Addressing Covid Human Rights Abuses, Restoring Law and Order
The World Council for Health is very pleased to publish this 5-page excerpt from Willem Van Aardt’s excellent book Covid-19 Lawlessness1
Willem Van Aardt (B.Proc, LL.M. PhD) is an International Human Rights and Constitutional Law specialist who resides in Barrington, Illinois, USA.
He was admitted as an Attorney of the High Court of South Africa in 1996 and as a Solicitor of the Supreme Court of England and Wales in 2005.
In 2020 he was appointed as an Extraordinary Research Fellow of North-West University Research Unit on Law, Justice and Sustainability.
Willem is author of numerous peer-reviewed articles relating to the violation of fundamental human rights.
Over the past two years, millions of people across the West lost their jobs, were injured, and died as a direct or indirect result of illicit public policies that were implemented.
Once the miscreant COVID-19 era bureaucrats have been ousted from their positions of power through lawful civil and political action, it is imperative to deal judiciously with the widespread human rights violations that occurred during the COVID-19 era.
The exhortation by Emily Oster in her October 21, 2022 article in “The Atlantic” to “Declare a Pandemic Amnesty” and forgive and forget what happened over the past two and a half years is not an appropriate nor reasonable course of action.38
Oster’s contention that any “misstep wasn’t nefarious. It was the result of uncertainty”, is simply not true.38 A group of corrupt supercilious political and corporate global elite willfully and lawlessly contravened International Human Rights Law (IHRL) and trampled on the dignity and human rights of millions of people in the pursuit of power and profit.
In the interest of truth, justice, reparation, and non-recurrence these international criminals and their accomplices, that are the enemies of humanity, need to be investigated, prosecuted, and held to account in terms of the rule of law.
Although there is no standard model for dealing with the past (DWTP), the 2004 report of the UN Secretary-General on “The Rule of Law and Transitional Justice in Conflict and Post-Conflict Societies” provides some guidance.25
The report determines that effective transitional justice strategies must be both inclusive in scope and all-encompassing in nature, involving all pertinent State actors and non-State actors in developing a “single nationally owned and led strategic plan.”26
The report further emphasizes that the practical definition of transitional justice should be expanded to include “judicial and non-judicial mechanisms, with differing levels of international involvement (or none at all) and individual prosecutions, reparations, truth-seeking, institutional reform, vetting and dismissals, or a combination thereof.”25
On December 16, 2005, the UN General Assembly adopted Resolution 60/147 entitled the “Basic Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Remedy and Reparation for Victims of Gross Violations of International Human Rights Law and Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law.”27
Significantly, this document outlines the State’s obligations concerning gross violations of international human rights and humanitarian law. Principle 8 defines the term victim as:
…persons who individually or collectively suffered harm, including physical or mental injury, emotional suffering, economic loss or substantial impairment of their fundamental rights [and] also includes the immediate family or dependents of the direct victim and persons who have suffered harm in intervening to assist victims in distress or to prevent victimization.
The “Basic Principles and Guidelines” expand the rights offered to victims by combining entitlements allowed under both IHRL and international humanitarian law (IHL).25,26,27 In the 2006 case of DRC v Rwanda, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) affirmed the complimentary application of IHRL and IHL.29,30.
In 2006, 2007, and 2009 the UN Human Rights Council also addressed the issue of the “right to truth” in a series of studies, reports, and resolutions aimed at strengthening “the right to truth” as a principle of international law and a standalone fundamental right of the individual that should not be subject to limitations.31-33
In his 2010 article entitled “A Conceptual Framework for Dealing with the Past”, Jonathan Sisson proposes that the “Joinet/Orentlicher principles against impunity”, formulated by Louis Joinet (1997) and further refined by Diane Orentlichter (2005) at the behest of the Commission on Human Rights, and the right to truth principles, could be utilized as a framework for dealing with the past.25,34,35
Importantly, these principles are based on the IHRL concept of primary State responsibility to protect and respect fundamental human rights and the inherent right of remedy for individual victims of serious human rights infringements.
As such, the principles do not involve new international or national judicial obligations but identify procedures and processes for the implementation of existing judicial obligations under IHRL.25
The “Joinet/Orentlicher” principles provide a helpful framework, from both a juridical and normative point of view, to deal with the insidious human rights violations that occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic.
The principles identify four critical rights for juridically dealing with the past: i.) the right to know, ii.) the right to justice, iii.) the right to reparation, and iv.) the guarantee of non-recurrence.25
To see more, and the long list of references, click here substack.com
Header image: TCI Telecommunications Commission
Please Donate Below To Support Our Ongoing Work To Defend The Scientific Method
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company 
incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Trackback from your site.
Wisenox
| #
Where’s the talk about intellectual property rights or patent contents?
Visit the World Council for Health site and you’ll find all the UN led organizations, like the Children’s Health Defense, and you’ll find the usual ‘mother earth’ new age stuff (Eve is the new equinox with Enki/Adam). You’ll also find the ‘dove of peace’.
Remember, peace means ‘a quiet population’. Quiet is from the proto-indo-european root *qwieha, which means to suppress/oppress just as quiet does.
The dove symbolizes oppression.
As far as the article goes, the insiders make their own laws, which are used to protect nobility/royalty-not you. It’s their ‘shield’. They break their own laws at will because they aren’t going to prosecute themselves, unless it’s a scam like Trump.
The most important ‘laws’ for vaccinated people are the protections from intellectual property rights claims over humans, but you won’t find a shred of that on the World Council for Health website. They just want you to have the ‘impression’ that they’re working on your behalf; they’re not.
Reply