Corporate Stranglehold on Global Citizens: Secret Supply Contracts
All national assets exposed, total immunity for entire "vaccine" supply chain, secret arbitration (ISDS)
Covid-19 gene therapy manufacturer supply contracts that were drafted, agreed and signed in secret have been available for over six months.
A source is available here: Telegram Group "Ehden's Files".
Ehden Biber first worked to verify a digital signature on the leaked Pfizer Brazil supply contract.
Biber’s substack is here for those who wish to catch up with his efforts and emerging views on these contracts.
Since then, more contracts with other nations and from other manufacturers have come to light. It should be noted that the Pfizer Brazil terms are, according to the testimony given to the Brazilian court by a Pfizer senior manager, Carlos Murillo, the same terms as agreed with 110 other countries (see “Carlos Murillo” section here).
Most recently, he has submitted the Pfizer contract to members of the House of Lords, UK, to raise awareness and question whether the contracts are by nature even legal. Watch this space, but don’t hold your breath.
Contract law may not be to many’s tastes or interest but in this case I believe that these contracts are essential mid morning reading because a) at that time of day you have the highest chance of remaining awake while reading them; b) they are a unique insight into the power balance between corporations and sovereign nation states.
Biber draws attention to four specfic sections of the Pfizer Brazil contract (reproduced in footnotes, below):
5.5 Purchaser Acknowledgement
8.1 Indemnification by the Purchaser
9.4 Waiver of Sovereign Immunity
9.5 Conditions Precedent to Supply
There is a further section that I feel is worth drawing attention to:
12.2 Arbitration
To summarily paraphrase the first four of the above sections in the contract:
The product’s components and constituent materials are still being studied. At the time of contract signing, long term effects and efficacy were unknown and whether there would be adverse effects was unknown.
The Purchaser (Brazilian government) has totally indemnified Pfizer and any party it states is anything to do with any aspect of the “vaccine” from any liability whatsoever. Any person holding positions in any of those parties past, present or future are covered by this indemnity.
The entirety of Brazil’s sovereign wealth and assets are totally exposed to Brazil’s liability to Pfizer under the contract i.e. should Brazil be found liable in any way, Pfizer could recover whatever amount it is determined to be owed through arbitration, in the form of any asset of Brazil.
Brazil will mantain “adequate statutory or regulatory authority and adequate funding appropriation to undertake and completely fulfil the indemnification obligations and provide adequate protection to Suppliers and all Indemnitees from liability for claims and all Losses arising out of or in connection with the Vaccine or its use” and keep doing so until the contract is fulfilled and possibly beyond, where “for clarity, the sufficiency of such statutory or regulatory requirements or funding appropriation shall be in [Pfizer’s] sole discretion.”
12.2 Arbitration
In the event of a breach of the contract by either party, the matter shall be settled via arbitration. The model of arbitration described is effectively that of Investor State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) that is present within some existing international trade deals and featured in the proposed Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) deal between the US and EU. The mechanics of this arbitration are as follows:
The nation state appoints an arbitrator (lawyer 1);
Pfizer appoints an arbitrator (lawyer 2);
Those two arbitrators together pick a third arbitrator (lawyer 3) as chair, in consultation with the nation state and Pfizer;
The three arbitrators conduct a completely secret arbitration in New York that remains secret even after arbitration, unless certain specified compelling circumstances are met which allow for a breach of that secrecy.
A relevant court may make a judgement of some form on the award the arbitrators decide upon.
The Investor State Dispute Settlement Navigator contains information about known pending and closed ISDS cases. There are 1104 known cases listed by the Navigator at time of writing.
I first learned about ISDS courtesy of David Malone, author of the Debt Generation and the www.golemxiv.co.uk blog. Malone’s personal study of the leaked TTIP documentation lead to his personal, one-man campaign to raise awareness of the content of TTIP and mechanisms such as ISDS contained within.
David Malone - "The Death of Democracy" a public talk on the TTIP
Malone’s full talk is worth viewing, but this embed is set to start at the point he outlines ISDS. Such is the power contained within the short boilerplate paragraphs of international law, one such arbitrator, Juan Fernández-Armesto, is quoted as saying:
When I wake up at night and think about arbitration, it never ceases to amaze me that sovereign states have agreed to investment arbitration at all [...] Three private individuals are entrusted with the power to review, without any restriction or appeal procedure, all actions of the government, all decisions of the courts, and all laws and regulations emanating from parliament.
Juan Fernández-Armesto, arbitrator from Spain
Since learning about ISDS etc, I have never met a single person who knew what ISDS was or the power of it. When I have explained it to people the vast majority refuse to believe the mechanism is real or that I have accurately described it.
