the present Charter, but this principle shall not affect the application of enforcement measures under Chapter VII.

Article 4

Membership in the United Nations shall be open to all other peaceful States which accept the obligations of the present Charter and are, in the opinion of the Organization, able and willing to fulfil them.

The attention of the governments of sovereign countries, their jurisdictions, their staffs and their internal protection forces should be drawn to the danger of certain articles of what the WHO calls a "constitution" with regard to the exercise of their sovereignty and to possible meddling.

Summary analysis of the Constitution of the World Health Organization - World Health Conference - New York - 22 July 1946

I - Constitution of the World Health Organisation - World Health Conference - New York - 22 July 1946

« The aim of the World Health Organization (hereinafter referred to as the Organization) is the attainment by all peoples of the highest possible level of health. »

The name of an organisation cannot change. It is declared in an official register, either in the prefecture for an association or in the trade register for a company. « An organisation is the result of regulated actions (a company, a public service, an administration, an association, an army, an event, etc.) ». (https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organisation). Each organisation formalises its name, its field of competence and action, its internal structure and its means of financing. In the case of the French judicial organisation, for example, this information can be found in the Code of Judicial Organisation (https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/codes/id/LEGITEXT000006071164/) which defines its prerogatives in a so-called legislative corpus (articles beginning with the letter « L ») and a so-called regulatory corpus (articles beginning with the letter « R »).

The World Health Organisation cannot be referred to as « the Organisation » in the context of an official text describing it because the noun « Organisation » is too vague a term that can generate all sorts of usurpations, of functions or of names. As it has not filed any statutes, WHO has no legal identity and does not fall within any legal framework, so it can, by mafia drift, illegally substitute itself for any structure as its nature as a phantom entity, « which is apparently only what it should be », allows. It can « pretend to be… » and deceive governments and citizens.

As WHO is an entity of unknown legal form, it can be likened to a mafia : « A mafia is a criminal organisation whose activities are subject to an occult collegiate leadership and which relies on a strategy of infiltration of civil society and institutions. » (https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mafia), or to a criminal association : « Any group formed or agreement established with a view to the preparation, characterised by one or more material facts, of one or more crimes or one or more offences punishable by at least five years' imprisonment shall constitute a criminal association. » (Penal Code - Art. 450-1 - https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/codes/article_lc/LEGIARTI000006418851/) - Participation in this association is a crime against the nation, the state and public peace. (https://www.cabinetaci.com/association-de-malfaiteurs/) - or an organised criminal organisation : « An organised gang within the meaning of the law is any grouping formed or any agreement established with a view to the preparation, characterised by one or more material facts, of one or more offences. » (Penal Code - Art. 132-71 - https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/codes/article_lc/LEGIARTI000006417490/)

The nature and structure of WHO violates the UN Convention against Transnational Organized Crime (https://www.unhcr.org/fr/4b151cb21.pdf).

United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime

« Article 5

Criminalisation of participation in an organised criminal group

• 1. Each State Party shall adopt such legislative and other measures as may be necessary to establish as criminal offences, when committed intentionally :

• a) Either or both of the following acts as criminal offences distinct from those involving attempted criminal activity or its consumption

• i) Agreeing with one or more persons to commit a serious crime for a purpose directly or indirectly related to obtaining a financial or other material benefit and, where required by domestic law, involving an act committed by one of the participants pursuant to that agreement or involving an organised criminal group;

• ii) the active participation of a person with knowledge of either the aim and general criminal activity of an organised criminal group or its intention to commit the offences in question:

• a. The criminal activities of the organised criminal group;

• b. Other activities of the organised criminal group when that person knows that his or her participation will contribute to the achievement of the above-mentioned criminal purpose;
  



3

• b) Organising, directing, facilitating, encouraging or counselling the commission of a serious crime involving an organised criminal group.

• 2. The knowledge, intent, purpose, motivation or agreement referred to in paragraph 1 of this article may be inferred from objective factual circumstances.
  
  

The nature and operation of International Criminal Organisations is very clearly defined in US law.

English Version (https://www.justice.gov/criminal-ocgs/international-organized-crime)

« International Organized Crime refers to those self-perpetuating associations of individuals who operate internationally for the purpose of obtaining power, influence, monetary and/or commercial gains, wholly or in part by illegal means, while protecting their activities through a pattern of corruption or violence. There is no single structure under which international organized crime groups operate; they vary from strict hierarchies to blood clans, networks and cells, and may evolve to other structures.

• Rely upon violence, threats of violence or other acts of intimidation;

• exploit political and cultural differences between nations;

• gain influence in government, politics, and business through corrupt means;

• hold economic gain including investment in legitimate business;

• and insulate leadership from prosecution through hierarchical structure. »

French Version

« La criminalité organisée internationale désigne les associations d'individus qui se perpétuent et opèrent au niveau international dans le but d'obtenir du pouvoir, de l'influence, des gains monétaires et/ou commerciaux, entièrement ou en partie par des moyens illégaux, tout en protégeant leurs activités par la corruption ou la violence. Il n'existe pas de structure unique sous laquelle les groupes criminels organisés internationaux opèrent ; ils varient de hiérarchies strictes à des clans de sang, des réseaux et des cellules, et peuvent évoluer vers d'autres structures.

• S'appuient sur la violence, les menaces de violence ou d'autres actes d'intimidation ;

• exploitent les différences politiques et culturelles entre les nations

• gagner de l'influence dans le gouvernement, la politique et les affaires par des moyens corrompus ;

• détenir des gains économiques, y compris des investissements dans des entreprises légitimes ;

• et isoler les dirigeants des poursuites judiciaires par une structure hiérarchique. 

II - Constitution of the World Health Organisation - World Health Conference - New York - 22 July 1946

CHAPTER II – FUNCTIONS

« Article 2

In order to achieve its purpose, the Organisation performs the following functions

• a) act as the directing and coordinating authority in the field of health for work of an international character ;

• b) establish and maintain effective collaboration with the United Nations, specialised agencies, government health administrations, professional groups and such other organisations as may be appropriate; »

An organisation must clearly define its objectives and areas of activity and state this publicly. Without a legal identity, it has no legality and no right of action. « To act as the directing and coordinating authority in the health field for work of an international nature. » is, indeed, a governmental declaration of intent at the health level. The word «travaux» employed in French becoming « works » in English with an even broader meaning, covers indeterminate actions, « Human activity requiring sustained effort, aimed at the modification of natural elements, the creation and/or production of new things, new ideas » (https://www.cnrtl.fr/definition/travail), outside the field of health as it affects all human activities, the regulation of such activities being generally the responsibility of a government. « Authority is the Power to act on others»and from a governance point of view a « Power legally conferred on a person, a human group to govern the whole or part of the social body, to regulate public affairs. » (https://www.cnrtl.fr/definition/Autorité). The WHO therefore presents itself as « the Organisation » (which one?), not « an Organisation » - the use of the definite article « the » determines that it is the only one in its field - invested with a power (non-legal since it does not fall within any legal framework) of an international nature, and therefore worldwide. It cannot act as a « directing and coordinating' authority » at the international level without violating the sovereignty of states and without interfering, as it has been guilty of doing (« who has voluntarily committed an act considered reprehensible.» - https://www.cnrtl.fr/definition/coupable) in the management of the « COVID crisis » in many sovereign countries. Article 2-a of the WHO « constitution » is a clear violation of articles 1-2, 2-1, 2-4, 2-7 of the UN Charter as well as the clearly expressed national sovereignty by the citizens of member countries, « We peoples… » in its Preamble (UN Charter). In fact, It is the peoples who commit themselves to respect and put into practice the UN Charter, which is the rule of conduct of Sovereign States in matters of peace and human rights.

The UN Charter is prescriptive in the same way as a constitution is in a sovereign country. It is therefore the peoples who are the custodians of the sovereign authority of the UN, and therefore in charge of applying and enforcing the legal principles of the Charter.

In article 2-b above, the word « establish », « To set up, implement… » (Trésor de la Langue Française Informatisé - http://stella.atilf.fr/Dendien/scripts/tlfiv5/advanced.exe?8;s=250734105;) clearly means that WHO has not signed any agreements with the UN because any collaboration with it is "established and effective" when it signs an agreement, approved by the General Assembly, with a «specialised agency» as defined in Article 57 of the Charter.

WHO thus clearly states in its so-called « constitution » that it is not a « specialised agency » with an agreement with the UN, « Subject to the terms of any agreement to be entered into between the United Nations and the Organisation and to be approved in accordance with Chapter XVI… » (Art. 6 of the WHO Constitution) illegally contradicted by Article 69 (Chapter 16 of the WHO Constitution), « The Organization is attached to the United Nations as one of the specialized agencies provided for in Article 57 of the Charter of the United Nations. The agreement or agreements establishing the relationship of the Organization with the United Nations shall be approved by a two-thirds majority of the Health Assembly. » But, Article 57 of the UN Charter only defines the nature of the institution that may be the subject of an agreement with the UN leading to a connection. The resolution of this agreement (or these agreements) is covered by Article 63 of the UN Charter - « The Economic and Social Council may enter into agreements with any institution referred to in Article 57, setting out the conditions under which that institution shall be brought into relationship with the Organization. Such agreements shall be submitted to the General Assembly for approval ».

It is the UN General Assembly that validates an agreement with an organisation, not a « Health Assembly » that does not exist in the Charter. An organisation applies with the UN for approval by submitting a dossier. The UN General Assembly examines the statutes of the applicant organisation, the merits of its application and decides whether or not to grant it. In no case does the organisation applying to the UN decide on anything. The WHO is therefore is defined, itself, as a UN bis, a UN granting itself international governmental authority, which is contrary to the UN Charter. It is therefore legitimate to think that the WHO is a tool of subversive conquest used by a mafia group (« A set of animate beings or things brought together to form a whole. » - https://www.cnrtl.fr/definition/groupuscule) to take control of the UN and some sovereign governments. The WHO's willingness to interfere is clearly expressed in Articles 66 and 67 of its « constitution »: « The Organization shall enjoy in the territory of each Member State such legal capacity as may be necessary for the fulfilment of its purpose and the exercise of its functions. » Art.66) and « a) The Organization shall enjoy in the territory of each Member State such privileges and immunities as are necessary for the fulfilment of its purposes and functions. » - « b) Representatives of Member States, persons appointed to the Council and the technical and administrative staff of the Organization shall also enjoy such privileges and immunities as are necessary for the free exercise of their functions in connection with the Organization. » (Art. 67).

These two articles are a restatement of Article 104, « The Organisation shall enjoy in the territory of each of its Members such legal capacity as may be necessary for the exercise of its functions and the fulfilment of its purposes. » and 105 « The Organization shall enjoy in the territory of each of its Members such privileges and immunities as are necessary for the fulfilment of its purposes - 2. Representatives of Members of the United Nations and officials of the Organization shall likewise enjoy such privileges and immunities as are necessary for the independent exercise of their functions in connection with the Organization. » of the UN Charter. WHO, which is neither a subsidiary body of the UN nor a « specialised agency » with an agreement with the UN, grants itself the same rights as UN delegates in the exercise of their functions. Those who wrote the WHO « constitution » took these articles out of the context of the UN Charter, effectively omitting that they were written to protect UN delegates, acting officially in accordance with the UN Charter and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, in conflict-ridden territories in the framework of peacemaking missions, which is not the case for WHO staff who belong to an entity of unknown legal form, of a private nature, whose financing is not clearly defined since its « constitution » does not clearly specify the nature of the member states that make it up and where its funds come from.

A state, without any precision as to its nature, can be summarised as a legal person exercising authority: « The notion of state is not subject to any precise definition. In constitutional law, it can be understood as a legal person under public law representing a community, a people or a nation, within or outside a given territory, over which it exercises supreme power, sovereignty. Its forms of organisation are diverse, ranging from a centralised model to a federal model. » (https://actu.dalloz-etudiant.fr/a-la-une/article/quest-ce-quun-etat/h/cc2b7dbab75f95b0db74949daa76f12c.html). A private entity (Foundation, Corporation, Multinational, etc.) with an identifiable legal form or an entity with an unknown legal form can therefore claim to be a « state » and sign a text if there is no definition of the notion of state in the text in question. In the UN Charter, each state is defined by the "Sovereignty of its people", a people considered as one voice in an alliance of independent nations, all sovereign, acting equally within a structure where management and personnel they pool, « A nation is a human community that is aware of being united by a historical, cultural, linguistic or religious identity. As a political entity, the nation, which is a concept born of the construction of the great European states, is a community characterised by its own territory, organised as a state. It is the legal person made up of people governed by the same constitution » (https://www.toupie.org/Dictionnaire/Nation.htm).

These nations of sovereign peoples have a similar legal status within the UN : « The Organization is founded on the principle of the sovereign equality of all its Members. » (Art. 2-1 - UN Charter) This principle of equality gives everyone decision-making power, which is why only the General Assembly can decide on all matters. The Charter guarantees a democratic functioning of the UN organisation, which is not the case of the WHO « constitution» which is a text without a legal framework. By coordinating the rights and duties of each member country within its structure and on the international scene, the Charter ensures equal treatment and action for each member country, establishing a universal democratic praxis. Democracy (Demos = people and cratie = power) is the power of the people for the people by the people within a sovereign country. The UN Charter established the power of the people for the people by the people at the international level.

Since the WHO constitution cannot be formalised in a legal manner since its content violates the UN Charter, the respective Constitutions and the sovereignty of the member countries, its text, which is illegal, not fixed by a formalised legal status, can be constantly modified by those who run The WHO. Thus, « to act as a directing and coordinating authority in the field of health for work of an international character » can become, since it has no statutes and is therefore not subject to institutional legal control, « to act as a directing and coordinating authority in the field of health for work of an international character », which effectively transforms what the WHO calls its constitution into a constitution of global governance. If this amended article is read in conjunction with Articles 66 and 67 of the WHO Constitution, « the Organization shall enjoy in the territory of each Member State such legal capacity as may be necessary for the fulfilment of its purpose and the exercise of its functions. » (Art.66) et « a) L'Organisation jouit sur le territoire de chaque État membre des privilèges et immunités qui lui sont nécessaires pour l'accomplissement de ses buts et fonctions. » - « b) Representatives of Member States, persons appointed to the Council and the technical and administrative staff of the Organization shall also enjoy such privileges and immunities as are necessary for the free exercise of their functions in connection with the Organization. » (Art. 67), it is obvious that the WHO can give itself a fictitious dictatorial world power if it causes to convince the legality of this text through communication and propaganda subterfuges.

« Immunities » are prerogatives, privileges granted to certain citizens according to legal criteria (parliamentary immunity, diplomatic immunity, etc.). WHO members have no special status and should not have one. If the WHO had an official legal nature, its staff would at most be members of an NGO and therefore criminally liable for their actions.

Article 68 of the « WHO Constitution » - « Such legal capacity, privileges and immunities shall be determined in a separate arrangement to be prepared by the Organization, in consultation with the Secretary-General of the United Nations, and shall be concluded between the Member States. » blatantly violates the UN Charter, in particular Articles 2-1) « The Organisation is founded on the principle of the sovereign equality of all its Members » and 2-2) « Members of the Organization, in order to ensure the enjoyment by all of the rights and benefits resulting from membership, shall fulfil in good faith the obligations assumed by them under the present Charter. »

No separate arrangements can be made between UN member states. As for the UN Secretary and UN staff, they must « In the performance of their duties, they shall not seek or accept instructions from any government or from any authority external to the Organisation. They shall refrain from any action incompatible with their position as international civil servants and shall be responsible only to the Organisation » (Chapitre XV - Art. 100). The UN Secretary cannot take any decision outside the General Assembly or the Security Council and, as the Charter is prescriptive, he cannot violate any of its articles. It should be noted that in Article 68 of its « constitution », WHO is maintaining confusion between its unknown legal status and that of the UN, by renaming itself in the body of the text of what it calls its « constitution », the Organisation. This is a usurpation of title and function. « Anyone who, without a title, interferes in public, civil or military functions, or performs the acts of one of these functions, shall be punished by imprisonment for two to five years, without prejudice to the penalty of forgery, if the act bears the character of this crime. » (Old French Penal Code - Article 258)

It is clear from Article 79 of its « constitution » that the WHO is attempting to instrumentalise the UN to create a World Government by making the UN Secretary General assume a legislative role contrary to his functions. Indeed, it is not the vocation of the UN to validate a « world constitution » or any constitution of any sovereign country, nor is it the vocation of the UN to validate any document, except treaties related to its mission, which it certifies as being in conformity with international law in force and diplomatic rules. To « be part » of a constitution is to accept to be a member of a governance (see explanations above) and as far as WHO is concerned, it is to accept, in violation of the sovereignty of countries, to become a member of a world governance, of unknown legal form, stateless, non-sovereign, not subject to international law, and therefore illegal. It is clear that the accession of member countries, spelled out in Article 80, is a sham validation of this government: « This Constitution shall come into force when twenty-six Member States of the United Nations have become parties to it, in accordance with the provisions of Article 79 ». (Art. 80)

It is indeed through the accession of UN member countries that the WHO intends to bring its « constitution » into force, therefore, it is indeed through the accession of UN member countries that the WHO intends to homologate a world governance of a private nature, which is absurd and illegal since it is a violation of the constitutions of sovereign countries and of the right of peoples to decide for themselves, and therefore a violation of Article 1 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights guaranteed by the UN.

As long as WHO's « constitution » has not entered into force (it cannot legally), WHO does not exist, since this "constitution" is the only text defining it as an entity. Invoke, in Article 81 of this « Constitution », - « In accordance with Article 102 of the Charter of the United Nations, the Secretary-General of the United Nations shall register this Constitution when it has been signed without reservation as to approval by any State or at the time of deposit of the first instrument of acceptance. » - Article 102 of the UN Charter is abused because the UN is mandated to register « Any international treaty or agreement concluded by a Member of the United Nations after the entry into force of the present Charter, as soon as possible, in the Secretariat and published by it. » (Art. 102). The WHO « constitution » is not a treaty between two or more sovereign states.

In the Arrangement signed by the governments represented at the 1946 Health Conference in New York, it is stated that « Having resolved to establish, pending the coming into force of the Constitution and the establishment of the World Health Organisation as provided for in the Constitution, an Interim Commission… ». Since the WHO constitution cannot come into force as it is contrary to international law, the WHO is in this case an Interim Commission on Health serving undetermined private interests. Furthermore, as most signatories signed with the words "ad referendum" next to their signature, meaning that they have to report back to their respective governments before signing or ratifying, the 1946 texts have no official value. They are working documents.

French Constitution of 4 October 1958 - Article 53

« Peace treaties, trade treaties, treaties or agreements relating to international organisation, those which commit the finances of the State, those which modify provisions of a legislative nature, those which relate to the status of persons, those which involve the transfer, exchange or addition of territory, may only be ratified or approved by virtue of a law. They shall not take effect until they have been ratified or approved. No cession, exchange or addition of territory is valid without the consent of the populations concerned. »

Only the President of the French Republic can ratify a treaty (Art. 52 - Constitution of 4 October 1958). No treaty committing the sovereignty, territory or governance of a sovereign country can be signed without the agreement of its population. (Art. 53 - Constitution of 4 October 1958). As far as France is concerned, any change in the Constitution must be submitted to a referendum for approval (Art. 89 - Constitution of 4 October 1958)

In terms of international health regulation, several bodies preceded the WHO. From 1859 onwards, several world health conferences were held and conventions were signed. Then the first health organisations appeared: The High Council of Health of Constantinople (1839), the Maritime and Quarantine Sanitary Council of Egypt of Alexandria (1843), the Sanitary Council of Tangier (1840), the Sanitary Council of Tehran in (1867), the Pan-American Sanitary Bureau (1902), the Hygiene Organisation of the League of Nations (1923), the International Office of Public Hygiene or OIHP (1907). During the war, the OIHP did not have the means to carry out its mission. In 1941, an Inter-Allied Relief Committee was created, which was replaced in 1943 by the United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Administration (UNRRA) with headquarters in Washington and a regional office in London. WHO is supposed to have taken over from these organisations on the basis of the Rome Agreement of 9 December 1907. One of the 1946 documents, registered at the UN, attests that WHO is supposed to assume the same functions as the International Office of Public Health or IOPH (1907) validated by the Rome Agreement of 1907. This is the Protocol on the Office of Public Health, published at the end of what WHO calls its "constitution". It is the only text concerning WHO published at the UN (Certified copy) (https://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=IX-2&chapter=9&clang=_fr) but it does not mention the official text of the 1907 Rome Agreement defining the prerogatives of the OIHP so the functions of the WHO are not legally established.

Protocol on the Office of Public Hygiene

« The Governments signatory to this Protocol agree, as far as they are concerned, that the tasks and functions of the International Office of Public Hygiene as defined in the Agreement signed at Rome on 9 December 1907 shall be assumed by the World Health Organisation or by the interim commission thereof and that, subject to international obligations, they shall take the necessary steps to this end. »

The protocol would have entered into force on 20 October 1947 in accordance with Article 7 of the UN Charter. Under this protocol, the WHO would be a subsidiary organ of the UN, and therefore like all subsidiary organs of the UN, obliged to respect the UN Charter. Following the rules of its own constitution, whose articles contradict UN laws, is a violation of the UN Charter. As a subsidiary body of the UN, the WHO cannot « act as a directing and coordinating authority » because by doing so it violates the UN Charter and Article 1 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights guaranteed by the UN.

In the management of the COVID crisis, in terms of international treaties, the WHO has exceeded its rights and violated the laws inherent in human rights and the UN Charter of which it is supposed to be a representative. It has also overstepped its rights by establishing International Health Regulations (IHR) without submitting them to the approval of the populations concerned, subjecting them to contradictory debate during a UN General Assembly and validating them by two-thirds of the members as recommended in the Charter.

UN Charter - Article 7

• 1. There are established as principal organs of the United Nations: a General Assembly, a Security Council, an Economic and Social Council, a Trusteeship Council, an International Court of Justice and a Secretariat.

• 2. Such subsidiary bodies as may be necessary may be established in accordance with this Charter.

Article 7 does not rule on the entry into force of a protocol or the establishment of a subsidiary body. It gives the right to the UN General Assembly to establish a subsidiary body under Article 22 of the UN Charter : « The General Assembly may establish such subsidiary bodies as it deems necessary for the performance of its functions ». It is the UN General Assembly that decides on the creation of a subsidiary body and defines its mode of operation. It is therefore surprising that the UN validates the entry into force of a text by virtue of Article 7 of its Charter since Article 7 does not rule on the entry into force of a treaty, this is the vote in the General Assembly who rule on the entry into force of a treaty. Moreover, the text has a majority of signatures « ad referendum », so it is only a working document, not a finalised agreement.

UN Charter - Article 18

Each member of the General Assembly has one vote.

Decisions of the General Assembly on important matters shall be taken by a two-thirds majority of the members present and voting. The following are considered important matters : recommendations relating to the maintenance of international peace and security, the election of non-permanent members of the Security Council, the election of members of the Economic and Social Council, the election of members of the Trusteeship Council in accordance with paragraph 1(c) of Article 86, the admission of new Members to the Organization, the suspension of the rights and privileges of Members, the expulsion of Members, matters relating to the operation of the trusteeship system, and budgetary matters.

Decisions on other matters, including the determination of new categories of matters to be decided by a two-thirds majority, shall be taken by a majority of the members present and voting.

Therefore, since the creation of the WHO subsidiary body was not subject to an adversarial debate and vote in the UN General Assembly, the WHO is not a subsidiary body of the UN. Every subsidiary organisation is the subject of a resolution which validates its existence. It does not follow a particular set of rules but applies the principles of the UN Charter, as is the case for example with the Board of Auditors.

WHO is neither a « specialised agency » with an agreement with the UN, nor a "subsidiary body". It has no statutes and therefore no identity or legal nature. It is indeed a mafia enterprise « A mafia is a criminal organisation whose activities are subject to an occult collegiate management and which relies on a strategy of infiltration of civil society and institutions » or an association of criminals « An association de malfaiteurs is any grouping formed or agreement established with a view to the preparation, characterised by one or more material facts, of one or more crimes or one or more offences punishable by at least five years' imprisonment (Art. 450-1 of the Criminal Code). Participation in this association is a crime against the nation, the state and public peace. »

The Triads

These origins date back to the Middle Ages. The Triads have long been nationalistic and secretive groups. Born under the Manchu dynasty, they wanted the restoration of Ming power. The Triads we know today are heirs to the Ming dynasty, but their objectives have changed. It was in the last century, with the arrival of the communists in the country, that they were declared outlaws. During this period, the Triads started to move to Hong Kong, Macao or Taiwan, to leave their patriotic values and pursue a criminal vocation.

At the head of these Triads, there is a leader who calls himself the « dragon head ». Several ranks are found below him. The whole can be drawn in a triangle as seen below. At the bottom are the soldiers who carry out orders and dubious transactions. Their role is the most risky, they form the armed arm of the organisation.

Officers manage them. More specific names are given to those with certain skills. For example, members are recruited by the « Incense Master », while the « the straw sandal » is in charge of the external affairs of the mafia. The « the fan of white paper » is in charge of finances. Those who do not respect the code of the Triads are corrected by the « Red Stick », who practices martial arts. The sentences are formal.

https://www.opnminded.com/2017/01/24/coeur-triades-chinoises-mafia-histoire-organisation-criminelle.html
http://bancpublic.net/article.php?id=5224

WHO's desire to establish a governmental structure is clearly stated in its Executive Council : « The executive (also known simply as the executive) is one of the three branches of government, together with the legislature and the judiciary, constituting the State in a democratic system respecting the separation of powers. It is responsible for managing the current policy of the State and for ensuring the application of the law drawn up by the legislative branch. »  (https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pouvoir_exécutif)

Constitution of the World Health Organization - World Health Conference - New York - 22 July 1946

The functions of the Council are as follows:

a) implement the « decisions and directives » of the Health Assembly; (Legislative power)

b) act as the executive body of the Health Assembly; (Executive power)

c) to perform any other function assigned to it by the Health Assembly;

d) to consult the Health Assembly on matters would be referred to it by that organism and on would be matters referred to the Organization by conventions, agreements and regulations;

e) on its own initiative, submit consultations or proposals to the Health Assembly;

f) prepare the agendas of the Health Assembly sessions;

g) submit to the Health Assembly for consideration and approval a general programme of work covering a specified period;

h) to consider all matters within its competence;

i) within the functions and financial resources of the Organisation, take any emergency measures in the case of events requiring immediate action. (On behalf of which sovereign government? Under which international treaty? What is immediate action? What kind of event? What measures? Similar to a judicial power). It may, in particular, authorise the Director General to take the necessary steps to combat epidemics, to participate in the provision of medical assistance to the victims of a calamity and to undertake such studies or research to the urgency of which its attention will been drawn by any State or by the Director General.

« Within the functions and financial resources of the Organisation, to take any emergency measures in the event of events requiring immediate action. » is a violation of Article 1-2 (Chapter I - Purposes and Principles) of the UN Charter : «To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples and to take all other appropriate measures to strengthen world peace. » No extra-territorial and extra-legal entity has the right to make decisions on behalf of sovereign peoples. Each government of a sovereign country has a legislative, a executive and a judicial power to make decisions and take action with respect to its people. WHO has no right to do this for them. In doing so, it violates the body of international law and the principle of non-aggression.

Of course, in terms of the WHO's global power grab, this is not a militarised aggression. It is a 'subversive takeover' by an organised criminal group, such group defined in the UN Convention against Transnational Crime : « Organised criminal group" means a structured group of three or more persons existing for a period of time and acting in concert with the aim of committing one or more serious crimes or offences established in accordance with this Convention, in order to obtain, directly or indirectly, a financial or other material benefit.»

Article 4 of UN Resolution 3314 defines that « The above list of acts is not exhaustive and the Security Council may designate other acts as acts of aggression in accordance with the Charter. » Whether the aggression is hot, military, or cold, subversive, « A war of aggression is a crime against international peace. Aggression gives rise to international responsibility » (Art.5 - Resolution 3314 - Definition of Aggression).

Since WHO is an entity of unknown legal form and mafia-like in nature, it is necessary to question the funding it receives since it is neither a subsidiary body of the UN nor a specialised agency with an agreement with its Economic and Social Council.

https://www.gavi.org/fr/modele-de-fonctionnement/modele-de-partenariat-de-gavi/om

GAVI Alliance

« Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance, was established in 2000 as a global health partnership to ensure that children in the world's poorest countries have equitable access to new and underused vaccines. In particular, Gavi aims to accelerate access to vaccines, strengthen countries' health and immunisation systems, and introduce new and innovative immunisation techniques. As a result, since its inception, Gavi has enabled the immunisation of an additional 326 million children and prevented 5.5 million potential deaths.

WHO is one of the four permanent members of the Gavi Board and alternates as chair (with UNICEF) of the Gavi Executive Committee. WHO also supports Gavi's activities by facilitating vaccine research and development, standard setting and regulation of vaccine quality. It also develops evidence-based policy options to guide vaccine use and maximise country access. Gavi also benefits from WHO's input on issues ranging from cold chain and vaccine management to training and post introduction analysis of vaccines. »



https://www.euro.who.int/fr/about-us/partners/global-health-partnerships/gavi-alliance

The financial links between the WHO, the UN and the private sector are contrary to the UN Charter. The UN is financed solely by the contributions of member countries and has control over the finances of the "subsidiary bodies" it has established and the « specialised agencies » with which it has entered into an agreement. It should be noted that the Charter does not refer to any « specialised agency », which is legally logical since the word agency refers to the private sector. An agency is « an entity or body responsible for managing the day-to-day affairs of a company or parent company ».

According to Article 100-2 of the UN Charter « Each Member of the Organisation undertakes to respect the exclusively international character of the duties of the Secretary General and the staff and not to seek to influence them in the performance of their duties.» The UN General Assembly cannot allow private companies to interfere with its work, either directly within its structure or through a WHO-type agency, as this is a clear conflict of interest under Article 2-1 (Prevention of conflicts of interest and transparency in French public life - https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/loda/id/JORFTEXT000028056315/) : « For the purposes of this law, a conflict of interest is any situation of interference between a public interest and public or private interests which is likely to influence or appear to influence the independent, impartial and objective exercise of a function. » and Article 18 of the United Nations Convention against Corruption (https://www.unodc.org/pdf/corruption/publications_unodc_convention-f.pdf) concerning trading in influence.

In view of the financial interests at stake, it is legitimate to fear that the UN Secretary General, the organisation's staff, the members of the General Assembly are subject to attempts at corruption by the agency of unknown legal nature called WHO and its financial partners.

In conjunction with the WHO and its financial partners, the UN is no longer able to act neutrally on the international scene and to play its role as mediator because it can only be suspected of promoting private interests instead of those of sovereign peoples. The UN, its subsidiary bodies and its specialised agencies can only be financed by the contributions paid by the member countries, otherwise it is no longer the sovereignty of the peoples that is expressed through it but that of private interests.

UN Charter - Article 17 (https://www.un.org/fr/about-us/un-charter/full-text)

• 1. « The General Assembly shall consider and approve the budget of the Organisation.
  

• 2. The expenses of the Organisation shall be borne by the Members according to the distribution determined by the General Assembly.
  

• 3. The General Assembly shall consider and approve any financial and budgetary arrangements with the specialized agencies referred to in Article 57 and shall examine the administrative budgets of such agencies with a view to making recommendations to them. »

The corporate or parent company nature of the WHO is evident in the above diagrams. The parent company could be the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation or the Welcome Trust (https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wellcome_Trust). With regard to what appears to be an opaque multinational, it is difficult at this stage of the ongoing investigations to determine who is at the helm of this nebulous assembly of heterogeneous structures.

UN Charter

Article 57

The various specialized agencies established by intergovernmental agreement and having wide international responsibilities under their constitutions in the economic, social, cultural, educational, health and related fields shall be brought into relationship with the Organization in accordance with the provisions of Article 63.
The institutions thus linked to the Organisation are hereinafter referred to as « specialised institutions ».

Article 63
The Economic and Social Council may enter into agreements with any institution referred to in Article 57, setting out the conditions under which that institution shall be brought into relationship with the Organization. Such agreements shall be submitted to the General Assembly for approval.
It may coordinate the work of the specialized agencies by consulting with them and making recommendations to them, and by making recommendations to the General Assembly and the Members of the United Nations.

Under UN Articles 57 and 63, it is clear that there are no « specialised agencies » of the UN, but « specialised institutions », which conclude agreements subject to approval by the General Assembly. A clear definition of an agency and an institution is needed.

The WHO, by presenting itself as a UN agency, is engaging in misleading advertising : « Any advertising which contains, in any form whatsoever, false or misleading claims, indications or presentations concerning one or more of the following elements is prohibited existence, nature, composition, substantial qualities, content of useful principles, species, origin, quantity, method and date of manufacture, properties, prices and conditions of sale of goods or services which are the subject of the advertisement, conditions of their use, results which can be expected from their use, reasons for or procedures of the sale or provision of services, scope of the commitments made by the advertiser, identity, qualities or abilities of the manufacturer, resellers, promoters or service providers. » (Art. L 121-1 - Code de la Consommation - https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/codes/id/LEGISCTA000006161818/1993-07-27/) and commits a breach of trust, « A breach of trust is the fact that a person embezzles, to the detriment of another person, funds, securities or any property whatsoever which have been handed over to him and which he has accepted on condition that he return them, represent them or make a specific use of them. » (Art.414-1 - Code Pénal - https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/codes/article_lc/LEGIARTI000042780077/)

The WHO Health Assembly

WHO does not specify the composition of the Health Assembly.

« Each Member State shall be represented by not more than three delegates, one of whom shall be designated by the Member State as head of delegation. » (Chapter V - Art 11 - WHO Constitution). The constitution does not define what a Member State is, nor how it is recruited, as it is the WHO Health Assembly that « elects the States to be nominated to the Board». Delegates may therefore be from the private sector and not officially represent their respective states. Only citizens with a legal status that allows them to represent their sovereign states can do so.



Decree n°69-222 of 6 March 1969 on the special status of diplomatic and consular agents

Art. 62

« French ambassadors and plenipotentiary ministers are eligible for the posts of head of diplomatic mission.
Foreign affairs advisors who have at least ten years' experience in a category A body, including at least three years abroad, and who have demonstrated their suitability for these posts, particularly through the exercise of managerial responsibilities, may also be called upon to occupy these posts.
Diplomatic agents in charge of an embassy enjoy the rank and prerogatives of an ambassador for the duration of their mission.
In the absence of the head of mission, the acting head of mission shall be the official occupying the most senior diplomatic post. »

https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/loda/article_lc/LEGIARTI000020668572

«The assembly adopts its own rules » (Art. 17 - WHO constitution) is illegal. An organisation of any kind must declare its rules at the time of its creation. With regard to a Society, «The statutes must be drawn up in writing. They shall determine, in addition to the contributions of each partner, the form, object, name, registered office, share capital, duration of the company and the manner of its operation. The Articles of Association may specify a purpose, consisting of the principles which the company has adopted and for the respect of which it intends to allocate resources in the performance of its activity. » (Art. 1835 - Civil Code - On the Company). With regard to an association, « Any association wishing to obtain the legal capacity provided for in Article 6 must be made public by its founders. The prior declaration shall be made to the representative of the State in the department where the association has its registered office. It shall state the title and purpose of the association, the location of its establishments and the names, occupations, residences and nationalities of those who, in any capacity, are responsible for its administration. A copy of the statutes shall be attached to the declaration. A receipt shall be issued within five days. » (Law of 1 July 1901 - Art. 5)

No association can exist without statutes, nor without being officially registered. This is the sine qua non for raising funds and becoming a legal person.

Arrangement concluded by the governments represented at the International Health Conference.

(19 June to 22 July 1946)

In this text, it is explained that a text of the constitution has been adopted « having today adopted a text of the constitution of the World Health Organisation » but that it does not enter into force « having decided to create, pending the entry into force of the Constitution and the establishment of the World Health Organisation, as provided for in the Constitution, an Interim Commission. »

It is therefore clear that the World Health Organisation cannot exist until its « constitution » comes into force. However, this constitution cannot come into force either within the UN or outside it, since the World Health Organisation is not a sovereign state, subject to international law. Legally, the WHO does not exist. Only an unnamed interim commission can act in its name and place. This commission comprises 18 countries in charge of appointing their representatives. By what criteria, since the « constitution » is not in force and the WHO is neither a subsidiary body of the UN nor a specialised agency that has concluded an agreement with the UN? This is clearly stated in the document :

"(c) enter into negotiations with the United Nations with a view to preparing an agreement or agreements as provided for in the Charter of the United Nations and in Article 69 of the Constitution. This agreement or agreements shall :

(i) Establish effective collaboration between the two organizations in the pursuit of their common purposes.

(ii) facilitate, in accordance with Article 59 of the Charter, the co-ordination of the general policy and activities of the Organization with those of other specialized agencies; and

(iii) At the same time to recognise the autonomy of the Organisation within the field of its competence as defined in its competition.

(d) to take all necessary steps to effect the transfer from the United Nations to the Interim Commission of the functions, activities and knowledge of the League of Nations Health Organisation hitherto assigned to the United Nations

(...)

establish effective liaison with the Economic and Social Council and those of its committees with which it appears useful to do so, in particular the Committee on Narcotic Drugs.

This arrangement is supposed to enter into force on the day of signature, except that the signatories have followed their signatures with the words "ad referendum" which means that they have no power to validate the Arrangement and must refer to their respective governments. The Arrangement has also not been submitted to the UN General Assembly.

On reading this document, it is clear that WHO is not a subsidiary body of the UN nor a specialised agency and that it even wishes to be totally autonomous from the UN: « At the same time recognising the autonomy of the Organisation in the field of competence as defined in its constitution », relying only on its « constitution » which is however illegal.

