[00:00:00]

Shawn Buckley

Our next witness is joining us virtually, Pascal Najadi. Pascal, can you hear me?

Pascal Najadi

Yes, sir. I can.

Shawn Buckley

Okay, and I can hear and see you. Pascal, can we begin with you stating your full name for the record, spelling your first and last name?

Pascal Najadi

Yes, my name is Pascal Najadi.

Shawn Buckley

And Pascal, do you promise to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?

Pascal Najadi

Yes, I promise to tell the truth, nothing but the truth, so help me God.

Shawn Buckley

Now, I’m going to try and introduce you, but if I don’t do you service, please add. Because I want people to appreciate that you kind of have travelled in other circles than most of us.

You are a Swiss-born British citizen, so you have dual citizenship. Your great grand uncle from your mother’s side was the president of Switzerland during World War II. His name was Rudolf Minger. You have served in the Swiss Air Force. You were an investment banker with Merrill Lynch International in New York and London. You were a director on the management board of Dresner Bank AG London and was in charge of advising heads of state and ministers in strategic, advisory, and crisis. The territories were Central Europe, Central Asia, the Russian Federation, the Middle East from Lebanon down to Oman, including Saudi Arabia and the African continent.

Does that fairly introduce you or should we add some more?

Pascal Najadi

No, that’s perfectly fine. Thank you very much, sir.

Shawn Buckley

Okay. And again I just wanted, because there’ll be people watching you online and there’ll be people here that won’t know your background. And you’re testifying from Switzerland today.

Pascal Najadi

That is correct, yes. This is from Switzerland, live.

Shawn Buckley

Now, I wanted to start because you have a personal story to share concerning the COVID-19 vaccine. And so if you want to share that with us and then we’ll move on to some of the legal activities you’ve been involved with.

Pascal Najadi

Okay. Sir, if I could just ask you the time maybe that I have please.

Shawn Buckley

Oh, so we’ve got 45 minutes.

Pascal Najadi

Okay, wonderful.

Shawn Buckley

Yeah. So actually, take your time. Because, like I say, there will be many people that are not familiar with your story.

Pascal Najadi

Sure. Thank you, sir. Well, first of all, I’d like to say the following, if I may, as an intro. I would say dear honourable judges, experts of the National Citizens Inquiry, dear ladies and gentlemen, dear supporters, friends, and colleagues, and victims of COVID-19 vaccinations from Canada and around the world: I greet you all warmly from Switzerland. It’s a great honour for me to give you my testimony here today.

Before I start, I wish to share with you my thoughts and essence about this genocide of Biblical dimensions against humanity—

Shawn Buckley

Pascal, can I interrupt you a little bit? Is it okay if we not read and we just have more of a dialogue?

Pascal Najadi

Sure.

Shawn Buckley

Yeah, because it’s just we’re in a format where, you know, it truly is testimony. Some people get uncomfortable with that, but I know when we’ve spoken in person that you’re very animated and very good at communicating.

Pascal Najadi

Sure. Sorry, I just wanted to greet everybody. And the personal story is the following.

Like many people, unfortunately billions, I trusted my Minister of Health, the Swiss Minister of Health, Mr. Alain Berset—who is now also President and still Minister of Health of Switzerland—when he came on board after the psyops started, showing people dying and people on ventilators in hospitals; saying that there is good news, that there is a vaccine coming, and it’s safe, it is tested like any other vaccine, and it’s effective.

And we then got introduced and pushed into a vaccine mandate with a QR code on the telephone, whereby people with a vaccination—or with an injection, I dare say—got the QR code, the green pass, to go and have a normal life. Whereas the un-injected people were discriminated [against] and many of them in some companies lost their jobs, like the pilots or cabin crew of Swiss International Airlines that were not agreeable to get injected with an experimental substance.

[00:05:00]

The consequence was that me and my family—my mother included, she’s 81—agreed to the injections. We got three times Pfizer mRNA into our bodies. And we did not, at that moment, have any second thoughts. Because again, the whole system—all multilateral channels of communication by the government, by the media mainstream—were saying, “You must vaccinate; you must protect others and yourself; it’s good; it’s effective; it’s tested.”