What do these contracts tell us?
If your nation bought any Pfizer Covid-19 gene therapy product from Pfizer under the same terms as Brazil, it advance purchased a product:
with then zero proven efficacy;
whose ingredients were not fully tested or understood and remain so;
whose side effect and adverse event profile was literally entirely unknown and still remains largely unknown*;
for which there was never any long term data available and this remains the case.
Within the scope of this contract, Pfizer only warranted that “at the time of delivery, the Product complies in a material manner with the relevant Specifications”. In the absence of the detail of the Specifications, the express acceptance of a product with unknown efficacy means it could be possible that Pfizer is only contracted to supply a product made of the specified ingredients in a specified way (Good Manufacturing Process) that meets the Specification, but has no specified performance. On the other hand, the Specification could have contained performance criteria tied to trial results around efficacy, for example. Without the Specification we won't know.
Brazil has only 24 hours from time of receipt to exercise its ability to reject detectably defective product. This requires that Brazil has the ability to identify defects of any kind in that timeframe. What if some of those defects only manifest once administered in a subject? Therefore if Brazil can really only reject product on its limited ability to find product defects prior to administration within 24 hours e.g. damaged packaging, identifiable ingredient or consistency problems, cold chain breaches etc, this right to reject is extremely constrained.
All this for a new human medicine destined for global rollout throughout the entire human race.
This contract is nothing short of gazing into the abyss. Your nation state is beholden to a corporation. It may have bought medical product from it that is literally snake oil that your nation has little real ability or capacity to verify before it administers the product - irreversibly - throughout its entire population.
Should the Pfizer gene therapy turn out to be either snake oil or, worse, toxic snake oil, there's no comeback for the nation state and the citizen may pay an additional price: their health and independence or their life.
Now, why is mention of supply contracts of this magnitude of corporate power that affect the entire globe, that were leaked over six months ago, completely absent from almost all media?
*And may never be formally, fully causally admitted given the nature of the products’ mechanism of action; variable time for detectable corollary effects to manifest; potential nature and spectrum of those effects.
5.5 Purchaser Acknowledgement
Purchaser acknowledges that the Vaccine and materials related to the Vaccine, and their components and constituent materials are being rapidly developed due to the emergency circumstances of the COVID-19 pandemic and will continue to be studied after provision of the Vaccine to Purchaser under this Agreement. Purchaser further acknowledges that the long-term effects and efficacy of the Vaccine are not currently known and that there may be adverse effects of the Vaccine that are not currently known. Further, to the extent applicable, Purchaser acknowledges that the Product shall not be serialized.
8.1 Indemnification by Purchaser
Purchaser hereby agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless Pfizer, BioNTech, each of their Affiliates, contractors, sub-contractors, licensors, licensees, sub-licensees, distributors, contract manufacturers, services providers, clinical trial researchers, third parties to whom Pfizer or BioNTech or any of their respective Affiliates may directly or indirectly owe an indemnity based on the research, development, manufacture, distribution, commercialization or use of the Vaccine, and each of the officers, directors, employees and other agents and representatives, and the respective predecessors, successors and assigns of any of the foregoing (“Indemnitees”), from and against any and all suits, claims, actions, demands, losses, damages, liabilities, settlements, penalties, fines, costs and expenses (including, without limitation, reasonable attorneys’ and other counsels’ fees and other expenses of an investigation or litigation), whether sounding in contract, tort (delict), intellectual property, or any other theory, and whether legal, statutory, equitable or otherwise by any natural or legal person (collectively, “Losses”) caused by, arising out of, relating to, or resulting from the Vaccine, including but not limited to any stage of design, development, investigation, formulation, testing, clinical testing, manufacture, labeling, packaging, transport, storage, distribution, marketing, promotion, sale, purchase, licensing, donation, dispensing, prescribing, administration, provision, or use of the Vaccine, any information, instructions, advice or guidance provided by Pfizer and relating to the use of the Vaccine, or any processing or transfer of anyone’s personal information processed and transferred by the Purchaser to the Indemnitees.