Legal value of the Protocol on the Office of Public Health 1946 only text published at the UN (https://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=IX-2&chapter=9&clang=_fr)

This text, certified by the UN, is signed by a majority of the signatories with the words "ad referendum", which means that the signatories did not have the power of their country to validate this Protocol at the time of its signature, in 1946, and that they had to make a reference to their respective governments before a final decision could be taken. This transitional text has no legal value from the point of view of international law since the document has not been updated with the ratified signatures of the governments concerned, even though the UN mentions the dates of ratification in the listing that accompanies the document. It is the signatures, together with a date and place, side by side, that are authentic in a legal document. At the very least, contract ratification addenda bearing the signatures of the national officials responsible for doing so should be certified and attached to the original document if the agreement is an international treaty. However, as long as a document does not bear the signatures of legal representatives, it is only a working document without legal value.

This protocol does not make WHO a Subsidiary Body or Specialised Agency of the UN, as it would require a General Assembly to have validated an agreement or defined its prerogatives as a subsidiary body (Art. 18, Art. 57, Art. 63 of the UN) for it to qualify.

Furthermore, the attention of sovereign governments and their judicial institutions should be drawn to the irregularities that can be observed in the signatures. Indeed, a certain F. G. Krotkov appears in the document as a signatory for the USSR but the USSR is not mentioned in the list of signatories by the UN (see UN document). Only the Russian Federation, which did not sign the original document, appears in the listing. Who signed the protocol for the Russian Federation? As for France, according to the UN listing, it has never ratified the document. Jacques Parisot, who signed for France, did so « ad referendum », i.e. with the intention of referring it to his government. Indeed, his functions did not allow him to represent the French government and sign on its behalf.

isap.sejm.gov.pl/isap.nsf/download.xsp/WDU19480610477/O/D19480477.pdf

https://www.who.int/governance/eb/who_constitution_fr.pdf

https://nice.cnge.fr/IMG/pdf/Alma_Ata.pdf

UN Member States cannot condone the activities and violations of laws by the WHO, a legal entity of unknown form similar to the City of London Corporation, or the « Franco-German Council of Ministers » or (and) « Franco-German Defence and Security Council ». Using the WHO as a global government structure is a violation of the right of peoples to self-determination.

WHO's membership of the Global Health Security Initiative and its role as a tool of the GHSI in psychological warfare makes it a hostile entity acting to destroy the national sovereignties of countries.

Comment en 20 ans la « pandémie grippale » covid a été préparée comme une guerre bioterroriste – WordPress (wikijustice-contre-la-dictature-sanitaire.com)

Exercise.pdf (rki.de)

Questions arise: Why does the UN validate agencies, such as the WHO, which were not created in accordance with the UN Charter, are financed by private entities and have the status of an agency, i.e. an entity without legal identity? Who runs the United Nations Global Compact entity? What kind of legal entity is the United Nations Global Compact?
This is contrary to the principles of the Charter. « The Members of the Organization agree to accept and carry out the decisions of the Security Council in accordance with the present Charter. » (Art.25 - UN Charter) « In the performance of their duties, the Secretary-General and the staff shall not seek or accept instructions from any government or from any authority external to the Organization. They shall refrain from any action incompatible with their position as international civil servants and shall be responsible only to the Organization. » (Art.100 - UN Charter). 

WJJA has approached the UN on numerous occasions about the Assange case. To no avail!

Requesting the UN to investigate the torture of the citizen known as Julian Paul Assange in the UK and to intervene with the UK government to stop the torture and release him - no one can be arbitrarily detained - WJJA was very surprised in December 2019 to receive the above response when it had sent medical reports attesting to this torture. This response is unacceptable and unworthy of the UN as Britain has ratified the Convention against Torture. (http://indicators.ohchr.org/‌) All the UN Directorates, the OCCHR, all the Permanent Delegations, have received 3 medical reports, a situation report, fifteen requests for release from the WJJA concerning the Assange case and the only response obtained while a Man is sequestered incommunicado by a private entity in a dark place and tortured on a territory that has ratified the UN Charter was this one, published above.

It should be noted that the UN has done nothing to save the citizen known as Julian Paul Assange except for a ruling (22 janvier 2016 - 54-2015. http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Issues/Detention/A.HRC.WGAD.2015.docx) which was not followed up and which it did not follow up and a report by the rapporteur against torture Nils Melzer. It is a less than minimal service to ensure the defence and protection of a man illegally sequestered incommunicado by an entity of unknown legal nature and whose physical degradation is complacently described in the media and whose death is regularly announced. To do nothing, to say nothing is to condone the crime, to be an accomplice to the crime. The UN's mission is to protect citizens from torture and to do everything possible to ensure that their fundamental rights are respected. The UN has not even demanded that the Belmarsh prison allow WJJA delegates to check on the health of the citizen known as Julian Paul Assange as required by international prison regulations. (https://www.ohchr.org/documents/publications/training11fr.pd)

WJJA has approached the UN on numerous occasions about the Assange case. To no avail!

Requesting the UN to investigate the torture of the citizen known as Julian Paul Assange in the UK and to intervene with the UK government to stop the torture and release him - no one can be arbitrarily detained - WJJA was very surprised in December 2019 to receive the above response when it had sent medical reports attesting to this torture. This response is unacceptable and unworthy of the UN as Britain has ratified the Convention against Torture. (http://indicators.ohchr.org/‌)

All the UN Directorates, the OCCHR, all the Permanent Delegations, have received 3 medical reports, a situation report, fifteen requests for release from the WJJA concerning the Assange case and the only response obtained while a Man is sequestered incommunicado by a private entity in a dark place and tortured on a territory that has ratified the UN Charter was this one, published above. It should be noted that the UN has done nothing to save the citizen known as Julian Paul Assange except for a ruling (22 janvier 2016 - 54-2015. http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Issues/Detention/A.HRC.WGAD.2015.docx) which was not followed up and which it did not follow up and a report by the rapporteur against torture Nils Melzer. It is a less than minimal service to ensure the defence and protection of a man illegally sequestered incommunicado by an entity of unknown legal nature and whose physical degradation is complacently described in the media and whose death is regularly announced.

To do nothing, to say nothing is to condone the crime, to be an accomplice to the crime. The UN's mission is to protect citizens from torture and to do everything possible to ensure that their fundamental rights are respected. The UN has not even demanded that the Belmarsh prison allow WJJA delegates to check on the health of the citizen known as Julian Paul Assange as required by international prison regulations. (https://www.ohchr.org/documents/publications/training11fr.pd)

Nils Melzer, the rapporteur against torture, contacted several times by WJJA, never replied to any of his letters. He, too, has received all reports and requests for release concerning the citizen known as Julian Paul Assange. The only response we received was from one of our delegates via a newspaper (see copy below).

It is clear from these documents that the UN seems to have forgotten the nature of its mission and that it is the duty of member countries to respect and enforce the principles of the Charter.

Indeed, their mission is:

WE THE PEOPLES OF THE UNITED NATIONS DETERMINED

to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, which twice in our lifetime has brought untold sorrow to mankind

to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and small

to create the conditions necessary for the maintenance of justice and respect for the obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law,

to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom (UN Charter - Preamble)

The Security Council and the General Assembly of the UN should have demanded that France respect its commitments when, in violation of the Charter and all the texts relating to human rights, its government had its eyes cut out, mutilated, gassed and incarcerated citizens simply because they were demonstrating (an inalienable, inalterable and imprescriptible fundamental human right), citizens whose protection it is supposed to ensure, depriving them of their fundamental human rights, discriminating against them (the civilian population was targeted for its political and trade union opinions, etc.) in violation of Art. 212-1-8 of the French Criminal Code and Article 7 of the Rome Statute.

The UN Security Council and the General Assembly should have demanded that the government of the United Kingdom, which has ratified the UN Charter, do everything in its power to ensure that the entity of unknown legal nature that is secretly sequestering and torturing the citizen known as Julian Paul Assange releases him. How can a private entity grant itself the right to secretly confine a citizen in violation of all international laws in a so-called democratic sovereign territory that has ratified the UN Charter and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights?

The UN Security Council and the General Assembly should have opposed the implementation of the COVID measures, which violate all fundamental human rights and the Nuremberg Code, and which could result in major global genocide. How can the UN claim to « ensure that States which are not Members of the United Nations act in accordance with these principles to the extent necessary for the maintenance of international peace and security » if UN member countries themselves violate the Charter and Fundamental Human Rights. How can citizens trust an international court on which countries that constantly violate fundamental human rights sit despite their commitment not to do so when ratifying the Charter: " 1. All Members of the United Nations are ipso facto parties to the Statute of the International Court of Justice. 2 - The conditions under which States which are not Members of the United Nations may become parties to the Statute of the International Court of Justice shall be determined in each case by the General Assembly on the recommendation of the Security Council. (Art. 93 - 1 and 2)

A new question arises as a consequence of the previous ones. Has the UN become an agency of the private entity of unknown legal form WHO and is it working for the private interests that fund it? Has it forgotten that those who work for it must not "In the performance of their duties, seek or accept instructions from any government or from any authority external to the Organization. They shall refrain from any action inconsistent with their status as international civil servants and shall be responsible only to the Organization »?

On the treason and crimes against the Nation committed by the Macron and Merkel governments

Prior to the implementation of the unconstitutional COVID measures, the Macron government has previously betrayed the French people by depriving them of their national independence, dispossessing them of their sovereignty, undermining the integrity of their territory and their institutions, when it violated Article 5 of the Constitution of 4 October 1958, « The President of the Republic is the guarantor of National Independence, Territorial Integrity and Respect for Treaties », by delegating the governance of France to an entity of unknown legal form, non-sovereign, called « Franco-German Council of Ministers » or (and) « Franco-German Defence and Security Council » after the signing of the Treaty of Aachen on 22 January 2019.

Brief analysis of the Treaty of Aachen

I - Treaty between the French Republic and the Federal Republic of Germany on Franco-German cooperation and integration - 22 January 2019

« Article 23

Meetings between the governments of the two States shall take place at least once a year, alternately in the French Republic and in the Federal Republic of Germany. After the entry into force of this Treaty, the Franco-German Council of Ministers shall adopt a multiannual programme of Franco-German cooperation projects. The Secretaries-General for Franco-German Cooperation responsible for preparing these meetings shall monitor the implementation of this programme and report to the Council of Ministers.

Article 24

A member of the government of one of the two States shall take part, at least once every three months and in rotation, in the Council of Ministers of the other State.

Article 25

The councils, structures and instruments of Franco-German cooperation shall be periodically reviewed and, where necessary, adapted without delay to the objectives agreed upon. The first such review should take place within six months of the entry into force of this Treaty and propose the necessary adaptations. The Secretaries-General for Franco-German Cooperation shall regularly assess the progress made. They shall inform the parliaments and the Franco-German Council of Ministers of the general state of progress of Franco-German cooperation.

The non-sovereign entity of unknown legal form, called « Franco-German Council of Ministers » or (and) « Franco-German Defence and Security Council », has been governing France and Germany since 22 January 2019, in violation of its sovereignty and the sovereignty of the German state. It applies on French and German territory a so-called "European" law not defined in the treaty, whereas on a sovereign territory only the national law in force on the territory and the international legal texts ratified by the successive sovereign governments of the countries concerned apply. All measures taken by the Macron government since 19 January 2019 can therefore be considered illegal because they were taken by a legal entity of unknown form hostile to the interests of French territory and the security of its citizens. Indeed, what sovereign interests does a non-legally defined "Franco-German Council of Ministers" or (and) "Franco-German Defence and Security Council" defend? The sovereign interests of France? The sovereign interests of Germany? The interests of a hostile entity?

« Article 2 - Treaty between the French Republic and the Federal Republic of Germany on Franco-German cooperation and integration - 22 January 2019

The two states consult each other regularly at all levels before major European events, seeking to establish common positions and agree on coordinated speeches by their ministers. They coordinate on the transposition of European law into their national law. »

The non-sovereign entity of unknown legal form, called « Franco-German Council of Ministers » or (and) « Franco-German Defence and Security Council », illegally determines and conducts the policy of the French and German nations in the place of the sovereign French and German governments, thus in the name of the sovereign French and German peoples who have not given them a mandate to represent them jointly, in matters of defence, internal and international security, armaments and diplomacy, through an entity of unknown legal form called the « Franco-German Defence and Security Council » in violation of Article 20 of the Constitution of 4 October 1958 of France: « The Government determines and conducts the policy of the Nation. It has the administration and the armed forces at its disposal ».

The French government exercises the sovereignty of the French people. It is not at the behest of an entity of unknown legal form called the « Franco-German Ministerial Council» or (and) the « Franco-German Defense and Security Council ».

The Treaty of Aachen illegally formalizes the appropriation of the institutions of the sovereign countries of France and Germany by an occupying force (or forces) hostile to the sovereign interests of both countries and the security of their inhabitants. The Macron government has delivered the armed forces and police forces of France to an entity of unknown legal form hostile to the interests of France, the integrity of its territory and its institutions, in violation of Article 411-2 of the Penal Code « The fact of delivering to a foreign power, to a foreign or foreign-controlled organization or to their agents either troops belonging to the French armed forces, or all or part of the national territory, is punishable by life imprisonment and a fine of 750,000 euros. »

Since the signing of the Treaty of Aix la Chapelle, all French and German elections are illegal because they are organized by a hostile and dictatorial occupation force. None of the citizens elected during these elections is legitimate in his position. No measure taken or fictitiously voted, since voted in violation of the Constitution, is legal and cannot have the value of law.

II - Treaty between the French Republic and the Federal Republic of Germany on Franco-German cooperation and integration - 22 January 2019

Chapter 2

Peace, security and development

Article 3

The two States shall deepen their cooperation in foreign policy, defense, external and internal security and development, while striving to strengthen Europe's capacity for autonomous action.

They shall consult each other in order to define common positions on all important decisions affecting their common interests and to act jointly wherever possible.

Article 4

(1) As a result of their commitments under Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty of 4 April 1949 and Article 42(7) of the Treaty on European Union of 7 February 1992, as amended by the Treaty of Lisbon of 13 December 2007 amending the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty establishing the European Community, the two States, convinced of the indivisibility of their security interests, are increasingly converging their security and defence objectives and policies, thereby strengthening the collective security systems of which they are part. They provide each other with aid and assistance by all means at their disposal, including armed force, in case of armed aggression against their territories.

The territorial scope of the second sentence of this paragraph corresponds to that of Article 42(7) of the Treaty on European Union.

(2) The two States shall act jointly wherever possible, in accordance with their respective national rules, to maintain peace and security. They shall continue to develop the effectiveness, coherence and credibility of Europe in the military field. In doing so, they commit themselves to strengthening Europe's capacity to act and to investing jointly in filling its capability gaps, thereby strengthening the European Union and the North Atlantic Alliance.

(3) The two States undertake to further strengthen cooperation between their armed forces with a view to establishing a common culture and conducting joint deployments.

They will intensify the development of joint defense programs and their expansion to include partners. In so doing, they intend to promote competitiveness and the consolidation of the European defense industrial and technological base. They are in favor of the closest possible cooperation between their defense industries, based on mutual trust. The two States will develop a common approach to arms exports with regard to joint projects.

(4) The two States establish the Franco-German Defense and Security Council as the political steering body for these mutual commitments. This Council will meet at the highest level at regular intervals.

Article 5

The two states are expanding cooperation between their foreign ministries, including their diplomatic and consular missions. They will exchange senior personnel. They will establish exchanges within their permanent representations to the United Nations in New York, in particular between their Security Council teams, their permanent representations to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, and their permanent representations to the European Union, as well as between the bodies of the two States responsible for coordinating European action.»

It is appropriate to draw the attention of the French and German Army Staffs and Security Forces to the gravity of the situation. France and Germany are no longer sovereign countries and are in the hands of an entity of unknown legal nature called « Franco-German Council of Ministers » or (and) « Franco-German Defense and Security Council » both of which seem to be placed under the direction of an entity of unknown legal nature called OMS.

France and Germany are in the hands of a hostile occupying force which civil servants of all positions and ranks must oppose in order to protect the sovereign interests of their respective countries, their security, the security of their territory and the security of their fellow citizens as they pledged to do when they took their oaths of office (See Internal Security Code above).

According to Article 53 of the Provisional Instruction Manual on the Use of Psychological Weapons of the Ministry of National Defense and the Armed Forces - 53. « The Armed Forces contribute to stopping the process of subversive action » - the French army must counteract the psychological weapons used by the hostile force that has taken over French institutions, by activating psychological actions, in particular by disseminating 6 - « all facts, news, explanations, intended to give individuals or groups to whom it is addressed, the means to objectively base their opinion. » « The success of the psychological action rests to a large extent on the organization of the population, the creation of networks or clandestine associations, formed of auxiliaries or sympathizers, the infiltration of all administrations, groups, unions, etc. ».

Since the institutions of France, and most likely those of Germany, are in the hands of a terrorist hostile occupation force, and since, in view of the facts described in this circular, the sovereign peoples of the nations of the World are involved, in spite of themselves, in a « stealth world war» led by a protean terrorist conquest force, of which only certain sections have been identified to date, this hostile force fomenting hotbeds of war in strategic geopolitical locations in order to destabilize states in order to take control of them, it is advisable to draw the attention of the French Army staff, of the directions of the French Forces of Order and Security Forces, of the state personnel and of all citizens to the fact that certain citizens, notably those exercising key functions within the state or the private sector, may have the status of prisoners of war or (and) hostages, in France, Germany, as well as in other countries, being threatened or blackmailed, in the same way as the citizen known as Julian Paul Assange who, sequestered in secret in a "Dark Place" and tortured is a hostage of the entity of unknown legal form called «Mountbatten-Windsor», an entity exercising power in the United Kingdom through the City of London Corporation and the Navigation Act of 1660 in violation of international treaties ratified by the sovereign government of the United Kingdom.

(See WikiJustice Julian Assange's International Complaint to the Judicial Institutions of the Sovereign Countries - monika-karbowska-liberty-for-julian-assange.ovh/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Plaint-Wikijustice-for-Julian-Assange. pdf)

It is imperative that civil servants and citizens be attentive to the distress that some civil servants or citizens might express (Hostages and individuals under threat always try to develop a language to communicate and call for help) in order, if necessary, to establish contact to bring them help while taking care, however, to preserve their safety

What is a Dark Place

Contrary to popular belief, a "Dark Place", illegal prison built by private entities that do not respect any law, is not necessarily a classic prison building, even if some "Dark Places" are prisons such as Guantanamo or privatised prison wings. They are usually small structures housing a limited number of prisoners, sometimes only one, depending on their status, and the abuse that those who illegally confine them to secrecy wish to inflict on them. A Dark Place can be a building in the city centre, a disused factory, a swimming pool, a hospital (most often a psychiatric hospital), a wealthy villa, a castle, an isolated flat, a small building in an innocuous housing estate, a boat (floating Dark Place), or even a beautiful villa by the sea.
The aim of the kidnappers is to create a space-time rupture in the kidnapped person in order to obtain an unwavering submission that will allow them to make him perform actions that serve their interests or to blackmail his relatives. To accentuate this psycho-pathological disorientation, the perpetrators apply a series of techniques listed in the Biderman Charter.

