Judge Rejects All Claims Virus Truth | Inland

The court finds that it has not been made plausible that Virus Truth has an interest in the requested information. In some cases the description is also “too vague.” Certain documents that the action group led by Willem Engel had requested are also not available at all by the State and the National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM). The latter applies, for example, to reports on so-called PCR tests, which are used to detect the virus. The group wants to know how reliable the corona test is exactly.

Virus Truth had also requested minutes from the Outbreak Management Team (OMT), which includes independent health experts who advise the cabinet. The final advice is invariably made public and that is sufficient, the judge believes. It agrees with the State’s argument that OMT members should be able to discuss freely with each other. Confidentiality then outweighs Virus Truth’s importance of full disclosure.

Wob

The court also points out that the Government Information (Public Access) Act states that the government is not obliged to disclose ‘personal policy views during internal consultations’.

Virus truth does not agree with the government’s corona measures, which, according to the protest group, violate the fundamental rights of citizens too much. In an attempt to get the measures off the table, the group previously went to the court in The Hague, which ruled that the government was indeed authorized to set rules and regulations to get the virus under control. The judge in Utrecht takes this earlier judgment into account.

Soil procedure

The information that Virus Truth hoped to obtain with the preliminary relief proceedings in Utrecht, the protest group wanted to use in a separate lawsuit. In this so-called substantive proceedings, the group hopes to get the judge and have the corona measures declared illegal.

–