9.4 Waiver of Sovereign Immunity
Purchaser, on behalf of itself and the State of Brazil, expressly and irrevocably waives any right of immunity which either it or its assets may have or acquire in the future (whether characterized as sovereign immunity or any other type of immunity), including any assets controlled by any agency, instrumentality, central bank, or monetary authority of Brazil, in respect of any arbitration pursuant to Section 12.2 (Arbitration) or any other legal procedure initiated to confirm or enforce any arbitral decision, order or award, or any settlement in connection with any arbitration pursuant to Section 12.2 (Arbitration), whether in Brazil or any other foreign jurisdiction, including but not limited to immunity against service of process, immunity of jurisdiction, or immunity against any judgment rendered by a court or tribunal, immunity against order to enforce the judgment, and immunity against precautionary seizure of any of its assets. Purchaser, on behalf of itself and the State of Brazil, further covenants and agrees not to assert any such immunity in any proceeding in connection with this Agreement. Purchaser, on behalf of itself and the State of Brazil, expressly and irrevocably submits to the jurisdiction of the courts of New York, or any other court of competent jurisdiction, for the purposes of enforcing any arbitral decision, order or award, or any settlement in connection with any arbitration pursuant to Section 12.2 and represents and warrants that the Person signing this Agreement on its behalf has actual authority to submit to such jurisdiction. Purchaser also expressly and irrevocably waives the application of any Law in any jurisdiction that may otherwise limit or cap its obligation to pay damages arising from or in connection with any Indemnified Claims. Purchaser represents and warrants that the Person signing this Agreement on its behalf has actual authority to waive such immunity and bind Purchaser and the State of Brazil to the limitations of liability and liability waivers set forth herein.
9.5 Conditions Precedent to Supply
Purchaser represents that it has and will continue to have adequate statutory or regulatory authority and adequate funding appropriation to undertake and completely fulfil the indemnification obligations and provide adequate protection to Suppliers and all Indemnitees from liability for claims and all Losses arising out of or in connection with the Vaccine or its use. Purchaser hereby covenants and acknowledges and agrees that a condition precedent to supply of the Product hereunder requires that Purchaser shall implement and maintain in effect such statutory or regulatory requirements or funding appropriation sufficient to meet its obligations in this Agreement and thereafter shall maintain such statutory and regulatory requirement and funding appropriation, each as applicable, for so long as necessary to meet all of Purchaser’s obligations under this Agreement, including, without limitation, any such obligations that, pursuant to Section 6.5, survive expiration or termination of this Agreement. For clarity, the sufficiency of such statutory or regulatory requirements or funding appropriation shall be in Suppliers’ sole discretion. Purchaser acknowledges that Suppliers’ supply of Product hereunder is in reliance (without any duty of investigation or confirmation by or on behalf of Pfizer or its Affiliates), inter alia, on Purchaser’s representations and covenants under this Section 9.5, Purchaser implementing and maintaining in effect the requirements and funding appropriation policy described in this Section 9.5 and the other representations and warranties made by Purchaser under this Agreement.
12.2 Arbitration
Any dispute, controversy, or claim arising out of, relating to, or in connection with this Agreement, including with respect to the formation, applicability, breach, termination, validity or enforceability thereof, or relating to arbitrability or the scope and application of this Section 12.2 (Arbitration), shall be finally resolved by arbitration. The arbitration will be at law and shall be conducted by three arbitrators, in accordance with the Rules of Arbitration of the International Court of Arbitration of the International Chamber of Commerce (“ICC”). The claimant shall nominate an arbitrator in its request for arbitration. The respondent shall nominate an arbitrator within thirty (30) days of the receipt of the request for arbitration. The two (2) arbitrators nominated by the Parties shall nominate a third arbitrator, in consultation with the Parties, within thirty (30) days after the confirmation of the later-nominated arbitrator. The third arbitrator shall act as chair of the tribunal. If any of the three (3) arbitrators are not nominated within the time prescribed above, then the ICC shall appoint the arbitrator(s). The seat of the arbitration shall be New York, New York, USA and it shall be conducted in the English language. The Parties undertake to maintain confidentiality as to all aspects of the arbitration, including its existence, content and result, and as to all submissions, correspondence and evidence relating to the arbitration proceedings. The foregoing sentence shall survive the termination of the arbitral proceedings. Notwithstanding the foregoing, a Party may disclose information relating to the arbitration proceedings to the extent that disclosure is required to protect or pursue a legal right related to the arbitration; enforce or challenge an award in bona fide legal proceedings; respond to a bona compulsory order or request for information of a governmental or regulatory body; make a disclosure required by securities Laws, rules of a securities exchange, or other similar Laws,regulations, or rules; or seek legal, accounting, or other professional services. The costs of the arbitration, including, without limitation, the Parties’ reasonable legal fees, shall be borne by the unsuccessful Party or Parties. However, the arbitral tribunal may apportion such costs between the Parties if it determines that apportionment is reasonable, taking into account the circumstances of the case. The arbitration award shall be final and binding on the Parties, and the Parties undertake to carry out any award without delay. Judgment upon the award may be entered by any court having jurisdiction of the award or having jurisdiction over the relevant Party or its assets.