Press Release – Legal Challenge to COVID-19 Measures Filed In Ontario Superior Court


Visit the Vaccine Choice Canada Press Release.


Mr. Rocco Galati, founder of the Constitutional Rights Centre, is Canada's leading constitutional lawyer who is famous for his numerous successful constitutional challenges against the Federal government for violations of the rule of law. On July 6, 2020 he filed a 191 page lawsuit against the Federal Government, Justin Trudeau, Teresa Tam, Doug Ford and the Province of Ontario, John Tory and the City of Toronto, the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, and numerous other parties for $11 million plus costs, while seeking declaratory judgments against the Covid19 lock-downs and mitigation protocols that are destroying the Canadian and world economies, as well as the health of its citizens.


Below are several video interviews with Mr. Galati regarding his lawsuit and with other lawyers worldwide who are also taking action, that will open your eyes to what is really going on with this PLANNED New World Order Covid19 false flag event. Nothing could be more important to society as whole to understand what is happening, who is orchestrating it, why it is being done, and what brave lawyers and concerned citizens are doing about it. 

We urge you to take the time to watch these videos and read the entire lawsuit to get a grasp of the scope of this massive deception being perpetrated upon the entire world by a group of global elite technocrats such as Bill Gates, the CDC, the WHO, Jeff Bezos, Elon Musk, Anthony Fauci, and the silicon valley tech giants with a collective depopulation agenda in mind. Forced vaccinations using RNA/DNA nano-particle sterilization and terminator formulations; global monetary collapse and destruction of small businesses; abolition of cash and introduction of digital money tied to an embedded quantum dot vaccination tattoo per ID2020, 5G, and global immunity passports; and a welfare state living wage system linked to the vaccination scheme is THE PLAN! Global totalitarian ambitions did not end with WWII, they were simply delayed until the technology revolution of the last 50 years could make it all possible.


Make no mistake, this IS our last chance to defeat this planned Orwellian police state agenda but we need all hands on deck to win this critical fight! If we don't take a stand now for our inalienable rights and freedoms, the bible prophesies of the book of Revelation will certainly be fulfilled here in our time. 

Revelation 13: 16-18

16 And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads: 17 And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name. 18 Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six (666).



What laws rank where"?



No 7070 Volume 313: Page 1448
7 December 1996.


CIRP Introduction

The judgment by the war crimes tribunal at Nuremberg laid down 10 standards to which physicians must conform when carrying out experiments on human subjects in a new code that is now accepted worldwide.

This judgment established a new standard of ethical medical behavior for the post World War II human rights era. Amongst other requirements, this document enunciates the requirement of voluntary informed consent of the human subject. The principle of voluntary informed consent protects the right of the individual to control his own body.

This code also recognizes that the risk must be weighed against the expected benefit, and that unnecessary pain and suffering must be avoided.

This code recognizes that doctors should avoid actions that injure human patients.

The principles established by this code for medical practice now have been extended into general codes of medical ethics.

The Nuremberg Code (1947)


Permissible Medical Experiments

The great weight of the evidence before us to effect that certain types of medical experiments on human beings, when kept within reasonably well-defined bounds, conform to the ethics of the medical profession generally. The protagonists of the practice of human experimentation justify their views on the basis that such experiments yield results for the good of society that are unprocurable by other methods or means of study. All agree, however, that certain basic principles must be observed in order to satisfy moral, ethical and legal concepts:

  1. The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential. This means that the person involved should have legal capacity to give consent; should be so situated as to be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, overreaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion; and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved as to enable him to make an understanding and enlightened decision. This latter element requires that before the acceptance of an affirmative decision by the experimental subject there should be made known to him the nature, duration, and purpose of the experiment; the method and means by which it is to be conducted; all inconveniences and hazards reasonably to be expected; and the effects upon his health or person which may possibly come from his participation in the experiment. The duty and responsibility for ascertaining the quality of the consent rests upon each individual who initiates, directs, or engages in the experiment. It is a personal duty and responsibility which may not be delegated to another with impunity.

  2. The experiment should be such as to yield fruitful results for the good of society, unprocurable by other methods or means of study, and not random and unnecessary in nature.

  3. The experiment should be so designed and based on the results of animal experimentation and a knowledge of the natural history of the disease or other problem under study that the anticipated results justify the performance of the experiment.

  4. The experiment should be so conducted as to avoid all unnecessary physical and mental suffering and injury.

  5. No experiment should be conducted where there is an a priori reason to believe that death or disabling injury will occur; except, perhaps, in those experiments where the experimental physicians also serve as subjects.

  6. The degree of risk to be taken should never exceed that determined by the humanitarian importance of the problem to be solved by the experiment.

  7. Proper preparations should be made and adequate facilities provided to protect the experimental subject against even remote possibilities of injury, disability