To reinforce the impact of these techniques, the hostage is regularly moved from one place of detention to another in planes, usually belonging to private companies, which the Americans have named "Guantanamo Express". (See «The Rendition» Project https://www.therenditionproject.org.uk) They are also called ghost planes. Dark places" exist in all countries.
The hostage may also be placed under house arrest, with chemical straitjacket, electronic bracelet and constant surveillance, in strategically chosen locations, which may be in the city centre, with some semblance of autonomy, including financial autonomy, through payment cards issued in the name of companies or in the name of their captors.

The Nazis and the Gestapo used Dark Places. Jean Moulin was tortured and killed in a villa (40 Bd Victor Hugo) in Neuilly sur Seine, requisitioned for the SS by Gestapo chief Karl Boelmelburg, aka Charles Bois aka Mollemburg aka Bennelburger. The terrorist organisation known as "la Cagoule" had also built secret prisons in Paris and its surroundings but also in all the cities where it was established, Nice, for example.

"La Futaie", Avenue Sainte Claire, Plateau de la Jachère in Rueil-Malmaison, built by members of the Cagoule, recalls the hideout in which Marc Dutroux sequestrate his victims. It was built by Henri-Joseph Vasselin at the request of René Anceaux. In Louvecienne, under the house of the perfume journalist François Coty, the police discovered a three-storey building that went down to a depth of fifteen metres, with numerous doors that made it possible to block any visitor without him seeing a living soul.

« La Futaie is halfway between a villa and a suburban pavilion, a discreet residence for retired middle-class people. On one of the walls of the cellar, a sort of bottle rack conceals an exit a little over a metre high, and very narrow: an armoured door thirty centimetres thick. After passing through it, you go down a small staircase that leads to a new door. There is a cell, lit only by an opening onto a pit. On the floor, a cement slab is raised. In the middle, a post where chains are fixed, the chains of those condemned by the justice of the Cagoule. »

La Cagoule, 30 years of conspiracy - Pierre Bourdrel (Albin Michel - 1970)

Impact of the Treaty of Aachen on the UN mission



The attention of the governments of sovereign countries, members of the UN and UN personnel, the staffs of France and Germany and state personnel, should be drawn to the seriousness of Article 5 of the Treaty of Aachen with regard to peacekeeping: « They shall establish exchanges within their permanent representations to the United Nations in New York, in particular between their Security Council teams, their permanent representations to the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation and their permanent representations to the European Union, as well as between the bodies of the two States responsible for coordinating European action. » and of Article 8: « (1) Within the framework of the Charter of the United Nations, the two States shall cooperate closely in all organs of the United Nations. They will coordinate their positions closely, as part of a wider effort of consultation between the EU Member States sitting on the UN Security Council and with due regard for the positions and interests of the European Union. They will act together to promote the European Union's positions and commitments at the United Nations in the face of global challenges and threats. They will make every effort to achieve a unified EU position in the appropriate UN bodies. (2) The two States undertake to continue their efforts to conclude intergovernmental negotiations on the reform of the United Nations Security Council. The admission of the Federal Republic of Germany as a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council is a priority of Franco-German diplomacy.

An entity of unknown legal form such as the « Franco-German Council of Ministers » or (and) « Franco-German Defence and Security Council » cannot sit in the UN. Only a sovereign country can do so.

Sovereign countries that are members of the UN cannot establish privileged exchanges, on the sly, within the UN, with a view to reforming the UN, in violation of the sovereignty of two sovereign countries, outside the other member countries, without violating the principle of equality prescribed by the Charter: « The Organization is founded on the principle of the sovereign equality of all its Members (Art. 2-1) » and « Original Members of the United Nations are those States which, having participated in the United Nations Conference for International Organization at San Francisco or having previously signed the Declaration of the United Nations, dated 1 January 1942, sign the present Charter and ratify it in accordance with Article 110. (Art.3) and "1. Membership in the United Nations is being open to all other peaceful states which accept the obligations of the present Charter and are, in the judgment of the Organization, able and willing to fulfil them. 2. The admission to membership in the United Nations of any state meeting these conditions be by decision of the General Assembly upon recommendation of the Security Council. »

The entity of unknown legal form "Franco-German Ministerial Council" or (and) "Franco-German Defence and Security Council" is therefore not a sovereign country and cannot sit in the UN. It is a hostile force that has taken over French and German institutions. Since this entity is illegally piloting a joint armed force not legally defined in the treaty, has it also seized the nuclear button? In view of the facts developed above, it would be preferable, for reasons of international security, that France, which is no longer a sovereign country, be provisionally excluded from the UN Security Council (UN Charter - Chapter II - Art. 5 : « A member of the organization against which preventive or enforcement action has been taken by the Security Council may be suspended by the General Assembly, upon recommendation of the Security Council, from the exercise of the rights and privileges of membership. The exercise of these rights and privileges may be restored by the Security Council. ») until it has regained its sovereignty.

Its presence in the UN Security Council, under the occupation of a force hostile to its sovereign interests, constitutes, to this day, a danger to the maintenance of peace and to the security of other member countries. Indeed, the hostile authority of unknown legal form « Franco-German Ministerial Council » or (and) « Franco-German Defence and Security Council», which has violated the French Constitution, has in fact denounced all international treaties signed by the French and German governments, without the consent of the sovereign French and German peoples. No sovereign country can now trust the governments and institutions of France and Germany, whose actions are « outside the law ». Germany and France are no longer subjects of international law. In view of these facts, it must be noted that peace is seriously threatened and that the Security Council must do everything possible to preserve it : « The Security Council shall determine the existence of any threat to the peace, breach of the peace or act of aggression and shall make recommendations or determine what measures shall be taken in accordance with Articles 41 and 42 to maintain or restore international peace and security. » (UN Charter - Chapter VII - Art. 39) in accordance with the Charter « the Members of the Organization agree to accept and carry out the Security Councils in accordance with the present Charter » (UN Charter - Chapter V-Art. 25)

The provisional ousting of France from the UN Security Council until it regains its sovereignty is crucial because the entity of unknown legal form « Franco-German Ministerial Council» or (and) « Franco-German Defence and Security Council » clearly manifests its will to take control of the UN in the Treaty of Aachen, « The two States undertake to continue their efforts to bring to a conclusion intergovernmental negotiations concerning the reform of the United Nations Security Council. »

It presents the EU as a member country of the UN, which the EU cannot be since it is not a sovereign country, « They shall use their best endeavours to achieve a unified position of the European Union in the appropriate organs of the United Nations » (Treaty of Aachen), in violation of the principle of equality of the member countries of the Charter (Art. 2.1: "the organisation is based on the sovereign equality of all its members") This takeover of the UN by the entity of unknown legal form, « Franco-German Council of Ministers » or (and) « Franco-German Defence and Security Council », via the entity of unknown legal form OMS, seems to have been premeditated for a long time, since 1981, election of François Mitterrand, by Jacques Attali, non-elected member of the French government, thus not being able to pretend to be a representative of popular sovereignty, who clearly describes, in his books, a world government having as its governance the UN General Assembly, in violation of the Charter.

« The General Assembly of the United Nations can, without reform, be established as a World Senate as defined in the previous chapter. The Security Council must evolve into the government of the world, as also defined above. If the European experience is anything to go by, the idea of setting up a kind of government, like the Commission, and turning the Security Council into a senate, like the European Council, is bound to fail. A simple solution to achieve this would be to merge the Security Council with the G20, under the name of « Governing Council », an executive made up of representatives of the Senate, i.e. the General Assembly. This new Governing Council would be composed of representatives from all continents (United States, European Union, Russia, China, India, with the right of veto; Japan, Brazil, Indonesia, Nigeria, with the future right of veto, alternating with Korea, Mexico, Australia and the ROC; ten other non-permanent members, designated by regional groups).

The Monetary Fund, the World Bank, the WTO, the ILO, the WHO, and UNESCO would be placed under the direct authority of this « Government Council .

In order for it to be able to take truly supranational decisions, this Council of Government would be assisted by a " head trustee manager delegate" elected by universal planetary suffrage (Disappearance of national sovereignty, of the integrity of territories and institutions of the different countries - violation of the UN Charter) from candidates proposed by political parties of global dimensions. This administrator would ensure the implementation of the decisions of the World Government Council. He or she would head a World Administrative Council (Applies to a company, not the governance of a country. Implies privatisation of states and their assets) This would include the heads of the major international institutions of today. Together they would form the outline of a world administration, reporting to the Governing Council.

In this scheme, each institution would find its place: the IMF would become the equivalent of the world's Ministry of Finance, the insurer and architect of the global financial system; it would supervise national budgetary and financial policies, control the will of exchange rates, manage liquidity and issue SDRs. The Bank for International Settlements would become the World Central Bank, with a currency based on three pillars: the dollar, the euro and the yuan. The World Bank would become the financier of global public goods (Who are the owners of the world's public goods since it is no longer the sovereign peoples?) and the essential actor of the planetary Growth."

Who will rule the world tomorrow - Jacques Attali (Editions Pluriel - 2010)

« The two States undertake to continue their efforts to conclude intergovernmental negotiations on the reform of the United Nations Security Council » gives rise to fears of a lobbying operation, within the UN itself, with the representatives of the member countries by the hostile force of unknown legal form known as the « Franco-German Ministerial Council » or (and) the « Franco-German Defence and Security Council », as part of the process of transforming the UN into a world government, in violation of the Charter.

« Lobbying is a strategy carried out by an interest group, a pressure group and an influence group, belonging to the same sector of professional activity and seeking to defend its own interests with policy makers. Its action is often discrete and indirect, unlike a demonstration initiated by a trade union organisation. It is based on a good knowledge of the decision-making circuits and on the constitution of vast networks. By exerting pressure and using their influence on decision-makers, lobbyists aim to influence the implementation of legislation, regulations and economic standards to their advantage. Lobbying is involved in close relations with the media, in the research community and with public authorities. Lobbying is very popular in the United States, where companies are increasingly engaging the services of a professional lobbyist. It is also common and widely practised in Brussels.»

https://www.journaldunet.fr/business/dictionnaire-economique-et-financier/1198953-lobbying-definition-traduction/

Like France and Germany, UN seems to be under attack by a legally unknown entity aiming to take over the Security Council, the General Assembly and the civil servant staff. This aggression can be defined as a « stealthy subversive invasion », which, like the takeover of France and Germany by the entity of unknown legal form called the « Franco-German Council of Ministers » or (and) the « Franco-German Defence and Security Council » falls under the crime against peace as defined in the Nuremberg Charter, the so-called London Charter or Nuremberg Statute : « (a) Crimes against peace, that is, directing, preparing, initiating or waging a war of aggression, or a war in violation of international treaties, assurances or agreements, or participating in a concerted plan or conspiracy to carry out any of the foregoing acts. » (Statut de Nuremberg - III Le Statut du tribunal international - a) - https://www.un.org/fr/genocideprevention/documents/A_CN.4_5-FR.pdf)

The acts of the « Franco-German Council of Ministers » or (and) « Franco-German Defence and Security Council », and of the governments of the various countries that implemented the unconstitutional COVID measures, in obedience to the « directives » of the entity of unknown legal form known as WHO, can all be qualified as crimes against peace and war crimes, under the Article III- b) of the Nuremberg Statute defines war crimes as « violations of the laws and customs of war. These violations include, but are not limited to, the killing, ill-treatment or deportation for forced labour, or for any other purpose, of civilian populations in occupied territories, the killing or ill-treatment of prisoners of war or persons at sea, the execution of hostages, the plundering of public or private property, the wanton destruction of towns and villages or devastation not justified by military necessity » and Article 8 of the Rome Statute (https://www.icc-cpi.int/NR/rdonlyres/ADD16852-AEE9-4757-ABE7-9CDC7CF02886/283948/RomeStatuteFra1.pdf) :

The mask requirement is a violation of Article 8 a-ii) of the Rome Statute:  « Torture or inhuman treatment, including biological experiments" and b-xxi) "outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment. »

The obligation to be injected with a messenger RNA or DNA product, the short, medium and long term harmlessness of which, as well as the absence of reprotoxic and carcinogenic effects, has not yet been scientifically proven, since the substances are in the process of being tested in phase III, is a violation of Article 8 a-ii) of the Rome Statute: « Torture or inhuman treatment, including biological experiments. »

The obligation to wear a mask, the confinement, the obligation to be injected with a messenger RNA or DNA product, whose harmlessness, in the short, medium and long term, as well as the absence of reprotoxic and carcinogenic effects, has not been scientifically proven to date, since the substances are in the process of being tested in phase III, is a violation of Article 8 iii) of the Rome Statute: « Intentionally causing great suffering or serious injury to body or health » and Article b-x) of the Rome Statute: « Subjecting persons of an adverse party who are in the power of the adverse party to mutilation or to medical or scientific experiments of any kind which are neither justified by medical, dental or hospital treatment nor carried out for the benefit of such persons, and which cause death to such persons or seriously endanger their health. »

The use of psychological weapons is a violation of Article 8 b-i) of the Rome Statute: « Intentionally directing attacks against the civilian population as such or against individual civilians not taking direct part in hostilities. »

The use of gas on civilian populations during demonstrations in violation of their fundamental rights as has been the case since the first Yellow Vests demonstrations is a violation of Article 8 - xviii) of the Rome Statute: « The use of asphyxiating, poisonous or other gases, as well as all analogous liquids, materials or processes. »

Provisional Instruction on the Use of Psychological Weapons - Ministry of National Defence and the Armed Forces - Personnel of the Armed Forces - 5th Division (29 July 1957) - Extracts

Psychological warfare aims to break the enemy's will.

« 8. - Psychological warfare is the concerted application of various measures and means designed to influence the opinion, feelings, attitude and behaviour of opposing elements (authorities, armies, populations) in such a way as to modify them in a direction favourable to the attainment of the objectives of war.

Psychological warfare is one of the main forms of cold warfare (warfare conducted without the outbreak of hostilities between regular armed forces of opposing powers); it always accompanies hot warfare (warfare involving the outbreak of hostilities between regular armed forces of opposing powers).

It seeks to annihilate the opposing will to fight and, if possible, to recruit auxiliaries and allies in the opposite camp; it seeks to facilitate and relieve the military operations.

All political and military leaders are responsible for it within the framework of their attributions; all citizens contribute to its conduct.

It inspires or influences all activities: political, diplomatic, military, economic, etc.

We distinguish :

Strategic psychological warfare operations, which have distant objectives in time and space ;

Tactical operations of psychological warfare, whose goals are limited in time and space ;

Psychological consolidation operations, which focus on a human environment previously controlled by the enemy.

Analysis of the psychological warfare waged against a given environment

I - Analysis of the Attack

30. - A given environment may be the object of psychological attacks by several enemy, neutral or allied foreign powers.

These attacks take the form of psychological operations whose expression necessarily reflects a political strategy. They are carried out by specialised organisations.

33. Capacity Analysis :

1) Management and executive bodies. The purpose of this analysis is to learn about foreign official, para-official and private organisations responsible for the political and technical conduct of psychological warfare.

2) Means of communication with the masses.

Material means: press, radio, television, cinema, posters, leaflets, graffiti, rumours and whispered propaganda, speeches, etc.)

Means of influence: infiltration and infiltration, compromise, intoxication, brainwashing, etc. ;

Active means: strikes, boycotts and demonstrations, sabotage and terrorism, letters and distribution of symbols, etc. ;

New scientific psychological techniques.

Means of action to be used

38. - The information will help determine the most appropriate means of reaching the target audience: pre-existing or to be created.

In particular, the following points will be assessed:

• the means that can be used: newspapers, posters, leaflets, rumours, etc.; associations and small groups, cinema, radio, television;
  

• the various forms of these means of communication: official or private, legal or illegal; ways of using the possibilities of influence.

47. - Strategic actions



Strategic psychological warfare operations are intended to pursue broad, long-term goals related to the war plan.

Their main goals are:

• to provoke and inflame dissension, opposition, dissent and, if possible, internal conflict and revolt within enemy coalitions or nations;

• participate in the disorganisation of the « rear » (war production and supplies of all kinds, communication routes, reinforcements and maintenance of units and equipment, etc.). Strategic psychological warfare operations require the use of general themes, the choice of which is particularly important and delicate: an error in the choice of these themes can seriously compromise the success of the propaganda campaigns undertaken. Only by constantly adapting the themes to enemy opinion and morale can serious results be expected.

Article 3

Consolidation actions

50. - These actions are aimed at the populations of occupied territories. They are intended to consolidate the results of previous psychological warfare operations, to obtain obedience to the military command, to stifle the development of resistance organisations, or to prevent their formation.

Their purpose is to involve the population in the security of communications and the maintenance of order in the occupied zone.

General information on means

Man, in his heart and mind, is the essential objective of War and Psychological Action. To conquer him emotionally and intellectually, material means will only be effective if they are handled with the heart and the intelligence. This is why their use calls for personal contact, which remains the mode of persuasion par excellence. In the psychological struggle, man is therefore both the stake and the motor of the action. In order to reach the man underneath the adversary, the psychological weapon will play on the principles and instincts that are anchored in the depths of every individual. It will appeal to mass feelings, to collective or particular interests and to the contradictions between the various enemy elements. 
 Beliefs, principles, instincts must be exploited in psychological warfare, but never collided with head on. In psychological action they are used as a support for the Moral Forces.

Basic psychological principles

74. - A few principles, essential to the success of a psychological operation, must be constantly borne in mind:

The processes used in psychological warfare apply to what can be changed in man, what is plastic, evolving. They exploit the tensions resulting from unfulfilled needs and aspirations, they offer the enemy acceptable ways of reducing these tensions;

Action is most effective when it concerns ideas or feelings shared by the majority;

Before acting, it is therefore necessary to determine what people are likely to react to and how they will react;

The man's reaction must imprint on him certain ideas or feelings that will last. He must therefore be given elements to justify his reactions in his own eyes;

Arguments and procedures must be subject to constant experimental verification. The results must be objectively controlled.

77. - Conduct of Psychological Operations : The following rules must be respected:

• Timeliness - avoid launching operations too early that would have no chance of success;
  

• Possibility - suggesting only possible actions to individuals (it is dangerous to incite a civilian population to rise up if they are unarmed and tightly controlled by a powerful police force)
  

• Effectiveness - weighing up the pros and cons of a course of action before committing to it (for example, it is often more cost-effective to encourage would-be enemy deserters to 'go underground' in their own country, rather than advising them to be taken prisoner;
  Progressiveness - dividing operations into different phases spread out over time at an appropriate pace (1) and each with a defined psychological objective;
  

• Celerity - constantly thinking of launching the next operation without delay (not waiting for the opponent's response, but always being at least one argument ahead of him).
  

