“There Is No Other Case in the World Like the One in the Netherlands Against Bill Gates, et al.
Tune into the live-streamed hearing on Thursday , October 22, 2026.
Oct 17, 2026
I will be traveling to the Netherlands this coming week to support the plaintiffs and expert witnesses in a landmark case that most people have never heard of. I hope I can help change that, by explaining why this case is important and inviting readers to watch the live-streamed hearing on Thursday, October 22nd, 2026 (very early in the US: 6:30am ET) and spread the word about it.
WHAT IS THIS CASE ABOUT?
This case is a civil lawsuit brought by seven Covid vaccine-injured citizens in the Netherlands against 17 defendants, including Bill Gates, Albert Bourla (Pfizer CEO), Mark Rutte (former Dutch PM and current Secretary General of NATO), and the Dutch State.
Details of the case can be found here:
This is the summary of the case:
COVID-19 is not a disease but a project known as “Covid-19: The Great Reset.” The defendants in these civil proceedings are being held personally liable with their private assets on the grounds of tort. Through their actions and omissions, they unlawfully misled the plaintiffs, as a result of which the latter received a Covid-19 injection, causing serious damage to their physical integrity and their mental and physical health.
Because it is a civil case, the defendants cannot be found guilty of a crime, but they can be found to have caused harm for which they owe damages.
The hearing on October 22, 2026, is to determine whether the case can move forward to an actual trial.
WHY IS THIS CASE IMPORTANT?
The importance of the Dutch case is that it may be able to bypass the ironclad liability shield granted through Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) and the PREP Act in the U.S., and a similar legal framework in the European Union, to anyone who studied, manufactured, distributed or did anything else with what the law recognizes as “countermeasures” against Covid.
As noted by pharmaceutical expert, independent researcher, and expert witness in this case Sasha Latypova in a December 2025 Substack article:
In the civil court system, lawsuits against vaccine manufacturers (Pfizer, Moderna, Johnson & Johnson, AstraZeneca) have faced near-universal dismissal. The PREP Act preemption is most clear-cut in this arena, as the core purpose of the Act is to shield the creators of medical countermeasures to encourage rapid innovation during a crisis.
Litigants attempting to sue manufacturers for adverse events, failure to warn, design defects, or deceptive marketing have found the federal courts to be deaf, blind and unreceptive. The PREP Act preemption is interpreted broadly to cover all aspects of the product’s lifecycle, from design to marketing.
If you’re interested in the history of Covid vaccine litigation, Latypova’s article contains a great deal of invaluable information, including a list of some of the prominent legal cases that all failed due to PREP Act protections.
Even if the pending Dutch case cannot crack the PREP Act shield (specifically, the EU version of it), it reframes the issue to address the nature of the entire Covid pandemic response, not just the manufacture of the vaccines.
Unlike all the other cases, this one reframes the actions of the defendants entirely, claiming that the whole Covid vaccine project was not part of a real public health pandemic response at all. Instead, the claimants argue, it was part of a plan called “The Great Reset,” which sought to coerce people into taking a medical intervention that the defendants knew in advance to be harmful and/or deadly.
Whether the claimants win or lose, the fact that this “conspiracy theory” is presented in a court of law, on the record, with expert witness testimony, makes it unique among all Covid litigation.
And whether or not you agree with any or all of the claimants’ positions, this is the only place where you will hear arguments against some of the world’s most powerful people and their roles in the coordinated global Covid response.
HOW DO WE KNOW THE DEFENDANTS ARE TAKING THIS CASE SERIOUSLY?
You might think that a lawsuit like this, brought by a few regular citizens with no institutional or corporate backing, would not pose a big threat to the biodefense public-private partnership that ran the global Covid response. Yet I believe they have been taking this case very seriously, based on a few things that have happened since the case was first introduced in the Netherlands in 2023.
Please note that it is speculation on my part to link these events to the Dutch Covid case. These events are, nonetheless, interesting to consider, in relation to the importance of the case:
- Human rights lawyer and bioweapons legal expert Francis Boyle, the most prominent expert witness originally on the case, died unexpectedly on January 30, 2025, at age 74, just twenty days after agreeing to testify.
You’ll find a good summary of Boyle’s bio and his importance to this case here: https://medium.com/@globalgeopolitics/the-mysterious-death-of-prof-francis-boyle-a-bioweapons-whistleblowers-final-warning-b50ab3a835ea
Key points:
- Boyle was known for his expertise in bioweapons law and his staunch opposition to high-risk biological research.
- He authored the U.S. Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act of 1989, a piece of legislation designed to prevent the development and use of biological weapons.
- Boyle’s most recent work focused on the dangers he saw in gain-of-function research and the COVID-19 pandemic response, which he believed was connected to bioweapons research.
- Boyle’s warnings about the dangers of COVID-19 were based on his understanding of bioweapons development. He believed the virus and the subsequent mRNA vaccines were part of a larger, ongoing bioweapons program.
- Boyle described the mRNA vaccines as “synthetic biological weapons of mass destruction,” a term he used to highlight the dangers he saw in the widespread distribution of the vaccine.
- He argued that the vaccines would lead to autoimmune disorders, cancers, and other health problems in the vaccinated population.
- Boyle’s concerns were grounded in his understanding of how biological agents are engineered and the risks associated with such technologies.
Because of his international prominence, legal advocacy, and expertise in biological warfare, Boyle was the expert witness who could provide the most credible and damning testimony in this trial.
Maybe his death right after agreeing to testify was a coincidence. I have no proof that it wasn’t.
For more information, read Sasha Latypova’s article about Boyle’s sudden and unexpected death.
For historical context, here’s just part of what Google AI has to say about “witnesses in bioweapons cases who died”:
- The original head lawyer on this case, Arno van Kessel, was arrested and detained by an anti-terrorism unit, the day after submitting initial documents in this case.
As reported here:
Stassen was supposed to present this case together with his colleague, Arno van Kessel. On the 11th of June, the day after having submitted documents to do with the initial proceedings, van Kessel was arrested and taken away blindfolded by a team of semi-military police and is being kept in the Netherlands’ highest secured prison, far away from his family, at least for another three months. The actual charge is unknown – most likely because the State Prosecution is still trying to find a criminal act.
After his arrest, van Kessel was also disbarred, and was finally released in February 2026.
Again, the timing and extreme nature of this arrest, vis a vis van Kessel’s role in the Dutch Covid case, could have been entirely coincidental.
PUTTING VITAL INFORMATION ABOUT THE COVID RESPONSE ON THE RECORD
If nothing else, this case puts vital information about the global Covid response on the record in an official court of law. The testimony of Sasha Latypova regarding the military/biodefense legal framework used to create the Covid injections and coerce the population into getting them is particularly important.
Executive Summary of Latypova’s testimony:
Based on my review of primary regulatory documents, leaked Pfizer’s Chemistry-Manufacturing-Control (CMC) files, relevant legislation in the U.S. and EU, and other publicly available documentation, it is my expert opinion that the Covid-19 mRNA injections were deployed under military ‘medical-countermeasure’ rules that bypassed standard pharmaceutical safeguards, rendering them legally and functionally indistinguishable from a potential bio-chemical weapon.”
Links to all the expert testimonies here: