Klaus Schwab Sued for Answers About 4th Industrial Revolution
First is the full letter to the court sent by interestofjustice.substack.com asking questions to Klaus about his Fourth Industrial Revolution changing what it means to be human.
Below that is the Constitutional Chambers response denying the right to get answers from Klaus & WEF, which ignores the international law that states all people have the right to communicate with international organizations. The Constitutional Chamber had the duty to apply international law and flat refused.
This is not a bad ruling because there are Supreme Court rulings that show which action is most appropriate on how to proceed to waive the WEF and WHO immunity in a different court.
The very important letter to Klaus Schwab, WEF during Davos 2023:
January 18, 2023
Dear Klaus Schwab WEF,
We saw your speech live this morning regarding inclusivity and cooperation with all in order to restore trust in a fragmented world. It is our understanding that the World Economic Forum is meeting in Davos this week to discuss enormous changes to the societal structure under SDG, Agenda 2030, Digital ID, Digital for Freedom initiative, etc. The changes to all of society are arising from the presumption that there is a climate emergency, which so far is a presumption that is not settled fact and is highly contentious among global climate experts.
This morning you mentioned issues such as genetics and extinction level issues affecting large populations, among various other important issues. Our organization has a question about the fourth industrial revolution that only yourself would be able to answer.
We saw an interview with you explaining that “the Fourth Industrial Revolution will not change what you are doing, it will change YOU. Take for instance a genetic editing, it will change what it means to be a human.” You further went on to wisely reflect that the situation may raise many ethical and even legal issues.
In order to ensure that the World Economic Forums promise of inclusiveness is not wholly illusory, we kindly request that in this week’s Davos meeting you ask your colleagues for, and provide the public with, the concrete science behind your presumptions of a climate emergency that is so grave, it requires sweeping reforms of the entire society and the way commerce is handled globally.
Furthermore, we ask that you, Klaus Schwab, to kindly explain in detail exactly which ethical and legal questions might be raised, and where does the WEF see gaps in the law that should be addressed in the Fourth Industrial Revolution?
Thank you for your time and the welcoming remarks. We take your offer to defragment the world through inclusion very seriously and look forward to your detailed response. We think your answering these questions will be the first step toward true inclusiveness, equity and defragmenting the world back into a cohesive orderly functioning society that will benefit everyone equally.
Respectfully, Dustin Bryce, Interest of Justice
The letter to the Constitutional Chamber to make Klaus respond:
Right of response action august 20, 2023
Constitutional Chamber Four Right of Response
Dear Judge,
Our freedoms are restricted at the national level and International level. Klaus Schwab and the World Economic Forum have produced statements in which affect petitioners rights as well as the public interest. Defendant was explaining that “the Fourth Industrial Revolution will not change what you are doing, it will change YOU. Take for instance a genetic editing, it will change what it means to be a human.”
Klaus further went on to wisely reflect that the situation may raise many ethical and even legal issues.
Plaintiffs would like to know which legal issues he is referring to as well as the other pertinent questions and statements to plaintiffs’ interests and the entire international community interests as stated within the letter plaintiffs mailed.
Because president Alvarado publicly advocates for the fourth industrial revolution whilst being both President and also a representative of the world Economic Forum, Alvarado having been educated directly under Klaus Schwab, who came to Costa Rica and gave President Alvarado a crystal.
At that time there was a discussion which is verbatim as follows:
Klauss Schwab: “You have a young population, you have a relatively well educated population. You can use the fourth industrial revolution to create, let’s say, FastTrack course, for your country.”
Carlos Alvarado: “My commitment will be to add value as part of the young leaders’ initiative.”
Klauss Schwab: “This is Merkel, Tony Blair. Say we’re all, even President Putin, say we’re all young global leaders before. So if I take you, if I take Chancellor Coates and the New Zealand Prime Minister three youngest leaders of governments are here. So I know you have many beautiful elements in your country that characterizes diversity. And at the same time, everything goes up for……. Thank you. Thank you very much.”
Costa Rica is also part of OECD who champions Klaus Schwab’s “invention” of a fourth industrial revolution which will clearly affect Costa Rica’s finances, laws and ethics.
Klaus Schwab boasts publicly about penetrating the cabinets of nations to further his agendas and Klaus is the man who coined the term “fourth Industrial Revolution” which he defines as a merger of the “biological, digital and physical” worlds, which sounds like trans-humanism.
Klaus Schwab has many times said very bizarre statements regarding his idea that everyone will have a chip in their head and he will be able to read their consciousness, as well as “you will own nothing and be happy“.
Gene editing is known to allow for lipid technology which merges the digital, biological and physical world and “under the skin surveillance“.
Klaus Schwabs advisor says: “A good two-way communication system, direct communication system, between brains and computers – this is kind of the water shed moment. Once you have a good two-way, nobody has any idea what occurs after that. If you have a good two-way communication system, directly between computers, it also means you can connect several brains together, you have an inter-brain net, because it’s the same system, the same communication system and nobody has any idea what this means for aspects like identity”. “Who am I, when I can access directly the brain of another person?”
Petitioners wonder if the fourth industrial revolution and gene editing, which will affect what it means to be human and our identities involves connecting brains together, reading people’s consciousness or two–way communications that may affect basic fundamental human rights such as privacy and free will, among all of the other questions we asked which were never answered.
The only person who has personal knowledge is Klaus Schwab and he was personally requested to answer as the head of WEF and the inventor of the fourth industrial revolution which is the subject matter to petitioners’ request.
Respondent has refused to respond to our request for information from good faith, for which it is violating article 12 (a, b, c, d, e) of the law that regulates the right of petition, which entitles the petitioner to protection jurisdiction of this court. Citizens have the right to petition according to article 27 of the Costa Rican Constitution and receiving a truthful answer is part of the right to life and freedom, as well as participation.
Constitutional Jurisdiction Act of the Supreme Chamber:
Article 1. The purpose of this law is to regulate constitutional jurisdiction, the purpose of which is to guarantee the supremacy of constitutional norms and principles and of International or Community Law in force in the Republic, its uniform interpretation and application, as well as fundamental rights and freedoms. enshrined in the Constitution or in the international human rights instruments in force in Costa Rica.
Article 2. It corresponds specifically to the constitutional jurisdiction:
a) Guarantee, through habeas corpus and Amparo remedies, the rights and freedoms enshrined in the political Constitution and the human rights recognized by International Law in force in Costa Rica.
c) Resolve conflicts of jurisdiction between the State Powers, including the Supreme Court of Elections, and those of constitutional jurisdiction between them and the Office of the Comptroller General of the Republic, municipalities, decentralized entities and other persons governed by Public Law.
Public law of administration regarding constitutional right to protection, International Public servants: Article 57. The Amparo remedy will also be granted against the actions or omissions of subjects of Private Law, when they act or must act in the exercise of public functions or powers, or are, in law or in fact, in a position of power. against which the common jurisdictional remedies are clearly insufficient or late to guarantee the rights or fundamental freedoms referred to in article 2, paragraph a), of this law.
Article 59. The appeal will be directed against the alleged author of the grievance, if he is a natural person in his individual condition; in the case of a legal entity, against its legal representative; and if it belongs to an organized company, group or community, against its apparent representative or the person responsible for it.
Petitioners affirm under the penalty of perjury the foregoing is true and correct according to law.
The court says WEF is untouchable and has immunity from basic questioning so they DENIED petitioners’ right to ask Klaus!
Read the courts reason and full judgement below:
In writing incorporated into the digital file at 4:33 p.m. on 20 August 2023, the appellants file an appeal for protection and state what is next: that Klaus Schwab and the World Economic Forum have made statements that affect both the rights of the plaintiffs and the interest of the public. They point out that the defendant explained that “the Fourth Revolution Industrial won’t change what you’re doing, it will change YOU. For example, the Genetic editing will change what it means to be human.” They add that Klaus continued to reflect that the situation may raise many questions ethical and even legal. They indicate that they would like to know what legal issues are refers, as well as other issues and statements relevant to the interests of the plaintiffs and the entire international community. They allege that by note dated January 18, 2023, addressed to Klaus Schwab, President of the World Economic Forum Organization (which is attached as evidence) requested information from their interest; however, they claim that they have not received a response. They request the appellants that the appeal be declared admissible, with the consequences of law.
Article 9 of the Law of Constitutional Jurisdiction empowers the Chamber to reject outright or in substance, at any time, even from its presentation, any management that is presented to your knowledge that turns out to be manifestly inadmissible, or when it considers that there are elements of judgment sufficient to reject it, or that it is the simple reiteration or reproduction of an equal or similar previous management rejected.
Written by Judge Castillo Víquez; considering:
- – OBJECT OF THE APPEAL. The appellants indicate that by note dated January 18, 2023, addressed to Klaus Schwab, President of the Forum World Economic Forum, requested information of interest; however, they accuse who have not received a response.
- – ON THE RIGHT OF PETITION AND PROMPT RESOLUTION. In the present case, having analyzed the allegations of the party appellant, it is necessary to indicate that the right to petition and prompt resolution, guaranteed in article 27 of the political Constitution, it can only be exercised before the different Public Administrations or entities in the exercise of public powers, since it consists of the faculty that every citizen has to write to any public official or official entity in order to present a matter of interest to you, and is complemented by the guarantee of obtaining prompt resolution, without the latter meaning that a response must be given favorable to their interests. In this sense, ordinal 27 of the political Constitution and paragraphs 2 and 3 of the Law on the Regulation of the Right to Petition No. 9097, establish the following:
“Article 27. Freedom of petition is guaranteed, personal or collective, before any public official or official entity, and the right to obtain a prompt resolution.”
“Article 2. Recipients. The right to petition may be exercised before any institution, public administration or public authority, both in the centralized sector as decentralized from the State, as well as those public entities, with legal personality and capacity of public and private law, regarding of the matters of its competence, whatever the scope institutional, territorial or functional of this.”
In addition, the right to petition before subjects of private law “will apply when they carry out any activity of public interest, manage and / or manage public funds or exercise any public power in a manner temporary or permanent.”
III. – ON THE INADMISSIBILITY OF THIS APPEAL. In the sub lite, on the other hand, the request that interests us was made to the World Economic Forum, which is not a Public Administration of the country, but an international organization. Regarding international organizations, in ruling No. 2007011690 At 10:31 a.m. on August 17, 2007, the Court declared the following:
“Of the document filing the appeal and the documentary evidence provided from the file, it appears that the respondent – Workshop Moderator of the German Cooperation Agency – is an international organization whose proceedings are removed from the jurisdiction of this Chamber, so that can be considered a passive subject in an appeal for protection. In Consequently, the appeal filed is inadmissible and so is declared.”
To which can be added what was said in ruling No. 2010012220 of the 5:43 p.m. on July 20, 2010, on a case similar to the one presented here:
“In this case, the plaintiff claims the alleged lack of response to the request for copies of the minutes of the agreements of the Board of Directors of COCESNA. This body was created by the Constitutive Agreement of the Central American Corporation of Air Navigation Services, subscribed through the countries of Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras and Nicaragua, approved by law number 3240 of November 20, 1963. Consequently, it is a legal person under international law public. Pursuant to article 2 of the Constitutive Agreement, COCESNA has exclusive rights over the provision of air traffic services, aeronautical telecommunications and radio aids for air navigation in the territories of the Contracting Parties. However, article 2 of the law number 3240, indicates that prior authorization from the Executive Branch, persons provide services similar to those provided by the Corporation Central American Air Navigation Services. In any case, the Section 23 of the Constitutive Agreement provides that COCESNA, for the purposes of achieve your financial balance, you can set rates and conditions of the fees that users of their services should pay; likewise, to request of the Corporation, the Contracting Parties must help to make effective payment of such rights. In a similar way to what was stated in the jurisprudential precedent cited above, as a subject of law International, COCESNA is the owner of the right established in section 24 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, approved by law number 3394 of September 24, 1964, according to which the files and Mission documents are always inviolable, wherever they are found.
