Menu Close

Last 4 May, the hearing took place of the summary proceedings of Stichting Stop5GNL against the Dutch State. After months of preparation a moment we have been living towards.

It was an exciting day. All compliments to the attorneys Thom Beukers and Xander Wynands who have stuck their teeth into this matter and made a powerful plea.

The State’s defense contained little news. They keep repeating that there is no evidence that exposure to radiation is harmful under the exposure guidelines and mention for their favorable studies. What they accuse us of.

On the other hand, however, there are thousands of peer-reviewed studies from reputable research institutes that show the opposite and warn of serious damage, such as changes in dna, cancer and neurological disorders. We have extensively highlighted these in the subpoena and pleadings. It is therefore clear that there is no consensus. And that clearly requires the application of the precautionary principle.

Moreover, the State ignores reports from institutes on which they generally rely that specifically state that it is unknown what the consequences of 5G are and that exposure to it can lead to ‘unintended biological consequences’.

‘You don’t gamble with public health”, states lawyer Thom Beukers on behalf of Stop5GNL in the District Court of The Hague. The foundation is claiming in summary proceedings a ban on 5G technology, because it has not been established that this new standard for mobile communication is safe. Beukers calls the construction of 5G an experiment. “If that gamble goes wrong, it has potentially serious consequences.” (article in Trouw)

Caution is especially appropriate here because – if there is full coverage of 5G we don’t have the choice of being exposed to it. A comparison with drugs is made in the pleading. These are extensively tested before introduction.

“You don’t gamble with public health”, says lawyer Thom Beukers on behalf of Stop5GNL in the District Court of The Hague. The foundation is claiming in summary proceedings a ban on 5G technology, because it has not been established that this new standard for mobile communication is safe. Beukers calls the construction of 5G an experiment. “If that gamble goes wrong, it has potentially serious consequences.” (article in the Telegraph)” (article in Trouw)

Caution is especially appropriate here because – if there is full coverage of 5G we don’t have the choice of being exposed to it. A comparison with drugs is made in the pleading. These are extensively tested before introduction.

“And patients even have a choice of whether or not to take a new drug. With 5G it will be different, if it’s up to the state. With a nationwide network you get a forced exposure.” (article in the Telegraph)” (article in de Telegraaf)