The shock I got was on the 10th of October 2022, when Janine Small, a senior manager of Pfizer Inc., was called into the European Parliament and had to testify and had to answer questions to parliamentarians. One—I believe he was a Dutch parliamentarian—asked a very simple question. He said, “Mrs. Small, could you please give me a direct answer, a yes or a no: Did you test the vaccine before you went to market?”

He switched off the microphone and then the lady said, “Of course not, we had to go with the speed of science.” So—

Shawn Buckley

Now, can I just interject because I think— That’s a pretty famous video and I think you just inadvertently left out— She was being asked, if I remember it correctly, whether or not they tested it for transmission, whether it would protect against transmission.

Pascal Najadi

The end points, so the end points: immunity and transmission. Correct.

Shawn Buckley

Right. So how did that affect you? Because you had three shots and you’re watching her basically say it wasn’t tested for that.

Pascal Najadi

Yes, for me it was clear. What she was telling me was, “The stuff doesn’t work.” Okay. Then I got worried. I start to calculate in my head that I have something experimental here. What was the purpose of it, I didn’t know.

I went straight through the messages of the Swiss Ministry of Health. I didn’t go to newspaper reports. I went backwards in communication statements given to us by the Ministry of Health.

First, I started December 2020. The video’s still there. Alain Berset saying, “We have a vaccine, it’s safe, it’s effective, and it’s tested like any other vaccine according to the Swiss regulator’s standard.” Then I went on and on where the same message was “safe, effective, vaccinate, safe, effective.” And then I came to the official press conference, which is still in the website of the Ministry of Health, where Dr. Virginie Masserey, the Director of Infection Control of the Swiss Ministry of Health, Public Health said— That was the 3rd of August, 2021, she said—end of July, I believe it was the 26th of July, 2021—they received a report from CDC of the United States saying that vaccinated people transmit the virus as easy and often as unvaccinated people.

Then a journalist interjected in the press room—it’s all on video—and said, “Dr. Masserey, can you confirm this? Is this really true?” And she said—it was in French she replied—she said, “Yes, vaccinated people transmit as easily and often as unvaccinated people.” So I made a note. That was 3rd of August 2021.

I went on towards my time, towards the present time. And on the 27th of October 2021, a few weeks before the COVID law of Switzerland was going for public vote to be prolonged or not, the Swiss Minister of Health, Alain Berset, on primetime live national TV, Channel One, said: “With the certificate,” means you are injected, “you can be sure that you are not contagious.” Okay, so I made a note.

There were lies in the room. Now who was lying? Was it the CDC of the United States and Dr. Masserey and the experts of the Ministry of Health? Or was it the Minister of Health himself trying to promote the COVID law with the Swiss voters? I didn’t know.

[00:10:00]

I took the consequences: I went to the Swiss police in my city and I went to file criminal charges against Alain Berset. It was the 2nd of December 2022 when I filed, at the police station, the police report for criminal charges for Article 312 of the Swiss criminal code: “Abuse of office.” Because clearly, I wanted this to be investigated. How come a Minister of Health, who is in charge of eight million people in the country, claims that it protects when his own Director of Infection Control, three months earlier, and the United States said that it does not protect?

This criminal charge report went to the state level—we have cantons like you have provinces or states in the United States—went on that prosecution level for about seven days. And then it ascended to the federal prosecution level, where federal prosecutor Nils Ekman confirmed to me in writing that he has given me a case number, in writing of course, and that he is in charge of these criminal charges to be investigated: whether or not they will open a procedure against Alain Berset—by then become president, in January 2023, of Switzerland.

He also asked me to supply him with more evidence or more causality regarding my own consequences. Unfortunately, I had to supply to him my blood reports. I had my own blood, six vials, taken in early March by my doctor, Dr. Weikl. And we transported them within 48 hours to the special laboratory of Professor Dr. Brigitte König in Magdeburg, Germany. She has established the most modern lab process to find out what the damage is of these mRNA injections. And three vials for evidence went, or are now still in cryonic freezing, and three vials were used for the lab tests in the laboratory.

