Inga Bite, president of the ECPM Advisory Council, presented ECPM and described its position at the European level. She emphasized ECPM is the only European political party explicitly defending Christian values and that it seeks to guide the EU back to the Biblical values it was founded on, most notably the value of human dignity. Ms. Bite reiterated ECPM’s support for the Oviedo Convention and its condemnation of discrimination of those who refused vaccination during the Covid-19 pandemic. She asserted that the EU overstepped its authority during the pandemic, compromising the rights and freedom of individuals.

Jūlija Stepanenko, president of Suverēnā Vara, shared her experiences with court cases involving unvaccinated employees. As the only member of the Latvian parliament banned from participating in online sessions, she sought to assist numerous individuals who lost their jobs for refusing vaccination. She argued that any law imposed by the state must not carry risks of health damage or death.

Dāvids Kļaviņš discussed the phases of Covid-19 policies: initial panic, societal division over vaccines, and restrictions on questioning their effectiveness. The Covid-19 politics resulted in societal, psychological and economic damage while the pharmaceutical industry financially thrived, he assessed. Kļaviņš concluded with a call for prudence in future global health crises.

MEP Ondřej Dostál gave a speech on the lessons learned from the Covid-19 pandemic. He advocated for upholding traditional bioethical values, such as human autonomy and the right to choose. As a lawyer specialized in healthcare, he explained that these values can only be overridden in cases of necessity or urgency subject to delicate procedures to assess proportionality. During the Covid-19 pandemic, these principles were disregarded and not applied and the measures taken were not proportional and violated human rights. Regarding vaccinations, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) ruled in the Vavřička case that only vaccines that create herd immunity can be made mandatory. However, there is no conclusive evidence that Covid-19 vaccines led to herd immunity. The mandatory vaccination of individuals who had already recovered from Covid-19 was a particular violation of their human rights.

Jean-Frédéric Poisson discussed France’s experience during the Covid-19 pandemic and the societal and economic consequences of the measures taken by the French authorities. He criticized the lack of transparency in the healthcare decision-making during the pandemic. He then addressed the World Health Organization (WHO) and Pandemic Agreement arguing the current text of the Agreement contains an imbalance in power to declare pandemics and impose health care policies, potentially undermining national autonomy and sovereignty. He urged national parliaments not to ratify the Agreement. Mr. Poisson concluded by acknowledging the WHO’s beneficial contributions to global health care, particularly in developing countries. However, he advised caution regarding certain WHO programs that do not align with Christian values, for example campaigns on birth control and sexual education.

Dr. Edgars Mednis, a pediatric homeopathic doctor, shared his perspective on the autonomy of doctors during the pandemic. He defended the right of physicians to make individualized treatment decisions for their patients. “Doctors are often given guidelines that do not suit everyone, and they must have the freedom to determine the best course of action for each patient.”

Lawyer and social worker Agita Galiņa contributed to the conference by discussing the mRNA technology used in the Covid-19 vaccines. She stated that mRNA technology should be adequately regulated and supervised so that its safety is guaranteed and prevent any potential harm.

The conference concluded with a Q&A session.