Thus, propaganda operations usually use the following rhythm :

• Exploration phase: during a trial period, launch the news you want to use;
  

• Control phase: follow this first phase with a period of cessation during which the effects will be recorded and the course of action adapted accordingly;
  

• Generalized psychological preparation phase: start rumors that will make the "target" audience aware of future information;
  

• Confirmation phase: publish official information around which the theme of the rumour will crystallize;
  

• Maturation phase: follow the fourth phase with a pause of varying length, depending on the importance of the news or the intensity of the shock it produces; it is during this fifth phase that the crystallisation envisaged in the fourth phase takes place.
  

• Operational phase: The art of the specialist consists, in particular, in correctly assessing the periods of silence during which :
  the news disseminated sinks into the unconscious and develops new attitudes,
  consciousness is made available and ready to receive new themes, old tensions give way to new ones that will be used for new propaganda operations.
  

Chapter II : Techniques

Article 1

PROPAGANDA

106. - The techniques discussed in this article are generally used by totalitarian propaganda and should be known so that a counter-propaganda can be rationally developed.
 

These main techniques are  :

107. - Simplification and magnification :

Propaganda presents the issues in clear, simple and concise dogmatic statements, with the aim of making them easily accepted by the audience.
Magnification increases the proportions of events favourable to the cause being defended and minimises events contrary to it.

108. - Repetition and orchestration :

Propaganda, like advertising, succeeds by repeating the same thing until it becomes 'obsessive'. However, sheer repetition would soon lead to boredom, so orchestration is necessary. The aim of orchestration is to repeat the same idea in different and progressive forms, using, for example, current events.

This technique must respect the following three principles:

• - do not neglect the aesthetic aspect ;


• - avoid banality;


• - never offend against the morals normally accepted in the target environment.

109. - Insinuation :

Insinuation is a way of creating and maintaining distrust; it leaves it to each individual to draw his or her own conclusions. Therein lies its strength, for man prefers to believe that he has thought for himself, rather than admit that he has had a thought imposed upon him.

The insinuation may take the following forms, for example:
 

• biased questions ;

• humour (funny stories, caricatures...);
   
• Doubted the purity of the motivation
  

• guilt by association of ideas ;

• graphic insinuation (drawings, partial photo enlargements, photomontages);
  

• hearing (significant pauses, voice inflection, etc.)

110. - Transfert de culpabilité :

Guilt transference consists of directing the feelings of the target community onto an adversary or enemy who is intended to play the role of scapegoat.

Its purpose is to free opinion from complexes of guilt or guilty conscience which, in their effects, lead to a paralysis of action.

The effectiveness of this process lies in its character of self-purification and self-justification of opinion.

The designated enemy or adversary must meet the following characteristics:

- be individualised in a simple, easily detectable and noticeable way;

- be able to readily accept responsibility for the faults and errors of a particular environment

- be reduced to uniqueness to eliminate any dispersion of interpretation;

- be important enough to justify attacks, but not so important as to make them impossible or ineffective.

111. - Terror :

Terror propaganda, by exploiting the psychological effects of fear: flight, paralysis, is the most direct way of inhibiting the reasoning faculties.

It aims to get the target audience to accept without reaction the themes proposed to them. It has been used throughout history, and has been exacerbated by the destructive power of modern weapons and the resurgence of basic terrorism, and is often part of large-scale propaganda campaigns.
It varies in degree from simple apprehension to sheer terror.

112. - The derivation :

Derivation consists in creating a new psychological current on a pre-existing current of public opinion.

It is in fact a question of capturing, for the benefit of a given rational programme, feelings, tendencies and attitudes that are irrationally anchored in public opinion.
Before taking action, the second step is to proceed by suggestion. This is the so-called « delayed propaganda » phase.

At the end of this process, action is entrusted to specialised groups whose ideology the target community then recognises.

113. - Majority effect :

The need for conformity, which is deep in the hearts of the majority of men, leads them to accept without difficulty an opinion that is considered to be the common opinion, or that is expressed by prominent figures.

The propagandist will use this effect by suggesting that opinion as a whole accepts his point of view and will quote the opinions of well-known and respected personalities.

- 56 -

114 - Exploiting the future :

The notion of the future conditions all action. Propaganda is thus led to assume in an abstract way this necessary future intended to support present action.
By interpreting the signs of change in a way that is favourable to his thesis, the propagandist strengthens the sympathisers and rallies the lukewarm.

No peace treaty officially ending the Second World War has been signed…

These extracts from the French Army manual, Provisional Instruction on the Use of Psychological Weapons, demonstrate beyond doubt that the French population has been and is being subjected to psychological warfare by a hostile entity (or hostile entities acting in collusion) of a terrorist nature. Generalities on the Psychological Weapon - Art. 1-2. - « Action and psychological warfare have the common characteristic of acting on the individual and collective psyche. Their data and methods are different. Psychological action concerns the friendly environment and is based on respect for the personality of those it is aimed at. Psychological warfare is directed against enemies and seeks to control their attitudes and behaviour. »

This psychological warfare has been going on for several years. If we refer to the French Army, it appeared in the 1950s, when the manual was published, or earlier: « For some years now, the French Union has been the object of permanent psychological aggressions. Carried out from within and without, they do not always come from obvious enemies and use various ideological supports. But they all lead to the same effects: to undermine the morale of the citizens, to create enemies from within, to destroy the national potential by initially dissociating its spiritual and moral unity. »

It should be recalled that no peace treaty officially putting an end to the Second World War has been signed, as shown by the question of the Senator of Charentes, Pierre Lacour, published in the JO Sénat of 08/09/1988: « Mr Pierre Lacour tells the Minister of State, Minister of Foreign Affairs, that almost forty-three years after the cessation of hostilities in the Second World War, the peace treaty legally putting an end to the conflict has never been signed. He asks whether, in view of the current easing of relations between the major powers, it would not be appropriate to initiate the necessary consultations to organise as soon as possible a conference of the countries concerned with a view to preparing and signing this peace treaty. » (https://www.senat.fr/questions/base/1988/qSEQ880901400.html). The « Moscow Treaty », or « Four plus Two Treaty » or « Two plus Four Treaty » of 12 September 1990, deals only with the withdrawal of Allied Forces from the territory and the reunification of Germany. (https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/loda/id/LEGIARTI000006488912/1991-04-26/#LEGIARTI000006488912) It is not a peace treaty.

Certainly, there is no war front, typical of the hot global wars that sovereign countries have faced so far, since the end of the Second World War there have been more and more war zones in the world. There are therefore many hot wars in which many countries are involved concomitantly, even if only in the context of arms sales. These hot wars (warfare involving the outbreak of hostilities between regular armed forces of opposing powers) develop in parallel with cold wars (warfare conducted without the outbreak of hostilities between regular armed forces of opposing powers), such as the psychological warfare conducted on French territory by the entity of unknown legal form « Franco-German Council of Ministers » or (and) « Franco-German Defence and Security Council ».
As entities of unknown legal form have taken over France, Germany and are trying to take over the UN, it is legitimate to ask who is leading these wars and whether there are regular troops or mercenaries paid by private entities on the ground, in violation of the sovereignty of states, under the domination of a hostile occupying force as France and Germany are.

Several entities of unknown legal nature sit illegally at the UN

The UN Security Council is today facing a « subversive internal aggression » that threatens the integrity of its structures and hinders its action in favour of peace and human rights. France and Germany, neither of them being sovereign countries anymore, since having become an entity of unknown legal form, non-sovereign, called « Franco-German Council of Ministers » or (and) « Franco-German Defence and Security Council », lobbying within the UN itself in order to create an international coalition involving member countries and aiming to lead a slingshot to take over the General Assembly and the Security Council - « The two States undertake to continue their efforts to bring to a conclusion intergovernmental negotiations concerning the reform of the United Nations Security Council » (Treaty of Aachen) -, Member States must urgently ensure that other entities of unknown legal form do not lend a hand, on the sly, to the entity of unknown legal form "Franco-German Council of Ministers" or (and) "Franco-German Defence and Security Council", in order to destroy the structures of the UN in violation of the Charter.

The UN Security Council must also investigate whether other countries, including member states, have fallen, like France and Germany, into the hands of an entity of unknown legal form as a result of a « stealth coup ». For the first time in its existence, the Security Council must investigate itself and the structures and personnel of the UN; A stealthy appropriation of its administration and structures as well as the takeover of certain member states by a hostile entity (or entities) of a terrorist nature render it unfit to defend peace and human rights in accordance with the Charter if it does not take, as a matter of urgency, drastic measures to preserve its independence and supremacy in the field of conflict regulation and the defence of peace and human rights.

The « Franco-German Council of Ministers » or (and) « Franco-German Defence and Security Council » is neither a state nor a sovereign country, subject to international law. It has no delimited territory, no population of the same nationality, no legally defined government. It cannot therefore conduct intergovernmental negotiations as expressed in the Treaty of Aachen, unless other UN member states have been subject to the same stealth coup as France and Germany and are run, under the radar, by entities of unknown legal form terrorists, The latter can be identified by their involvement in the implementation of illegal measures - violations of fundamental human rights and the UN Charter - COVID, following the "directives" of the entity of unknown legal form called WHO. The WHO can be seen as an executive structure within an emerging global governance in terms cause of its constitution.

Two other countries should be provisionally excluded from the UN Security Council until their sovereignty is legally established. These are the United Kingdom and the United States of America. Indeed, due to a legal vacuum concerning the ownership, prerogatives, and management of the English crown, and given that there are legitimate suspicions about the legal identity of birth and thus legitimacy on the throne of the citizens who claim to be its legatees, the State of Virginia in the United States of America remains subservient to the City of London Corporation via the Navigation Act of 1660. Thus, if the State of Virginia is subservient to the City of London Corporation via the Navigation Act of 1660, this means that all American institutions, the Pentagon, Congress, the Federal Bank and the White House are also subservient to the City of London Corporation, i.e. to a private entity of unknown legal form. This makes the United Kingdom and the United States of America an entity of unknown legal form of a private nature, not two separate countries, subjects of international law, in which the sovereignty of the people is fully expressed. Under the Navigation Act of 1660, the United States of America is merely a colony under the dominion of the entity of unknown legal form, the City of London Corporation, which owns the trademark « Mountbatten-Windsor », and is therefore a private entity that cannot claim to be a subject of international law and is not entitled to sign treaties or sit in international institutions. In this case, under the Navigation Act of 1660, elected or not, the President of the United States of America is in the service of the entity of unknown legal form known as « Mountbatten-Windsor ». The collusion between the UK and the US violates Article 2-1 of the UN Charter: « The organisation is based on the sovereign equality of all members » and violates the rights of other member states.

(See pages 177 to 197 (City of London Corporation, Navigation Act, Virginia London Corporation and non-existence of the USA as a sovereign country) - International Complaint filed by WikiJustice Julian Assange with the judicial institutions of Sovereign Countries - monika-karbowska-liberte-pour-julian-assange.ovh/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Plainte-Wikijustice-pour-Julian-Assange.pdf)

It should be noted that the United Kingdom and the United States of America are not sovereign countries and are therefore not subjects of international law. They cannot sit on the UN Security Council, nor can they be members of the General Assembly. They have neither a legally defined regular army, all their army corps being similar to mercenary corps, thus to private militias, nor sovereign autonomous governance. All their international actions are « outside the law ». Neither can negotiate or sign treaties. All the countries, colonies or former colonies of the "Mountbatten-Windsor" brand, called Dominions, still subordinate to the City of London Corporation, under the Navigation Act of 1660, cannot claim to be sovereign countries, subject to international law. They cannot therefore sit in international institutions, conduct negotiations or sign treaties. These are Australia, Canada, Ceylon, India, Ireland, New Zealand, Pakistan, South Africa and Newfoundland. Governed by the entity of unknown legal form known as 'Mountbatten-Windsor', via the City of London Corporation and the Navigation Act of 1660, they cannot claim to have autonomous governance, nor a regular army.

The entity of unknown legal form called the « Franco-German Council of Ministers » or (and) the « Franco-German Defence and Security Council » which steers the France-Germany territorial binomial and the entity of unknown legal form « Mountbatten-Windsor » which steers the City of London Corporation UK - State of Virginia (Washington DC) USA territorial binomial, more the colonies of the dominions, apply illegal extra-territorial and extra-constitutional governance of unknown legal form over these four formerly sovereign countries, which endangers the peace and threatens the territorial and institutional security of all sovereign countries on all continents.

In view of these facts, it is clear that these entities of unknown legal nature, in addition to not having the right to sit there, since they are not sovereign countries, subject of international law, arrogate to themselves factitiously and illegally a supremacy of voice in the UN since its creation: « Each member shall have not more than five representatives in the General Assembly » and « Each member of the Security Council shall have one member in the Council ». Thus, if we stick to the Security Council, Great Britain, the United States of America and Northern Ireland, permanent members, each have a representative whereas under only one same governance, they should only have one, knowing that in view of their legal status of an unknown nature of a private nature, none of them has the right to sit in the Security Council, nor in the General Assembly of the UN. It should be recalled that the Charter has been "ratified by the signatory states in accordance with their respective constitutional processes." (UN Charter - Art. 110). However, under the Navigation Act of 1660, the City of London Corporation is not a legally structured state and therefore does not respect constitutional rules. It has no defined territory, no population with the same nationality, and no legally government. Consequently, neither the United Kingdom, nor the United States of America, nor Ireland have legally ratified the UN Charter.

The UN General Assembly and the UN Security Council have the right and duty to regain their independence and the power and legal means to do so.

The UN General Assembly and the UN Security Council have the right and duty to regain their independence and the power and legal means to do so.

UN Charter - Functions and Powers

Article 11

• 1- The General Assembly may discuss any questions relating to the maintenance of international peace and security referred to it by any Member of the United Nations, or by the Security Council, or by any state not a Member of the United Nations in accordance with the provisions of paragraph 2 of Article 35, and, subject to Article 12, may make recommendations with respect to any such questions to the state or states concerned, or to the Security Council, or to both the states and the Security Council. Any such matter requiring action shall be referred to the Security Council by the General Assembly before or after discussion

• 2- The General Assembly may draw the attention of the Security Council to situations which appear likely to endanger international peace and security

In the event that UN structures and personnel are now under the control of an unknown legal entity, of a terrorist nature, or about to be, sovereign member countries, and sovereign member countries in charge of the Security Council, can legally, in accordance with the Charter, relocate to a place they deem safe (Art.3) and have recourse to reliable structures working in accordance with the Charter (Art.28 to 32 - Procedure) in order to carry out their actions in complete freedom. This provisional organisational option will allow sovereign peoples to continue to work for the maintenance of peace and the preservation of human rights in accordance with the Charter, while allowing the Security Council to work to regain control of its administrative bodies and to identify countries which, like the United Kingdom and the United States, may be, have been, or may be, like France and Germany, under the control of a legal entity of unknown form and terrorist nature.

UN Charter - PROCEDURE

Article 28

• 1 - The Security Council shall be so organized as to be able to exercise its functions continuously. To this end, each member of the Security Council shall at all times have a representative at the Headquarters of the Organization.

• 2 - The Security Council shall hold regular meetings at which each member may, if it so desires, be represented by a member of its government or by some other specially designated representative.

• 3 - The Security Council may hold meetings at such places other than the Headquarters of the Organization as it deems most suitable to facilitate its work.
  

Article 29

The Security Council may establish such subsidiary bodies as it deems necessary for the performance of its functions.

Article 30

The Security Council shall establish its own rules of procedure, in which it shall determine the manner in which its President shall be appointed.

Article 31

Any Member of the Organization which is not a member of the Security Council may participate, without the right to vote, in the discussion of any matter referred to the Security Council whenever the Council considers that the interests of that Member are particularly affected. 

Sovereign countries, members of the UN, may assist each other and implement the requirements of the Charter, especially in times of serious crisis, outside the UN structures under Article 49 of the Charter : « The Members of the United Nations shall join in rendering mutual assistance in carrying out the measures decided upon by the Security Council. » It is an international application on the scale of sovereign peoples of the principle of Fraternity advocated by the motto of France, which the Gendarmes, the military and the forces of law and order have a duty to defend: « Before taking up their duties, all officers of the national police force or the national gendarmerie solemnly declare that they will serve the Republic, its principles of liberty, equality and fraternity and its Constitution with dignity and loyalty by taking an oath. » (Article L434 - Internal Security Code - Book IV - Police and Gendarmerie Nationale). Fraternity, a feeling of solidarity, friendship and disinterested assistance, a bond of intelligence, understanding and harmony between several people, appeared with the Fraternity of Arms, that union forged between two knights, between several citizens or several nations having fought side by side. Fraternity, a principle of the French Republic, one and indivisible, inserted into the motto of France on the initiative of Alphonse de Lamartine, is envisaged as the mutual protection from which each individual can benefit within his or her sibling, a cooperation that is beneficial to all. It is the « One for all, all for one » of the Musketeers.

It should be noted that the UN Security Council cannot be reformed because it is committed to putting the Charter into practice. The Charter alone is prescriptive. Nothing and no one is above it.

The supremacy of the UN Charter is clearly defined in Article 103: « In the event of a conflict between the obligations of members of the United Nations under the present Charter and their obligations under any other international agreement, the former shall prevail. »

The Charter is an International Constitution which prescribes a legislative universality « erga omnes », i.e. « with regard to all », egalitarian since it is applicable to each citizen, in all places, independently of membership of the UN, while respecting the national sovereignty of multiple and equal peoples (Art. 2-1: « the organisation is based on the sovereign equality of all its members. » ) expressing together, after debate and agreement, a common international sovereignty, « We the peoples of the United Nations… » (Preamble) in the field of human rights and the defence of peace.

The principles prescribed by the Charter are therefore equality, protection of human rights and peace, mutual respect, negotiated solutions of differences, non-interference (Art. 2-4 : « Members of the Organization shall refrain in their relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state or, in any other manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations. » As international treaties are subordinate to the requirements of the Charter, it is clear that the Treaty of Aachen has no legal force under Article 2.4.

France and Germany, two sovereign countries victims of an attack

If we refer to the definition of Attack, « Criminal enterprise perpetrated against a person or a community, especially in a political context. Criminal attempt against an object, property, material asset. An act that violates rights, principles, enshrined in law. » (https://www.cnrtl.fr/definition/Attentat), during the signing of the Aachen Treaty between Emmanuel Macron and Angela Merckel, France and Germany were object of an attack, whose their citizens are victims. Since this attack was carried out by several people, resident in several states, in violation of the territorial laws of their respective states and international law, while deceiving the vigilance of their fellow citizens, there is a plot.

All persons, plotters who participated in the resolution of this attack, once identified, whether or not they are public officials, law enforcement officers or not, are liable to criminal prosecution after filing a complaint with their respective jurisdictions by the citizens who were victims of this attack, whether French or German, i.e., for French citizens, with the public prosecutor for conspiracy and attack by virtue of Articles 412-1 (Attack) and 412-2 (Conspiracy) of the Criminal Code. French and Germans may also simultaneously choose to file a joint complaint with international courts.