The results are devastating because the nanolipids are the packaging of both Moderna and Pfizer mRNA. The nanolipids are toxic. You can Google that. They are synthetic; you can buy them; they are traded for laboratory, for tests for research. And they’re labelled, ‘Toxic, Not for Human Use or Animal Use.” Clear. So we have a toxin already in the packaging. Every shot delivers about 15 billion nanolipids into your body. They are charged positively electrically; the blood cells of your body are negatively charged. What happens, the nanolipids shoot into your blood cell, go inside, and destroy your energy system.

Professor Dr. Bhakdi, who many of you know worldwide, one of the leading experts, made me the expert report—unfortunately, reading 10 pages of complicated laboratory language which I don’t even understand—and concluded that I have lost at least 20 years of my life. And that the nanolipids have done the first damage: three shots cumulative 15 billion or 20 billion each, between 50 and 60 billion nanolipids hitting my blood cells. We unfortunately also determined one year and three months after the last shot that I still have 183 MPO [myeloperoxidase] per millilitre of my blood, of spike proteins running through the body, attacking my organs and systems.

Shawn Buckley

I just want to slow down to make sure that people understand. So how many years of your life did Dr. Bhakdi predict you’re likely to have lost?

Pascal Najadi

Twenty.

Shawn Buckley

Twenty. And one year and three months after your last injection, they’re finding spike protein circulating in your blood.

And I’ll just let both the commissioners and those watching your testimony know that you’ve consented to your medical records forming part of this record. And so the report on your blood with spike protein is now Exhibit OT-3c and the letter from Dr. Bhakdi is OT-3a. And thank you for consenting to that. Because it verifies what you’re saying and I think it’s important for people to realize,

[00:15:00]

your body is still obviously manufacturing or retaining spike protein after 15 months.

Pascal Najadi

Yes. The regulators wrote to me by email that it will be gone after three to six weeks. Obviously not. The doctors who have administered those injections have violated the criminal law in Switzerland because they were giving to me injections without informed consent. They should have had a form where they should have read out to me the severe possible consequences or side effects, and on the same page, there should be a line to sign that I understood the above. That would go into a ten-year saving of my medical history. That didn’t happen. Therefore, I have also filed criminal charges against the two medical doctors, Swiss medical doctors, that have given me those jabs without informing me.

Shawn Buckley

I’m going to ask you what’s happened with that. But we’re curious, what did your doctors tell you? I mean, you are telling us for sure they didn’t give you informed consent, but do you recall what was said to you when you were vaccinated?

Pascal Najadi

Yeah, it was like in a train station. We had to wait in a tent and then one after the other was going through—green light, red light—into a box. You could sit down. I remember I had a pullover and he said, “Please, you want it here or here?” I said, “here.” And I said, “Does it hurt?” He said, “No. Maybe you have a bit of a swelling today or tomorrow but don’t worry.” And he went on with the disinfectant and the jab was not painful and I was given the pass—no, not the pass. I had to leave the box to go and pick up my vaccination certificate booklet and went out.

Shawn Buckley

Okay, so what happened with— You charged the doctors. Can you share with us what’s happened with that?

Pascal Najadi

Okay, so I filed those charges as well as a whole package to the federal prosecutor.

I said, “The whole line is defunct because obviously promoting it as safe and effective for protecting, it was obviously not true by the Minister of Health statement in television.” I said, “The doctors didn’t ask for informed consent and signature, which they should.” I also submitted the lab report and the spike report. And Professor Dr. Bhakdi sent directly, in German, his conclusions.

I’ve done all the job actually, what the justice should have done. But it then got rejected. All of these three charges got rejected. The federal prosecutor rejected [them] a few weeks ago saying that the Minister actually did publicly, on several occasions, say that it’s not quite effective and that it could be dangerous.

