The Secret Case That Could End Jab Mandates Worldwide (Voting Matters)

A government legal officer by day. Lead plaintiff suing the entire Queensland Government by night. He just built the biggest anti-mandate human rights case on Earth — and the state can’t kill it. One man. Thirteen expert witnesses. Zero government experts. History in the making.



The legal case is based on the fact that the Government should not have subjected the entire population to medical experimentation. A key point raised here is that even the drug regulator in Australia, the TGA, admits that 'drugs and medicines in the provisional approval stage have unconfirmed safety'. The claim that the Covid jabs were safe is an outright lie.

So forcing, or tricking, people into taking them was a dangerous proposition for a virus that was no more deadly than influenza (going by the official statistics and the fact that many victims were likely killed from misdiagnosed, and untreated, pneumonia - plus deadly hospital protocols involving the drug Remdesivir).

If you reflect on International Law, under Article 7 of the ICCPR, it is clearly a crime against humanity to coerce or trick people into taking experimental drugs. The reason for the prohibition is obvious. 

Justice is still needed. People must never be forced into that position again. Furthermore, the technology is inherently dangerous. Why it hasn't been banned comes down to corruption and mental incompetence from those in authority.

[Posted at the SpookyWeather2 blog, October 14, 2026.]