Nouveau paragraphe

The « Franco-German Council of Ministers » or (and) « Franco-German Defence and Security Council » shows its willingness to interfere in the sovereign countries of the African continent

It is also necessary to draw the attention of the governments of the sovereign countries of the African continent to the desire of the « Franco-German Council of Ministers » or (and) « Franco-German Defence and Security Council » to interfere in the regalian missions (education, professional training, crisis resolution, "good governance", etc.) of each of them.

Only the peoples of the countries of Africa, applying their sovereignty to their respective territories in their own right, are in charge of their education systems, the rights and duties of their citizens, their economic development strategies and the choice of their respective governments.

In the event of conflicts, it is up to each government, in Africa as elsewhere, to invoke the treaties of alliance or to refer to the UN Security Council. Article 7 of the Treaty of Aachen advocates the interference of the « Franco-German Council of Ministers » or (and) « Franco-German Defence and Security Council » on the African continent in violation of the UN Charter.

« Both States commit themselves to an increasingly close partnership between Europe and Africa by strengthening their cooperation on private sector development, regional integration, education and vocational training, gender equality and women's empowerment, with the aim of improving socio-economic opportunities, sustainability, good governance, as well as conflict prevention, crisis resolution, including peacekeeping, and post-conflict management. The two States shall establish an annual political dialogue on international development policy in order to intensify the coordination of their policy planning and implementation. (Treaty of Aachen - Art. 7) In Article 7 of the Treaty of Aachen, the « Franco-German Council of Ministers » or (and) « Franco-German Defence and Security Council » also presents itself as a governance of the EU, as it speaks on its behalf: « The two States undertake to establish an ever closer partnership between Europe and Africa ».

In the name of which states of Europe and Africa is the « Franco-German Council of Ministers » or (and) « Franco-German Defence and Security Council » committed to an ever closer partnership between the EU and Africa? The treaty was signed between the Merkel government and the Macron government, it cannot involve other countries, neither from the EU nor from Africa since these countries are not signatories of the treat.

Endangerment, Genocide, Discrimination

Any civil servant, as well as any citizen whatever his or her social status, whether or not he or she is a law enforcement officer, who has applied the unconstitutional COVID measures, or forced anyone else to submit to them, is also liable to criminal prosecution following the lodging of a complaint with the public prosecutor by any citizen who considers that he or she has been the victim of his or her actions, for :

• Endangering others, « The act of directly exposing another person to an immediate risk of death or injury likely to result in permanent mutilation or disability through the manifestly deliberate violation of a particular duty of care or safety imposed by law or regulation is punishable by one year's imprisonment and a fine of . » (Penal Code - Art. 223-1 - https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/codes/article_lc/LEGIARTI000024042637/)

• Endangering others by forcing civilians to be injected with substances against their will in violation of Article L1111-4 of the Public Health Act (https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/codes/id/LEGIARTI000041721051/2020-10-01), Articles 3, 4, 5 and 6 of the Universal Declaration on Bioethics of 2005 (http://portal.unesco.org/fr/ev.php-URL_ID=31058&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html), Articles 4 and 10 of the 1789 Declaration of Human Rights, Articles 1, 3, 5, 12, 13, 19, 23 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (https://www.un.org/fr/universal-declaration-human-rights/) and the Nuremberg Code.

• Indeed, the injected substances have been marketed under a CONDITIONAL MA (Marketing Authorisation): manufacturers still have to prove the efficacy, safety, short-, medium- and long-term harmlessness of the injected substances, as well as their absence of reprotoxic and carcinogenic effects. The laboratories' answers are expected by 2023. These substances are currently undergoing phase 3 trials. The composition of the products gives rise to fears of « hacking » of the human genome, by messenger RNA (Pfizer and Moderna) or DNA (Janssen and AZ), carrying the genetic code of the Spike protein considered responsible for miscarriages and thrombosis.

• Many citizens report disabling side effects and, to date, over twenty thousand deaths have been reported in Europe.

• Pfizer also confirmed that the spike proteins could infect people who have not been injected: « Unlike conventional vaccines, these spike proteins, as well as 'lipid nanoparticles', have the ability to cross the 'blood-brain barrier' which ensures special protection of these sensitive areas of the body.». Individuals who could be infected by persons carrying the incriminated proteins would then be subjected to medical experimentation against their will by contamination of potentially dangerous subjects subjected, themselves too, to medical experimentation, left in contact with healthy populations, and not subject to medical surveillance protecting them from the evolution of the effects of the injected substances on their health and the degree of danger they represent within civilian populations. This is a violation of the Nuremberg Code and endangerment of others. (Art. 223-1 - https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/codes/article_lc/LEGIARTI000024042637/).

"LOS ANGELES, California, May 3, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) - In their latest briefing note, America's Frontline Doctors (AFLDS) has warned that spike proteins from the experimental COVID-19 gene therapy vaccines can :

• 1.) cross the « blood-brain barrier » causing neurological damage,

• 2.) be « excreted » by the vaccinated, causing illness in unvaccinated children and adults,

• 3.) cause irregular vaginal bleeding in women.
  

The risks of such penetration include « chronic inflammation and thrombosis (clotting) in the neurological system, contributing to tremors, chronic lethargy, stroke, Bell's palsy and ALS-like symptoms ». Lipid nanoparticles can potentially fuse with brain cells, leading to delayed neurodegenerative disease. And the mRNA-induced spike protein can bind to brain tissue 10 to 20 times more strongly than the spike proteins that are (naturally) part of the original virus. »
Third, because these experimental vaccines produce many trillions of spike proteins in their recipients, these vaccinated individuals "may excrete some of these (spike protein) particles to close contacts", thereby causing disease in them.

In an email correspondence with LifeSiteNews, AFLDS founder Dr Simone Gold directed this author to an April 29 tweet in which she posted a document from Pfizer's experimental trials in which the pharmaceutical giant "acknowledges this mechanism" of potential shedding, she wrote. »
https://www.actuintel.com/2021/05/06/pfizer-confirme-que-les-personnes-vaccinees-contre-le-covid-peuvent-transmettre-des-proteines-de-pointe-et-nuire-aux-personnes-non-vaccinees/

Endangering others by forcing civilians to wear masks in their workplaces, public places, public transport, outdoors, in theatres, forcing children, teenagers and students to wear masks in their schools, including in the open air or while playing sports, to the detriment of their physical health, their psychological balance and their school learning. The mask forces the individual to reintegrate some of their toxins and carbon dioxide. It therefore reduces lung capacity, muscle and brain oxygenation, causing headaches, inability to concentrate and discomfort. It causes skin diseases, allergies and can induce colonisation of the oesophagus and lungs by fungi and cause lung diseases. Some masks are said to contain graphene, a substance considered carcinogenic. They create anxiety and fear in those who wear them. The suicide rate of children, teenagers and students has increased as a result of confinement (bullying, in prison, subject to medical monitoring) and wearing the mask.

« Attempted hanging from the age of 6

Unfortunately, as early as December, the Toulouse University Hospital had to deal with several suicide attempts among children. "There have been severe ones, including among very young adolescents. We all agree that we are not at the top of this crisis", warns Jean-Philippe Raynaud.

The seriousness of suicide attempts must be stressed. We have little children aged 6 or 7 who attempt to hang themselves. Personally, I had never seen anything like that!
Professor Isabelle Claudet - Head of paediatric emergencies at the Toulouse University Hospital.
https://actu.fr/occitanie/toulouse_31555/toulouse-des-enfants-de-6-ans-font-des-tentatives-de-pendaison-l-hopital-subit-les-effets-du-covid_42031662.html

Any civil servant, as well as any citizen whatever his or her social status, whether a law enforcement officer or not, who has applied the unconstitutional COVID measures, or forced anyone else to submit to them, is also liable to criminal prosecution following the lodging of a complaint with the public prosecutor by any citizen who considers that he or she has been the victim of his or her actions, for :

Discrimination by making a distinction between citizens according to their state of health and their submission or refusal to submit to an injection of experimental medical products in phase 3 trials, the composition of these products giving rise to fears of "hacking" of the human genome by messenger RNAs (Pfizer and Moderna) or DNA (Janssen and AZ), carriers of the genetic code of the Spike protein considered to be responsible for miscarriages and thrombosis. This discrimination is coupled with a violation of Article L1111-4 of the Public Health Code which states: « Every person shall make decisions about his or her health with the health professional, taking into account the information and recommendations provided by the health professional. Everyone has the right to refuse or not to receive treatment. However, the doctor is still responsible for the patient's follow-up, in particular for palliative care. The doctor is obliged to respect the person's wishes after having informed him or her of the consequences of his or her choices and their seriousness. If, by refusing or interrupting any treatment, the person's life is endangered, he or she must repeat the decision within a reasonable time. He or She may call on another member of the medical profession. The entire procedure is recorded in the patient's medical file. The doctor shall safeguard the dignity of the dying person and ensure the quality of his or her end of life by providing the palliative care mentioned in Article L. 1110-10. » (https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/codes/id/LEGIARTI000041721051/2020-10-01)

Discrimination by making a distinction between citizens wearing a mask or refusing to wear a mask, also in violation of Article L1111-4 of the Public Health Code.

Discrimination is a violation of Articles 225-1 to 225-4 of the Criminal Code. (https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/codes/section_lc/LEGITEXT000006070719/LEGISCTA000006165298/#LEGISCTA000006165298)

These two discriminations are also violations of fundamental human rights, imprescriptible, inalienable, inalterable, guaranteed by the Constitution of October 4, 1958, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Charter of the United Nations, in particular a violation of the rights: to human dignity, to dispose of one's body, to freedom of movement, to freedom of opinion, to privacy, to freedom to work and to property rights (Whether you are an owner or a tenant, you are free to do as you wish in your workplace or home).

Practised on targeted populations, in France and in several countries, these discriminations are crimes against humanity which are violations of article 212-1-8 of the Penal Code (« It is also a crime against humanity and is punishable by life imprisonment to commit any of the following acts in execution of a concerted plan against a civilian population group as part of a widespread or systematic attack : « 8. Persecution of any identifiable group or collectivity on political, racial, national, ethnic, cultural, religious, gender or other grounds that are universally recognized as impermissible under international law. ») - https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/codes/article_lc/LEGIARTI000027811403/) et de l’article 7 du Statut de Rome.

Banning a citizen from a public place of any kind (gym, restaurant, bar, bank, insurance company, theatre, cinema, shop, hospital, etc.), depriving a person of a job or suspending him from his duties, prohibiting a child, teenager or student from entering his school, because he is not in possession of a health passport, , depriving a person of a job or suspending him from his duties, forbidding a child, a teenager or a student access to his school because he is not in possession of a "health pass" or because he does not wear a mask or because he refuses to be vaccinated is the same crime of discrimination against a group identifiable by a distinctive element (health pass, mask, etc.) designating them as an outcast. ) (« An individual who does not belong to any caste, who is regarded as an impure being whose contact is a defilement and who is therefore rejected by the whole of society. A person despised, ostracized from the community. » - https://www.cnrtl.fr/definition/paria) This crime of discrimination is similar to the crime of making Jews wear a yellow star in order to ban them from public places because they carry contaminating germs.

 « The quarantine imposed on the Jewish population have a strictly medical meaning. Its necessity was dictated by the virulence of the disease: the Germans acted as best they could in the face of a morbid fact whose existence they could only observe, before inducing its consequences.
Indeed, as the Jew is almost the only vector of the epidemic and as, in case of contamination of a non-Jew, one can most often trace the infection back to a Jewish source, it appeared urgent, for the protection of the population, to restrict the freedom of movement of Jewish inhabitants, to subject their use of the train to a special administrative medical authorisation, to direct them to parks designated for their use only (since, for example, the transmission of infectious fleas is facilitated by the common use of benches), to prohibit them from frequenting omnibuses and to reserve special compartments for them in trams.

(…)

We are the first to have resolved the question of blood by our actions (...). Anti-Semitism is a question of disinfection. Eradicating infectious fleas is not a question of ideology. It is a matter of hygiene. In the same way, anti-Semitism has never been, in our eyes, an ideological issue, but a matter of hygiene, a matter that will soon be settled, by the way. We will soon be rid of our lice. We still have 20,000. Then it will be over for the whole of Germany.

(…)

The Jews in the East are seen as vectors of disease. From carriers, they become, by assimilation, the pathogens themselves, in the East, as in the West, because there is unity of race. »

Eradicating Typhus: Medical Imagination and Nazi Health Discourse in the Polish General Government (1939-1944) - Johann Chapoutot (https://www.cairn.info/revue-historique-2014-1-page-87.htm)

« On the way to school, the child passes restaurants, hotels, swimming pools. There too, signs have been put up warning: "No Jews allowed in here", "Jews are not welcome here", "No Jews allowed". What does the child feel when he sees these signs? Approval, revolt, amusement, disgust? None of these! The child has known about these signs for almost five years. It's normal," he thinks, "it goes without saying, the entrance is forbidden to Jews. »

Erika Mann (Thomas Mann's daughter) - 10 million Nazi children (Modern Age Book - 1938)

Discrimination means sorting out populations and whatever the reason, it is a crime against humanity... The last discrimination is doing between those who deserve to live and those who deserve to die.

Any civil servant, as well as any citizen whatever his or her social status, whether or not he or she is a law enforcement officer, who has applied the unconstitutional COVID's measures, or asked anyone else to submit to them, is also liable to criminal prosecution following the lodging of a complaint with the public prosecutor by any citizen who considers that he or she has been the victim of his or her actions, for :

Genocide in violation of Article 212(1) of the Criminal Code and Article 6 of the Rome Statute (https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/codes/section_lc/LEGITEXT000006070719/LEGISCTA000006117597/#LEGISCTA000006117597)

Genocide is committed when, in execution of a concerted plan for the total or partial destruction of a national, ethnic, racial or religious group, or a group determined on the basis of any other arbitrary criterion, the perpetrator commits or causes to be committed, against members of that group, any of the following acts:

• wilful endangerment of life ;

• serious harm to physical or psychological integrity;

• submission to conditions of life likely to lead to the total or partial destruction of the group;

• measures intended to prevent births;

• forced transfer of children
  

Genocide is punishable by life imprisonment.

The first two paragraphs of Article 132-23 on the security period shall apply to the crime provided for in this Article. »

Genocide for prohibiting and denying citizens, including children and adolescents, access to medical facilities or treatments of proven therapeutic benefit, resulting in the deaths of citizens.

Genocide for confining elderly people to nursing homes, depriving them of care and ordering their euthanasia with Rivotril or other deleterious substances (There is ample evidence of this, including from practitioners and renowned practitioners).

Genocide for depriving elderly people of contact and causing them to suffer from slippage syndromes resulting in death.

Genocide for denying access to health care to citizens suffering from cancer or other diseases requiring constant hospital follow-up or emergency interventions.

Genocide for forcing civilian populations to be injected with substances marketed under a CONDITIONAL MA (Marketing Authorisation), the manufacturers still having to prove the efficacy, safety and harmlessness of these substances in the short, medium and long term, as well as their absence of reprotoxic and carcinogenic effects. These substances are currently in phase 3 trials. The composition of the products leads to fears of 'hacking' of the human genome, by messenger RNA (Pfizer and Moderna) or DNA (Janssen and AZ), carrying the genetic code of the Spike protein considered to be responsible for miscarriages and thrombosis. The action of these substances on the hormonal system leads to fears of forced sterilisation of the people to whom they have been injected (a drop in fertility of around 16% in rats has been observed). A disruption of the immune system has also been observed. Apart from sudden deaths, cases of fulminant blindness, vasculitis, myocarditis, pericarditis, pancreatitis, inflammatory syndromes, acute, rapidly disabling multiple sclerosis, facial paralysis, muscle weakness, blood clots in the brain, intestine or liver, (https://ansm.sante.fr/dossiers-thematiques/effets-indesirables-lies-aux-vaccins-autorises-contre-la-covid-19-ce-quil-faut-savoir), erythema multiforme, glomerulonephritis, menstrual disorders (https://www.doctissimo.fr/sante/epidemie/coronavirus/vaccins-pfizer-et-moderna-de-nouveaux-effets-secondaires-sous-surveillance/6c8a5f_ar.html) have been observed. Some doctors have alerted the health authorities to the fact that the life expectancy of some or all of the people who have received one of the products being tested could be reduced to five years.

Genocide for having, as a result of forced confinement, a policy of terror generating anguish, led many citizens to commit suicide or triggered serious, disabling psychopathologies that could lead to death by stress.

Genocide for forcing citizens to wear masks that force those who wear them to re-enter some of their toxins and carbon dioxide. The masks reduce lung capacity, muscle and brain oxygenation, causing headaches, inability to concentrate and discomfort. It causes skin diseases, allergies and can induce colonisation of the oesophagus and lungs by fungi and cause lung diseases. It lowers the immune defences of those who carry it, inducing secondary immunosuppression which exposes them to developing numerous pathologies, including severe lung infections, viral, fungal or bacterial infections (https://www.pharmanity.com/blog/immunodepression-definition-formes-causes-traitements/6238)

Nouveau paragraphe

Crimes against humanity and the human species

As the substances injected, on the "directives" of the legally undefined entity called WHO, in many countries, during the so-called "vaccine" world campaign, are in an experimental phase, there is nothing to rule out a perennial modification, in the near or distant future, of the human genome by the spike protein (Retrotranscriptase enzymes allow RNA to be transformed into DNA and to become part of chromosomes). There is therefore a non-negligible risk that the mass injection campaign of so-called « vaccine products » will become a « genetic transformation likely to modify the offspring » of citizens who have received one or more doses of the product in violation of Article 16-4 of the French Civil Code.

The attention of sovereign governments and their institutions, as well as of all citizens, must be drawn to the legal danger of a genetic transformation of the individual by artificial and controlled mutation, because, legally, it would make every genetically modified citizen a "genetically modified organism" and no longer a citizen. Could a genetically modified organism, even a human one, continue to be considered as a full human being under the law, since it has been modified in its primitive codification? Indeed, any genetic modification obtained by biological manipulation would make him an artificial being, therefore a fabrication, a product of a laboratory. What would then be its legal status? What would be its rights?

The issue of the patentability of human genes raises fundamental ethical questions which Senator Philippe Darniche clearly expressed in the Senate:

Question écrite n° 26133 de M. Philippe Darniche (Vendée - NI) publiée dans le JO Sénat du 22/06/2000 - page 2179 (https://www.senat.fr/questions/base/2000/qSEQ000626133.html) :

« Mr Philippe Darniche drew the attention of the Secretary of State for Health and the Disabled to the issue of the patentability of human genes. Considering that the human genome is a common heritage of humanity, he refuses the appropriation of gene sequences that the logic of patents induces and opposes the transposition of European Directive 98/44/EC of 6 July 1998 as it stands and calls for an immediate moratorium allowing its renegotiation as well as the suspension of all patenting of the genome. Believing that the human body, including genes, is not a commodity, he recently signed the international appeal against the patentability of human genes as a petition. For this reason, and in view of the urgent need for each State to organise itself before taking a decision with far-reaching consequences involving the very future of mankind, he asks her what her position is on this serious ethical issue and whether she intends to take the necessary measures to rapidly set up a genuine public debate involving all of our fellow citizens on this real social issue. »

The commodification of the human being is the fundamental legal issue that arises from the European Directive 98/44/EC of 6 July 1998

(https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/FR/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:31998L0044).

European Directive 98/44/EC of 6 July 1998

• Article 5

• « 1. The human body, at the various stages of its formation and development, and the simple discovery of one of its elements, including the sequence or partial sequence of a gene, shall not constitute patentable inventions.

• 2. An element isolated from the human body or otherwise produced by a technical process, including the sequence or partial sequence of a gene, may constitute a patentable invention, even if the structure of that element is identical to that of a natural element.

• 3.  The industrial application of a sequence or partial sequence of a gene must be concretely stated in the patent application. »

Under this article, it is clearly established that an isolated element of the human body, a gene for example, can be patented and be considered an invention (5-2). Admittedly, it is stipulated in 5-1 of the same article that « a human body, at the various stages of its constitution and development, as well as the simple discovery of one of its elements, cannot constitute patentable inventions », but this article contradicts 5-2, which stipulates that « an isolated element may be patented ». How can the lawyer decide?

If a human body at the various stages of its constitution and development, i.e. in its "original state", cannot be considered a patentable invention, there is nothing in the Circular to indicate that a human body modified during its life by artificial mutation and controlled by a laboratory, as could be the case for individuals who have received one or more doses of products containing modified RNA, or DNA, of the spike protein, cannot be the subject of a patent application if it is clearly established that their initial genome has indeed been modified by genetic manipulation.

It is not the object that is patented but the process. Now, if the individual whose genome has been modified by the spike can be the subject of a patent application by the laboratory that modified his or her genome, in accordance with Article 5-2 of this directive, he or she becomes the de facto property of this laboratory. It is then similar to an object and no longer to a human being as defined in article 44 of the Black Slave Code of 1665 (http://1libertaire.free.fr/CodeNoir02.html) : « We declare slaves to be movable and as such to be included in the community, not to be followed by mortgage, to be divided equally between the co-heirs, without precipitate and right of birth, not to be subject to customary dower, feudal and lineage withdrawal, feudal and seigniorial rights, to the formalities of decrees, nor to the subtraction of the four quints, in the event of a disposition by death or by testament. »

Article 8-1 (European Directive 98/44/EC of 6 July 1998) specifies that the patent extends to any material obtained in the process of modification or manufacture, and therefore also to the modified living being (human, animal, plant, bacterium, etc.): « The protection conferred by a patent relating to a biological material endowed, as a result of the invention, with specific properties shall extend to any biological material obtained from that biological material by reproduction or multiplication in identical or differentiated form and endowed with those same properties. »

There is nothing to prevent a laboratory that has modified a citizen, i.e. created a process from his genetic data « in corpore », once it has asserted its intellectual property rights over this process, from considering it its property and confiscating all its assets. A "patentable object" is not a free man who has fundamental rights such as the fundamental right to property. Indeed, there is nothing in any text that legally determines what a patent for genetic modification "in corpore" must contain, the content, the container, the process, all three? What does the patent holder own, the content, the container, the process, or all three at the same time? What is the legal nature of the genetically modified organism? Before its modification? During its modification? After modification? Is it a guinea pig belonging to a laboratory? Is it paid for the modifications it undergoes? Who decides on the modification? Is it him? The lab? He and the lab? A higher authority?

The Nagoya Protocol

The Nagoya Protocol determine on Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable Sharing of the Benefits Arising out of their Utilization (https://www.cbd.int/abs/doc/protocol/nagoya-protocol-fr.pdf and thus acts as an international market for genetic resources.

Nagoya Protocol - Article 1

« The objective of this Protocol is the fair and equitable sharing of the benefits arising out of the utilization of genetic resources, including by appropriate access to genetic resources and by appropriate transfer of relevant technologies, taking into account all rights over those resources and to technologies and by appropriate funding, thereby contributing to the conservation of biological diversity and the sustainable use of its components. »

There are no clearly established laws governing this gene market since the Nagoya Protocol commits the parties, suppliers and users, not legally defined, to all sorts of rules in which the source, i.e. the genetic donor, has no say. Providers and users, referred to as Parties, are also not legally defined in the Protocol. It could be any entity, including mafia or illegal ones. Many questions arise: Where and how do the suppliers obtain this genetic material? What kind of genetic material is it? What is the purpose of this genetic material? By what right do they appropriate it? The word  "part", constituent element or portion of a whole, considered in its relation to that whole" has no legal value. Only the governments of sovereign states, representatives of sovereign peoples, can sign such agreements, and only after popular consultation, because the decisions involve the health of everyone and the management of the world's common heritage of all human beings.

Nagoya Protocol - Article 7

1.In implementing article 6, paragraph 3 (g) (i), and article 7, each Party shall encourage the providers and users of genetic resources and/or traditional knowledge associated with genetic resources to include in the mutually agreed terms and conditions provisions to cover, where appropriate, dispute resolution, including :

a) The jurisdiction to which they will submit dispute settlement procedures;

b) The applicable law;

and/or

c) The possibility of using alternative dispute resolution methods, such as mediation and arbitration.

2. Each Party shall ensure the possibility of recourse in its legal system, in accordance with the applicable jurisdictional rules, in the event of a dispute concerning the mutually agreed terms.

Each Party shall, as appropriate, take effective measures with respect to :

a) Access to justice;

and

b) The use of mechanisms for mutual recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards and judgments.

4. The Conference of the Parties serving as the meeting of the Parties to this Protocol shall assess the effectiveness of this Article in accordance with Article 31 of this Protocol. »

Interference appears in Article 19 of the Protocol with respect to non-legally defined entities, referred to as "developing country Parties", least developed countries (on what basis is a least developed country identified as such? ) and small island states: "The Parties shall cooperate in capacity building and development and in strengthening human resources and institutional capacities for the effective implementation of this Protocol in developing country Parties, in particular the least developed countries and small island developing States among them, as well as in Parties with economies in transition, including through global, regional, subregional and national institutions and organizations. In this context, Parties should facilitate the participation of indigenous and local communities and relevant stakeholders, including non-governmental organizations and the private sector." (Nagoya Protocol - Art. 22-1).

The notion of developing country Parties has no legal value. It is the representatives of the governments of sovereign countries and peoples who sign treaties, not Developing Country Parties which have no legal nature and identity. Only a state has the right to sign a treaty or any other document committing a sovereign country: "Every state has the capacity to conclude treaties. (Art.6 - Vienna Convention)

A developing country Party or Parties are not States. They are entities of unknown legal form that are not subject to international law and are therefore not entitled to sign treaties. The Nagoya Protocol has de facto no legal value. It has no legitimacy and cannot be applied in any way, anywhere. It is a legal, financial and diplomatic swindle that falls under article 313-1 of the French penal code: « Fraud is the fact of deceiving a natural or legal person, either by the use of a false name or capacity, or by the abuse of a true capacity, or by the use of fraudulent manoeuvres, and thus determining him, to his detriment or to the detriment of a third party, to hand over funds, securities or any other property whatsoever, to provide a service or to agree to a deed of obligation or discharge. » (https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/codes/article_lc/LEGIARTI000006418192/)

The Nagoya Protocol is, like any other protocol, an "agreement that supplements a previous agreement; a provision that is added as a result to supplement or amend it". It is an adjustment to the management of access to genetic resources referred to in the Convention on Biological Diversity written in 1992.

What a treaty and a convention are in International Law.
A treaty is « an international agreement concluded in writing between States and governed by international law, whether embodied in a single instrument or in two or more related instruments, and whatever its particular designation. » (Art.2 - Vienna Convention) The protocol for signing treaties is defined in the Vienna Convention.

The treaty seals the rules between states, the convention defines the implementation of these rules in all the sectors concerned, public and private. Both treaties and conventions are subject to international law. The protocol for signing treaties is defined in the Vienna Convention

A convention is a contract between two or more parties, private or (and) public, which operates on the principle of Article 1108 of the Civil Code : « A contract is commutative when each party undertakes to provide the other with a benefit which is regarded as equivalent to that which he receives. It is random when the parties agree to make the effects of the contract, in terms of the benefits and losses that will result from it, depend on an uncertain event. »

A Convention is an agreement that determines the way in which the rules contained in a treaty will be applied legally and in practice in different territories or on the international scene. It is a kind of international implementing decree, the « modalities of application » of the treaty. It is therefore a complementary and subsequent document to the treaty.

It is important to specify that treaties and conventions are texts, signed in accordance with international law, which have legal value. They are implemented by sovereign states, in the case of treaties, and by states and/or private sector actors, in the case of convention sIn fact, the Convention on Biological Diversity cannot have a secretariat, "a service or set of services provided by one or more secretaries; staff of such a service", only a company or an administration can have one. The Convention on Biological Diversity is therefore an entity of unknown legal form, both a « normative text » of a commercial nature and a corporate management whose operation is incompatible with the UN, whose Charter it violates in several articles. It also violates the laws of international trade, since all companies must have statutes.

The Nagoya Protocol defines a form of global governance similar to the WHO, of unknown nature and legal identity, called the Assembly of Parties, «The Conference of the Parties (COP1)», also known as the Conference of the Signatory States, is a generic term for the supreme body (Designated by whom?) of certain international conventions. It is composed of all the member states of the conference (the « party » states) and verifies the proper implementation of the objectives of the international conventions adopted. » (https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conférence_des_parties) which is defined as a "supreme" organ (no legal definition), therefore above everything, « Above which there is nothing more; which cannot be surpassed in its kind, in its domain ». (https://www.cnrtl.fr/definition/suprême).

Conventions between States cannot be placed under the domination of any supreme regulating body, the only rules to which they must submit are those of the laws of the corpus of international law. Like the WHO, this « Assembly of Parties » grants itself governmental prerogatives even though it has no legal status and is not a subject of international law: « The Conference of the Parties serving as the meeting of the Parties to this Protocol shall, at its first meeting, consider and approve cooperative procedures and institutional mechanisms to promote compliance with this Protocol and to address cases of non-compliance. These procedures and mechanisms shall include provisions for the provision of advice or assistance, as appropriate. They are separate from and without prejudice to the dispute settlement procedures and mechanisms provided for in Article 27 of the Convention. » (Convention on Biological Diversity - Art. 30)

It is clear that the UN is allowing private entities of an unknown legal nature to speak for it and act in place of the General Assembly, in violation of the Charter: « The General Assembly may discuss any questions or any matters within the scope of the present Charter or relating to the powers and functions of any organs provided for in the present Charter, and, subject to the provisions of Article 12, may make recommendations thereon to the Members of the United Nations, to the Security Council, or to the Members of the United Nations and the Security Council. » and the principle of « the sovereign equality of all its Members. » (Art. 2-1)

The « United Nations System », informally called the « UN Family ».
The United Nations Family: http://www.un.org/fr/about-us/un-system

It is clear that the United Nations has failed in its mission and no longer lives up to its founding principles, since it has violated its own Charter, which is nonetheless prescriptive, by becoming part of a system of entities of unknown legal form and by agreeing to be financed by private funds in violation of Article 17(2) of the Charter: « The expenses of the Organization shall be borne by the Members in accordance with the apportionment of such expenses as the General Assembly may decide ».

The UN is no longer an association of equal sovereign peoples acting for a common purpose in accordance with a founding text, but a conglomerate of private entities of unknown legal form called the "United Nations System", financed by numerous funds and thus acting for private interests contrary to those of sovereign peoples.

Having violated its own Charter, the UN no longer has any international legitimacy in legal terms. It is now a private company, without statutes, whose managers and employees are now subject to international criminal law. They can no longer benefit from the protection of the Charter. All texts signed in the name of this entity, "United Nations System" or "United Nations Family" or by members of this entity, are not international treaties and have no legal value.

The UN system as described on its website is like a mafia, and it has adopted one of its language codes by unofficially calling itself « The United Nations Family ». (See document above)

« The Mafia, an Italian criminal organisation whose activities, carried out by family clans under an omerta, are based on a strategy of infiltrating civil society and its institutions. (Its main branches are the Camorra [Neapolitan region] and Cosa Nostra [Sicily].) »
https://www.larousse.fr/dictionnaires/francais/mafia/48508

Because a mafia is a secret society, not a gang. One does not join by cronyism, but by initiation. This is what a repentant « soldier » of the Colombo mafia family (Italian-Americans from New York), Michael Franzese, says about his initiation. This is a ceremony in which the « novice » is pricked on the finger by his « godfather »; when a drop of blood flows, the latter warns « This is a blood bond. Your allegiance to Cosa Nostra (Our Thing) is sealed by blood. If you violate your oath, your blood will flow ».

Throughout the ages and almost from Sicily to the United States, the ceremony is similar. Before that, the godfather (in this case, Thomas Di Bella, chief lieutenant of the Colombos), instructs Franzese in the intangible rules of the mafia: « Cosa Nostra comes first and above everyone else. If you become one of us, you and your father ["Sonny" Franzese, Michael's father, is an important Mafioso] will be equal. With us, a father has no priority over his son; one brother does not come before the other. We are all one, united by blood. There is no stronger bond between men than entry into our family ».

Xavier Raufer, criminologue, enseignant et écrivain (https://www.xavier-raufer.com/site/ce-quest-vraiment-une-mafia/)

The Italian Criminal Code defines in Article 416 bis the crime of Mafia association which characterises mainly three organisations : Cosa nostra in Sicily, the camorra in Campania and the Ndrangheta in Calabria. In particular, point 3 states: « The association is of a mafia type when those who are part of it use the intimidating force of the associative link and the condition of subjection and omerta that derives from it to commit crimes, to acquire in a direct or indirect way the management or at least the control over economic activities, concessions, authorisations, tenders and public services, or to make profits or gain unfair advantages for oneself or for others, or to prevent or hinder the free exercise of the vote or to obtain votes for oneself or for others in electoral consultations.

(…)

In fact, the activity of territorial control is known and widely analysed under its political and military aspect: the mafia is presented as exercising a territorial sovereignty rivaling that of the state; the mafia also appears to hold a de facto monopoly of violence on certain territories; it controls local elections by practising voto di scambio, i.e. the exchange of votes in elections for favours from elected officials (notably the awarding of public contracts); it levies racketeering on its territory, a racketeering perceived by some as a « mafia tax ».

(…)

Far from being a unitary and pyramidal structure, the mafia functions as a network associating various relatively autonomous cells [Champeyrache, 2007, p. 71 ff]. The mafia organisational structure is based on the notion of clan, of family, and each family is established in a territory. The different mafia families participate in a real network of the territory, each one controlling a district, a street, according to its size. Autonomy and sovereignty characterise each of these families operating on their own territory. »

The mafia economy between the principle of territoriality and extra territoriality - https://www.cairn.info/revue-herodote-2013-4-page-83.htm

In view of the above facts, the UN can be seen as the steering centre of a mafia network with different « families » managing a clearly defined territory. Two of these « mafia families » can now be considered identified: the « Mountbatten-Windsor » Family of the City of London Corporation and the City of London Corporation UK - State of Virginia (Washington DC) USA which is incommunicado sequestering the citizen known as Julian Paul Assange and the Family known as the « Franco-German Council of Ministers » or (and) « Franco-German Defence and Security Council ».

The WHO seems to be a kind of « executive », giving orders, ensuring the smooth running of operations and the submission of everyone to the « United Nations Family ».

« First of all, the essential point: Cosa Nostra is indeed an organisation. It: « is organised in hierarchical structures with a summit and an epicentre in Palermo, the seat of the association's governing body, known as the "dome" or « commission ». Contrary to popular belief, the island's mafia is not structured in independent and diversified associations, but constitutes an organisation which, even though it is articulated and complex, nevertheless has a substantial unity ». (Indictment of the magistrates at the maxi-trial in Palermo, 1986)
But the mafia architecture evolves according to economic and financial opportunities, the level of repression and the methods of its leaders (dictatorial, centralised, terrorist for Riina - discreet, more consensual, decentralised - almost feudal - for Provenzano). »

Xavier Raufer, criminologist, teacher and writer - (https://www.xavier-raufer.com/site/ce-quest-vraiment-une-mafia/)

The various foundations of the « UN Family » seem to serve as transmission organs between the different « families » at the helm of territorial structures and money laundering schemes. It is therefore legitimate to consider the « developing country Parties » mentioned in the Nagoya Protocol as territories in the process of being colonised by the parent company of this international mafia called the « United Nations family ». It appears, however, that if this « United Nations Family » behaves like a mafia, it does not apply its code of honour, since it does not respect any rules and acts like a multinational company wanting to make the most of its production tools and raw materials, raw materials which, if we refer to the Nagoya Protocol, are living beings or elements of living beings. This industrial profitability of the body is closer to Nazi health management than to the mafia.

It should be recalled that the citizen known as Julian Paul Assange, who was held incommunicado and tortured by the entity of unknown legal form known as « Mountbatten-Windso» of the City of London Corporation UK and the City of London Corporation - State of Virginia (Washington DC) USA, was raised in a cult called the « Family Cult », also known as the Great White Brotherhood or Santeniketan Parc, which also bears uncanny similarities to Nazi principles, including lebensborn and drug experimentation.

The families of the « United Nations Family » bear disturbing similarities to the Family Cult and the Cagoule terrorist organisation.

« The Great White Brotherhood is composed of Initiates from all parts of the earth, and these form the invisible government of the earth. The Great White Lodge meets every seven years, and each of the schools of occult philosophy is represented. This group is a legislative body which decides, with its clearer intelligence, the needs of humanity, and seeks to meet those needs in the most efficient manner. At these meetings, beings superior to the Masters themselves are present. The power of the Adepts over the visible and invisible worlds enables them to invoke the forces of Nature to achieve a particular end. The temple of the Great White Lodge, we are told, stands on an island of permanent rock in the heart of the Gobi Desert of Mongolia or Mongolian Tibet. » ((Manly P. Hall, Special Class in Secret Doctrine in Appreciation of H.P.B. (Madame Blavatsky), Manuscript Series No. 36).

This invisible government of the earth is reminiscent of the motto of the Family Cult or the Santiniketan Parc Association: « Invisible, unknown, unheard of ». The co-creator of the Family Cult, the Santiniketan Park Association or the Great White Brotherhood is the English writer Raynor Johnson, member of the « Society for Psychological Research ».