Shawn Buckley

I just want to put that into context. So the public prosecutor isn’t saying that you’re incorrect about him lying publicly on the occasion you complained about, but he didn’t break the law on other days, so he’s not going to proceed with charges.

Pascal Najadi

Correct.

Shawn Buckley

I used to practise defence law. I’ll have to try that on a judge and see how far I get.

Pascal Najadi

Yeah, so the federal prosecutor came back with a different statement. I said, “How come in August 2021, the Director of Infection Control says it doesn’t protect and it’s not— et cetera? And how come three months later, in October 2021 the Minister says it protects?” That was my point. That was not answered or investigated or anything.

So I’ve taken a criminal lawyer in Zurich and we have now taken this—filed within the deadline, comfortably fine—to the federal criminal court of Switzerland. And it’s now there, where my lawyer has written a piece proving that the entire COVID vaccination policy was a lie and was fake. I mean, wrong. And we are now at that stage.

With the two doctors, we took them to the cantonal—in your case would be provincial—supreme court proving well that informed consent was necessary. Why? The prosecution claimed it was not a poisonous injection;

[00:20:00]

therefore, I should have given these criminal charges within three months after the jab. But if it’s a poisonous injection—that’s our argument—we have 10 years. And the nanolipids on the packaging, that’s clear: nanolipids are toxins. Therefore, it’s a toxic injection. Therefore, you know, we will see where this goes now, but it’s at the Supreme Court of Lucerne.

Shawn Buckley

It’s curious, we had a witness this morning, a Dr. Shoemaker, that was telling us with regards to those lipid nanoparticles that basically a hundred percent of the animals, the mammals, would die in animal testing. So it basically didn’t even get to human testing until our current vaccine rollout.

Pascal Najadi

Yeah, I’m not an expert, but that’s what Professor Bhakdi told me about the nanolipids. Yes.

Shawn Buckley

Now, you’re also involved in a civil lawsuit in the state of New York.

Pascal Najadi

Yeah.

Shawn Buckley

Can you tell us kind of how that came about and what that case is about and how it might apply to us in Canada?

Pascal Najadi

Yes. Well, I got in touch with Ana McCarthy; she’s Panamanian American citizen. She’s not an attorney, she’s not a lawyer, but she studied law. And she has filed two active cases that are now active at the New York State Supreme Court in Manhattan. These are cases 101048/22, filed in November 2022, Ana McCarthy v. Pfizer, Inc. New York. And the case I’m involved is case 100197/23, filed on the 6th of March of this year, 2023, at the same court. Both cases are active. The justice assigned is Honourable Justice Lori Sattler.

These cases are very important. Why? Because Ana McCarthy argued, correctly, that actually President Biden’s national emergency and vaccination mandate of the 9th of September, 2021 in the United States—that was Order 3414042—was unconstitutional. Because the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled on the 13th of January ’22—remember that’s the same power like the White House, the U.S. Supreme Court—that under the First Amendment of the United States Constitution, there is exemption for religion. This was not communicated by Biden to his own military and his own people or all of the nations worldwide.

That means there is an exemption: it’s religion. Which means you don’t have to specify. If you’re on American territory or anywhere in the world, the injection—no matter which vaccine—is a U.S.-manufactured, U.S.-patented, U.S. company product, you can say the simple thing: “I don’t vaccinate. I am religious.” You don’t have to say which religion, you don’t have to say if you’re a priest or not, you just say, “I feel religious.” That’s fine.

Shawn Buckley

And I just want to slow this down. Because this is important, what you’re talking about. Now my understanding is—and this is from an earlier conversation—that by U.S. law, U.S. companies have to obey U.S. law, even abroad. So U.S. companies acting abroad, they can be subject to court proceedings in the United States.

Pascal Najadi

They are not allowed to violate U.S. law that prevails at home abroad. Very simple. The United States did not have a nationwide vax mandate which made a two-tiered society between vaxxed and unvaxxed. Yet in my example, Switzerland—I’m Swiss-British—or Britain, Pfizer came to our country, violated those rules by selling their product, making money in a two-tiered or apartheid market, vaxxed/unvaxxed. Already that as well is a violation because in the USA, everybody is the same in front of the law. Okay?