It needs to be noted, of course, that such privilege is granted for the exercise of the functions that correspond to the mission in accordance with International Law. In the specific case, it is clear that the actuated party, since it is a person of public international law, is not obliged to provide any information and is protected, which does not prevent it from Contracting Parties, a management in that sense can be formulated. Relevant to the Air Navigation Directorate of the General Directorate of Aviation Civil of Costa Rica, the mere fact that through official letter number 05/09 of February 28, 2009, it has communicated to the protected party the approved rates by COCESNA for its services as of May 2009, does not imply anything more than helping to make your payment effective, as provided by the Article 23 of the Constitutive Agreement of COCESNA. As for the rest, the file does not show that the plaintiff had requested in writing from the Central American Corporation of Air Navigation Services or to the Directorate of Air Navigation of the General Directorate of Civil Aviation of Costa Rica any explanation regarding the increase in rates ordered by the first.”
Therefore, not only can this Court not process an amparo against the World Economic Forum because it is an international organization, but, as far as substantial, the constitutional provisions are not applicable to it either contained in articles 27 or 30 of the political Constitution, which are referred to the right to information of public interest that people have in relation to public entities of the Costa Rican State, understood as those who act in exercise of imperial powers and who, for that reason, can – and should – be subjected to the necessary public scrutiny, nor paragraph 41 of the Charter Fundamental, which seeks speed in the processing of matters before the Administration of Justice or the different Public Administrations of the country, avoiding unjustified delays. Consequently, the appeal is inadmissible and thus declared.
Therefore:
The appeal is rejected outright.
Interestofjustice.substack.com will refile under the international right to communicate with international orgs and will go to the Administrative Contentious Court.
“It should be noted, of course, that such privilege is granted for the exercise of the functions that correspond to the mission in accordance with International Law.”
WHAT mission is the WEF on???
Is economic overlordship of Earth REALLY a “mission”?
Maybe the Administrative Contentious court could elaborate WHY the immunity should be granted, and if no one can explain it, perhaps it is time to revoke or waive their diplomatic immunity.
Petitioners want the immunity waived to make the WEF answer what they are doing trying to connect us all to the Matrix and usher in a merger of biological, physical and digital worlds.
We the people are not up to speed, and yet these policies affect us all.
Klaus, can’t you just sit down and TALK to the general public about your wild vision of a Fourth Industrial Revolution with consciousness reading and transhumanism?
Many people are not aware that Interest of Justice (IOJ) is “partner” with WHO, FDA, HHS OGA, etc as an “interested stakeholder”. WEF is a bunch of snobs and won’t allow meaningful participation with IOJ. Petitioners from IOJ do intend to break through to our governments to ditch WEF & WHO using science diplomacy and if anyone can do it, IOJ can because they are already recognized as respected partners with governments and international organizations that make health policy.
Moreover, Interest of Justice has a hearing on November 9, 2023 to take the covid vaccines off the market for serious undue experimentation, and IOJ intends to keep going all the way to stop the WEF-WHO and their captured regulators such as FDA, or at least to make our nations to PROHIBIT the “diplomatically immune” international organizations in the public interest. They are NOT immune. They waived immunity by violating ethics and they should be properly sued in the right court with jurisdiction to handle this worldwide genocide.
Why the massive secrecy?
yogaesoteric
November 6, 2023