(From Page 137 International Complaint filed by WikiJustice Julian Assange with the judicial institutions of Sovereign Countries - monika-karbowska-liberte-pour-julian-assange.ovh/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Plainte-Wikijustice-pour-Julian-Assange.pdf)

« The family cult in which the citizen known as Julian Assange was raised operated according to the principles of Lebensborn. Some of the actors in the WikiLeaks-Assange affair have links or possible links to Nazis or Nazism. Carl Lundsum of The Pirate Bay. Kim Doctom, although he denies it. Gore Vidal, who met Mussolini during the war in the US embassy, who like Hitler had an admiration for the Mystery religion and the emperor Julian. Gore Vidal prolific author (and much more) of the book shown by Julian Assange at 3 Hans Crescent Street. In his own words, Gore Vidal was a friend of Princess Margaret. The British crown also had links to the Nazis. »

(Page 76 - International Complaint filed by WikiJustice Julian Assange with the judicial institutions of Sovereign Countries - monika-karbowska-liberte-pour-julian-assange.ovh/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Plainte-Wikijustice-pour-Julian-Assange.pdf)

CSAR (Comité secret d'action révolutionnaire), or OSARN (Organisation secrète d'action révolutionnaire nationale), or Cagoule, a French terrorist organisation (https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cagoule_(Osarn)

This mafia-like functioning of the United Nations Family is also reminiscent of the CSAR (Comité Secret d'Action Révolutionnaire), also known as the Cagoule, a French terrorist organisation, involved in numerous assassinations, that of the Minister of the Interior Max Dormoy, Laetitia Tourreaux, the Russian economist Dimitri Navachine (https://fr. wikipedia.org/wiki/Dimitri_Navachine), director of the World Bank for Europe, friend of Anatole de Monzie (https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anatole_de_Monzie), himself a friend of Otto Abetz, German ambassador to France during the Second World War, and of the Rosselli brothers (https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlo_Rosselli) for the Italian fascist regime. The CSAR worked hand in hand with the UCAD (Union des Comités d'Action Défensive) created by General Edouard Duseigneur (https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Édouard_Duseigneur) and Duke Jospeh Pozzo di Borgo (https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Pozzo_di_Borgo).

According to Eugène Deloncle, leader of the Cagoule, what he calls, in speaking of the secret organisation he leads, « an inverted Freemasonry will have its rites, its oaths, its tests, its signs of recognition ». (In La Cagoule - Philippe Bourdrel 1970). Members of the bonnet can be found in civilian life, in the army and in the police. Each member of the Cagoule has several surnames and an identification number. The creator of the military Cagoule is said to be Georges Loustauno-Lacau (https://fr.wikipedia.or/wiki/Réseaux_Corvignolles).

« The Cagoule was composed of secret societies suitably divided, separated from each other and ignoring each other (the point was crucial) ». (In La Cagoule - Philippe Bourdrel 1970). It was well established in Toulouse and Nice under the name of the « Knights of the Sword ». Its ambition was to take a number of politicians hostage.

« The instruments of the future provocations: complete outfits of the Paris police officers (jackets and trousers), kepis and white batons, but also armbands bearing the initials of the CGT, the Socialist Party (SFIO) and other left-wing organisations. These acquisitions were intended to enable the « Cagoule » to create the kind of disturbance during demonstrations on the left and the right that would benefit it, and to trigger the violent reactions that would provide fuel for its fire.

(…)

The subscribers were first recruited from the industrial circles affected by the propaganda of CSAR and its subsidiaries (voluntary or not). Major brands of cars and tyres contributed their share; equally well-known brands of aperitif and toothpaste, several banks and insurance companies paid large sums.
One of the accused of the Cagoule will affirm that Eugène Deloncle had received the sum of one million from the Ligue des Contribuables, presided over by Lemaigre Dubreuil, director of Huiles Lesieur. In all likelihood, Lemaigre Dubreuil personally belonged to the Cagoule. The head of the CSAR was also supported by Marshal Franchet d'Esperey, who vouched for his patriotism after the industrialists.

The secret organisation which had called itself the CSAR in Paris was hidden elsewhere under other names. It bore the innocuous titles of vaguely patriotic associations, and changed its label each time, depending on the region. Thus, it became difficult to establish the relationship between the centre of the web and its extensions… »

La Cagoule - (Philippe Bourdrel - Albin Michel - 1970)
https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cagoule_(Osarn)

The Cagoule had its access to Matignon thanks to François Marie Mitterrand, a great friend of François Marie, aka Joseph, Méténier (https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/François_Méténier), an active member of the Cagoule. It should be remembered that François Marie Mitterrand was awarded the Francisque by Marshal Pétain. In order to be decorated, one must apply for the order of the Francisque: « I, the undersigned, declare that I am French by father and mother, that I am not Jewish, under the terms of the law of 2 June 1941 (J.O. 14 June 1941) and that I have never belonged to a secret society » (https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ordre_de_la_Francisque) and be mentored. The two godfathers of François Marie Mitterrand, Gabriel Jeantet and Simon Pierre Arbellot de Vaqueur, aka Simon Arbellot (https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simon_Arbellot), were both members of the Cagoule (https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gabriel_Jeantet). Another friend of François Marie Mitterrand, the banker Jean-Pierre François, aka Jean Fèvre, aka Joachim Feilberbaum, aka JPF, aka Jean François, aka Pierre François, aka... whose motto is « the truth never triumphs, it is the adversaries who die…" (L'ami banquier - Bernard Violet -Albin Michel 1998) is also connected with the Cagoule since he worked with Georges Soulès, aka Raymond Abellio, one of its leaders.

Jean Edern Allier links Mitterrand to a family, of a mafia order: « Nepotism is the disease of Mitterrandism. When Tonton is not the Uncle, he is the godfather, the father, the brother, the cousin, the lover or the magnificent cuckold of his entourage. The Elysée is a family tree whose ramifications extend to the government and ministerial cabinets via the prefectures and embassies. Socialism is a foster care agency. » (The Lost Honour of François Mitterrand - Jean Edern Hallier - Editions du Rocher Les Belles Lettres - 1996)

Moreover, in his book, Les puissances du mal, Jean Edern Hallier accuses Roland Dumas, involved in the Elf affair and close to François Mitterrand, of having ordered his assassination. He presents Mitterrand's entourage as a gang that he calls the « gang of Solutré » : « Thus his loyalty to the years of collaboration came full circle with the pilgrimage where his disciples accompanied him, each times, on his ascent from the "big site". Behind Mitterrand, Roland Dumas, the shadow, Badinter, the yellowish sycophant and his sub-human Keijman, Charasse, the coprophage, Lang, the paedocrat, Bergé, the madam, Fabius, the contaminated vampire, Hanin, the dirty Navarro on duty, Joxe, the controller of dirty work, Rousselet, the fresh money caddy, Hernu, the comic trouper, Beregovoy, the good proletarian and Attali, the relic dealer. It's thirteen to the dozen to make a bonus, the Solutré gang. »

Jean-Pierre François was honorary consul of Panama, a position he did obtain for one of his collaborators, Michel Gonzalez, aka Gonzales, a former member of the racing and gaming department of the DGSI, recycled at the request of the same Jean-Pierre François, as CEO of the Société Européenne de Location d'Immeubles commerciaux et industriels (SELICOMI), which operates in the Paris region. Michel Gonzalez and Jean-Pierre François participate in hunts in the company of a former Belgian Minister of Foreign Trade (1950-1952) under whose ministry « a special anti-communist police force linked to the Gladio network functioned effectively » (L’ami banquier - Bernard Violet -Albin Michel 1998). Michel Gonzalez was also president of the « Société Niçoise d'Exploitation des Casinos. Jean-Pierre François also knows the Spanish Minister of Commerce, Alberto Ullastres Cavo, a member of Opus Dei (https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alberto_Ullastres). At the interface between Jean-Pierre François and François Mitterand, we also find François Durand de Grossouvre (https://www.memoiresdeguerre.com/article-grossouvre-fran-ois-de-122738398.html), a member of Gladio: "In France, François Mitterrand pulled on François de Grossouvre's ear a little, saying: 'I hope you had nothing to do with his old stories at least? Because his friend had carefully hidden from him that, since 1948, he was one of the French pillars of Gladio, one of its main Stay Behinds ». (Secret War at the Elysée - Capitaine Paul Barril - Albin Michel 1996)

« According to the testimony, collected in November 1990, of a former Walloon « barbouze », André Moyen, aka Captain Freddy, the Belgian branch of Gladio, created at the Liberation under the aegis of the American OSS, sometimes called upon French friends. Among the latter, some members of the Cagoule, including the famous Doctor Martin."

The banker friend - Bernard Violet - Albin Michel 1998

« François Durand de Grossouvre was also considered to be part of the « circle of influence » of Joachim Feilberbaum, known as Jean-Pierre François, a protégé of the father of Roland Dumas, the future foreign minister. This Austrian Israelite, naturalized French, fought in the Resistance in Lyon before creating the Banque Romande, which, according to the services, had a bad reputation in Swiss financial circles. The Banque Romande was suspected of trafficking with the Mafia, but also of links with the « Kintex network » of the Bulgarian special services. The services added that « Pierre François », or « Jean François », was « linked to left-wing Gaullist circles » and to personalities such as Gilbert Beaujolin, Maurice Herzog or the controller Gonzales, a close collaborator of the Gaullist Roger Frey.

Secret War at the Elysée - Capitaine Paul Barril - Albin Michel 1996

In 1952-53, Pinay, together with Jean Violet (https://www.voltairenet.org/article12838.html), a member of the Cagoule and agent of the Service de Documentation Extérieure et de Contre-Espionnage (SDECE) and the BND, together with Otto von Habsburg, a member of the EPU, acting as Violet's boss, founded « Le Cercle », which was composed mainly of Knights of Malta and members of Opus Dei, and which will can able to continue to serve, during a large part of the century, as the umbrella organisation at the Fascist International. Important political figures associated with the Circle include : Konrad Adenauer, l’archiduc Otto von Habsburg, Franz Josef Strauß, Giulio Andreotti, Manuel Fraga Iribarne, Paul Vanden Boeynants, John Vorster, le général Antonio de Spínola, Henry Kissinger, Margaret Thatcher et Ronald Reagan. »

https://noach.es/2020/04/19/iv-21-i-operation-gladio-le-cercle/

It should be remembered that it was Antoine Pinay who was behind the creation of Bildeberg. The Cagoule is financed by rich industrialists, Eugène Schueller, founder of the l'Oréal group, Jacques Lemaigre Dubreuil, CEO of Lesieur, Louis Renault, Gabriel Jeantet of Lafargue cements, Pierre Pucheux of the Cartel de l'Acier (https://fr.wikiqube.net wiki/Pierre_Pucheu), the Michelin companies and Saint Gobin.

(https://www.liberation.fr/medias/1999/02/10/douteux-relents-sous-la-cagoule-comment-la-france-des-annees-30-a-enfante-des-terroristes-d-extreme-_264637/).
https://fr.wikiqube.net/wiki/La_Cagoule

http://labrousse-erick.over-blog.com/2017/10/la-cagoule-noyaute-toujours-la-republique-par-hulot.htm
lhttps://www.jp-m.eu/dossiers/cagoule.php

In the 1930s, Dr Henri Martin was in charge of the 2nd office, which dealt with intelligence. The « Z » sections of the Cagoule were dedicated to shadowing. « Z » is also the name of a kind of private intelligence agency, run by the British MI6, created by Major Claude Edward Marjoribanks Dansey, who also manages all the secret services in the United Kingdom and helped create the OSS, the forerunner of the CIA. Z is based in Switzerland, in Bern and Zurich. Like the Cagoule, Z is financed by rich industrialists, such as de Beers, the diamond emperor (https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Beers), Henri Wilhelm August Deterding, founder of Shell (https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henri_Deterding), Calouste Sarkis Gulbenkian of the Turkish Petroleum Company (https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calouste_Gulbenkian)

The link between Mitterrand, the Cagoule and Z is Henri Déricourt who is said to have transported Mitterrand in a Lysander to London and whom Mitterrand cleared at his trial for treason after the war. Déricourt was himself linked to Karl Boemelburg, head of the Gestapo, whose armed wing was the sub-section IV S, which was made up of former members of the Cagoule (In Triple Jeu - Jean Lartéguy - Bob Maloubier - Robert Laffont) and who was the last person to have seen Jean Moulin alive in the house in Neuilly that he had requisitioned and where the Resistance fighter was tortured and killed.

CSAR, « Z », the Family Cult may well be sub-families of the United Nations Family. They share direct links with the British secret service and the Family known as Mountbatten-Windsor.

The United Nations Global Compact
When the United Nations was created, it had a Charter that all sovereign countries that were members of the United Nations chose to respect and put into practice. It has been ratified. It is therefore prescriptive and cannot be replaced by any other text. « "In international law, a solemn document in which rights and/or major principles are recorded. (e.g. the United Nations Charter). In domestic law, a document in which the fundamental rights of individuals are defined. Generally, the charter is included in the Constitution. Historically, the first charter dates back to the 13th century: Magna Carta or Magna Carta, a text that set out the powers of the monarch in England. » (https://perspective.usherbrooke.ca/bilan/servlet/BMDictionnaire?iddictionnaire=1477). The Charter has a universal dimension.

It is therefore essential to understand how the UN Global Compact violates a Charter that is a solemn, prescriptive rule of conduct for both the UN and the sovereign peoples who have ratified it. A Compact can only permit to action if it is part of an international treaty framework.

The United Nations Global Compact (https://www.un.org/fr/chronique/le-pacte-mondial-des-nations-unies-proposer-des-solutions-aux-défis-mondiaux)
« Based on the core conventions and declarations of the United Nations, the ten principles of the Global Compact are recognised and endorsed in numerous intergovernmental resolutions and outcome documents, including General Assembly resolutions. To join the Global Compact, the head of a company makes a public commitment to the Secretary-General that the company will take a responsible, integrated and principled approach to achieving the UN's development goals, indicating that the company can be a strong, long-term partner of the organisation. »

The phrase « based on the fundamental conventions and declarations of the United Nations » is a violation of the UN Charter since all actions of the General Assembly, the Security Council, the Economic and Social Council, the subsidiary bodies and the specialised agencies are based only on the UN Charter and implemented only in accordance with the UN Charter. A convention is not a treaty (see above) and a declaration, fundamental or not, is not a legal commitment. Similarly, no decision or action can be endorsed and thus « endorsed in numerous intergovernmental resolutions and outcome documents, including General Assembly resolutions ».
It is the UN General Assembly that votes on resolutions, not the resolutions that authorise the UN General Assembly to act. Only the Charter gives the right and duty to act to the General Assembly and the Security Council. An endorsement is a commercial law term, "An endorsement is a personal commitment given by a third party (avaliste) in favour of one of the signatories of a commercial paper (avalisé) up to an amount which is regularly equal to the total amount due. The endorsement may, in particular, be given for the benefit of one of the parties to the promissory note." (https://www.legavox.fr/blog/maitre-joan-dray/aval-garantie-pour-billet-ordre-9655.htm) and it is in no way a 'text' - a text does not act, does not endorse - that gives its approval but a person for a third party.

« To take part in the Global Compact », a compact is a text that one signs, not an action that one takes part in. This pact can only be signed by contactors and if it is not part of any treaty, it will not affect the action of the signatories. The phrase « The head of a company publicly commits to the Secretary-General that the company will take a responsible, integrated and principled approach to achieving the development goals set by the United Nations » is completely contrary to the UN Charter and the way the UN works. The UN does not enter into partnerships with companies. Companies could just sign a private agreement in which they commit themselves to the UN Charter. Nothing more. « Public pledge to the Secretary-General », a public pledge has no legal value, only duly signed contracts have the value of a commitment. As for the UN Secretary General, he has no power except to appoint staff and all his actions must be carried out in accordance with the Charter. In all things, it is the Charter that is prescriptive. The UN is not intended to define any development. The UN is a body whose function is to work for peace, to ensure respect for human rights and to act as a peacemaker in conflicts.

In the light of this Pact, it is clear that the UN has been transformed, in violation of the rights of member countries, by individuals who endanger peace and human rights, into a consortium of private companies. The UN is no longer fulfilling its mission. It seems to be an empty shell in the hands of legally indeterminate private entities.

This first article of the Covenant is contrary to any law, rule, agreement or contract: « Businesses should support and respect the protection of international human rights law ». In a Covenant, one is not « invited to », one « undertakes to », one does not promote or respect the protection of the law, the law does not have to be protected, it is the law that protects, one therefore undertakes to respect the texts relating to the law, as far as the UN is concerned, legal texts relating to human rights such as the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights or the convention against torture. The management and staff of the UN, under duress, taken hostage, blackmailed or complicit, seem to be doing everything in their power to destroy international law and the protection it provides to every citizen in terms of fundamental human rights.

This Pact is a violation of the UN Charter and a threat to the world's geopolitical balance and therefore to peace. It is illegal. It is akin to a declaration of war, even if it is a stealth war.

Overarching questions arise: How could the representative members of sovereign countries allow the UN to become a private entity of unknown legal form, financed by private funds and demonstrating, in violation of the Charter, a hegemonic will contrary to the sovereignty of the equal peoples that compose it? How could they let it set up the structures necessary for the creation of global governance?

The leaders of the sovereign countries sitting on the Security Council and the leaders of the sovereign countries sitting on the General Assembly have also failed in their mission by allowing the destruction from within of a peace-regulating body, responsible for the defence of human rights, which the sovereign peoples they represent have entrusted to them to manage.

Brief analysis of the Convention on Biological Diversity: The privatisation and commodification of life

Under the pretext of protecting ecosystems, the signatories of the Convention on Biological Diversity give themselves the right to « manage or control the risks associated with the use and release of living modified organisms resulting from biotechnology that are likely to have adverse environmental impacts which could affect the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity, taking also into account risks to human health. » or endanger populations and ecosystems by creating and ordering living organisms as they see fit, «prevent the introduction of, control or eradicate alien species that threaten ecosystems, habitats or species. »

At no point is the concept of alien species defined in the Convention. Can humans, once genetically modified, become an alien species and thus be eradicated? Or a spider?
They also give themselves the right to identify and monitor « described genomes and genes of social, scientific or economic importance ». What social or economic importance can genes and genomes have? The word economic clearly indicates a desire for profit from the exploitation of living organisms. With regard to conflict management, an Arbitral Tribunal appears: « The Arbitral Tribunal shall render its decisions in accordance with the provisions of this Convention, any relevant protocol and international law », which has no legal value. It is therefore a tribunal outside jurisdiction, of unknown legal nature, which is supposed to manage the conflicts that will arise from the exploitation of living matter. This genetic economy seems to be developing and structuring itself on the fringes of legal rules and the structured world economy.

Attention should also be drawn to the lies told by the senators during the debate on the cloning bill on 23 October 2021:

« Is cloning already prohibited under French law? Today, no provision of French law explicitly prohibits such a practice. However, it is commonly accepted that the provisions protecting the integrity of the human being in the Civil Code do not allow recourse to such a practice. » (https://www.senat.fr/rap/l02-128/l02-12812.html)

The correct answer would have been yes, human cloning is prohibited under French law by virtue of Articles L2151-3, « A human embryo may not be conceived, constituted by cloning, or used for commercial or industrial purposes», L2151-4, « Any constitution by cloning of a human embryo for therapeutic purposes is also prohibited », of the Public Health Code. Finally, Article 16 of the Civil Code states: « The law ensures the primacy of the person, prohibits any attack on the dignity of the person and guarantees respect for the human being from the beginning of his life. »