In Switzerland with the COVID law, not. Because if you’re not vaxxed, you cannot go to the restaurant. So it’s apartheid. If you’re vaxxed, you can, you could. They are not allowed to violate U.S. laws abroad.

[00:25:00]

It sounds simple, but it was a lot of work to file. And it only was possible because I’m Swiss and British; I could attach the criminal filing—not the procedure, just the criminal filing in Swiss precedent—to this case, 100197/23. And I was able to attach a ruling that files a loss in London in the administrative court in ’22 for frivolous marketing. I could attach that ruling as a British citizen onto the case that we submitted, or she submitted, into the New York State Supreme Court in Manhattan against Pfizer.

Shawn Buckley

Right. And again, I’m just going to try and explain this because I want people to understand. What you’re saying is that U.S. companies, so Pfizer acting in Canada is subject to U.S. law, not just Canadian law but, according to the U.S. system, U.S. law. So they can be held liable for violating U.S. law as they act in Canada and so that would require a religious exemption.

And it would also prevent a two-tiered system; you call it an apartheid system and that’s quite appropriate, actually: identity papers for the state to grant you privileges to access certain activities. So that’s basically why you believe this is an important case.

Pascal Najadi

It’s very important.

Shawn Buckley

Yeah, I just, I’m trying to make sure people understand what you’re saying.

Pascal Najadi

Yeah, sure. And don’t forget, people can also sue the U.S. president now because he did not communicate on the 13th of January 2022 that actually every human being on the planet has a right to say, under the First Amendment of the United States of America, “I don’t need to vaccinate.”

Shawn Buckley

Right.

Pascal Najadi

One more legal fact. On the 23rd of March of this year, President Biden lost in the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals of New Orleans. He lost the claim, his claim. He said, “I’m the CEO of the United States of America. Like a company CEO, I have the right to force-vaccinate my employees of the federal agencies.” Well, the judges ruled, “No U.S. president has such authority.” And they reaffirmed in their decision that on U.S. territory, vaccinations are an exclusive affair between the doctor and the patient. Been ruled on the 23rd of March, 2023, in the Appeals Court of New Orleans. He cannot go to the U.S. Supreme Court with this because he lost already in ’21 with the same question at the U.S. Supreme Court.

Shawn Buckley

Which is likely why he lost in New Orleans the second time around. So, okay. Now you were telling me about something happening in Germany regarding their military.

Pascal Najadi

Yeah, the German Ministry of Defence is still force-vaccinating their soldiers and officers. That is obviously in violation of what I just told you. Ana McCarthy has—and I witnessed this call—called the Ministry of Defence a few days ago and has made them aware that they are in violation by using, in our case, Pfizer U.S. product force-vaccinating soldiers, or under vaccination mandate. Ana McCarthy also has issued temporary restraining orders, has notified Pfizer—via their lawyers, Davis Polk in New York—and the judges in New York that the German military is still doing that.

We are now watching every day to see when the German military, the Bundeswehr, will stop this illegal activity.

Shawn Buckley

So it’s another example of using the U.S. courts to try and influence what is happening in other countries.

Pascal Najadi

Well, it is clear: it’s a violation. I mean, it’s not just trying to influence. We report them and say, “This is a violation.” This is serious. It’s not trying to—they have been notified. The TROs [temporary restraining orders] have been issued. They are in force.

We will see, but the German government cannot continue with this. Impossible.

Shawn Buckley

No. And you see, you’re describing a procedure that Canadians don’t appear to have attempted. We’ve had a lot of lawyers speak in frustration about our constitutional rights being overlooked during this in court cases, but we haven’t actually heard of attempting to use U.S. law to influence what happens in Canada.

[00:30:00]

And that’s why I’m kind of going over this again and again, just so that we get to understand that.

Now, you had kind of presented a presentation and I stopped you from reading it. Are there some points that you wanted to cover that I haven’t asked you about yet?

Pascal Najadi

No, it was just maybe my closing remarks, but I can wait. I’m here for questions, really.

I’ve said what I had to say, what I have done, attempted to do, and the Swiss criminal charges are now at the Swiss criminal court and the two Swiss doctors are in the Lucerne Supreme Court. I will update people—you, maybe—as soon as we get more information through my channels. My Twitter is @najadi4justice and I update and make legal statements there.

Shawn Buckley

And I’ll also indicate that some of the court proceedings that you’ve referred to we’ve entered as exhibits for the commissioners and the public to access, so that they have a better understanding of what you’re referring to [Exhibits OT-3, OT-3a to OT-3g].

I will open you up then to the commissioners, if they have any questions. We’re doing decently for time.

Pascal Najadi

Thank you.

Shawn Buckley

No, and the commissioners don’t have any questions.

So Pascal did you want to just share briefly some of the remarks that you had for closing?

Pascal Najadi

Yes, I would like to, if I may.

Shawn Buckley

Yes.

Pascal Najadi

I call this The Devil’s Rules Explained. But we are battling always that recognition that we have been duped. How do you get someone to admit that they have been duped and triple- injected or double-injected with an mRNA bioweapon substance? How do you get someone to admit that they have been duped into giving these injections to their own children? This psychological trap makes the duped the guardians of the dogma. These, the duped, have been placed in the position of having to lie to themselves in order to maintain psychological equilibrium and avoid harming themselves. This trap of pride makes the Machiavellianism of their crimes, they have been allowed to harm themselves.

This is—for the bad, evil people—the perfect genocide, is perpetrated through the victims themselves. But no, we will break this and obliterate these rules, with strong determination have begun to stop this genocide, promoted by truth. Thank you.

Shawn Buckley

Thank you, Pascal. And Pascal, we really appreciate you. I know you’re in a different time zone and you’ve been very kind to attend.

On behalf of the National Citizens Inquiry, I want to sincerely thank you for participating and sharing this important information with us.

Pascal Najadi

Thank you, sir, and thank you for the Commission and thank you to everybody. Greetings to Canada and all over the world, thank you.

[00:33:15]

Final Review and Approval: Jodi Bruhn, September 6, 2023.

The evidence offered in this transcript is a true and faithful record of witness testimony given during the National Citizens Inquiry (NCI) hearings. The transcript was prepared by members of a team of volunteers using an “intelligent verbatim” transcription method.

For further information on the transcription process, method, and team, see the NCI website:

About these Transcripts

Credentials

• Former Investment Banker with Merill Lynch International
• Director on the management board at Dresdner Bank AG, London

Summary

Mr. Pascal Najadi testified from Switzerland live.

He trusted in the advice of the Swiss Minister of Health and got vaccinated against COVID with 3 shots of the Pfizer vaccine. In October 2022 Pascal heard the testimony to the European Parliament by a Pfizer executive, that the vaccine had not been tested for transmission before it went to market. This was confirmed by the CDC over one year prior that had claimed vaccinated transmit the virus as easily as unvaccinated. However, the Swiss Government was telling all of the population that those that got vaccinated would not transmit COVID. So he chose to file criminal charges against Alain Berset for Abuse of Office. This case was escalated to the Federal level. This was rejected as apparently Alain Berset (the now President of Switzerland) apparently did say on a couple of occasions that “maybe” the vaccine would help prevent transmission. It has now been escalated to the Federal Criminal Court of Switzerland

He learned that the nanolipids used in mRNA vaccines are toxic, not for human use. He had his blood tested and has been told that he has likely lost 20 years of his life due to the, still active, spike protein in his blood. Failure to provide Informed Consent to him, he has filed criminal charges against two Swiss medical doctors as a result. This is now at the Supreme Court level.

He points to the illegalities of the U.S. companies not obeying U.S. laws abroad re: vaccine mandates. A recent important case that was decided on March 23, 2023 the US Supreme Court of Appeals in New Orleans: that the only parties that have a right to address vaccines are between the patient and the doctor.