Debunking Of Bogus, Frivolous, Dishonest, Ridiculous, Bad-Faith Complaint By Christian Oesch



Let's clear the air about something: I have a solid argument and evidence, including direct, circumstantial, and propensity, to allege that Oesch's complaint is abusive, bogus, frivolous, bad-faith, malicious, and dishonest. I absolutely believe this opinion to be true based on a host of evidentiary facts. 

Oesch made his false allegation, lies and insults on multiple public forums, in order to try to discredit me, in order to disacrd my investigative report about him which debunks his lies and fake claims about his background etc. -- so making this response public is absolutely appropriate. 

This document presents arguments, including excerpts from my official filing, that the 9 January 2023 email I sent to a small group of people was absolutely lawful, truthful, and contained facts and sincere opinions which are protected by law, and the audience was absolutely appropriate given in the days that led to that I received multiple emails that contained messages from Oesch where he had defamed and insulted me in order to discredit my investigative report. The recepients were listed in one of those emails I got which made my head steam. Also, everything I said in that email pertained to Oesch's public statements and actions. And Oesch is a public figure. 

Therefore, his complaint is completely bogus, and there is solid reason to believe he knew it was bogus. So he padded it with a bunch of lies and fake claims and ficticious plot-line, and he intentionally omitted key facts. So it's a TOTAL MOCKERY OF THE SWISS JUSTICE SYSTEM, a shot in the dark to hope he ends up with a racist prosecutor who would buy his lies. 



27 February 2023 

I researched Christian Oesch's public fake claims and disruptive, egotistic, strange actions after he interjected himself in my high-profile project to have a piece of the action, and he didn't coordinate with me, and he took over the most critical phase, and he incompetently messed it up, and he lied and insulted me when I called him out. 

The more I looked the more I found about his dodgy past -- and he didn't seem to have changed his behavior after going back to his native country, Switzerland, after a 20+ year sojourn in the USA where he did lots of bad things like selling "energized" sugar-water as cancer treatment, being involved in a ponzi scheme, setting up numerous shell companies / tax schemes, etc. -- his sugar water sold as cancer treatment joint got shut down by FDA's Criminal Investigations Division some months after Oesch left the company he was a CEO of for many years.  The Ponzi Scheme was shut down by US Federal Government law enforcement, and they forfeited his money. He sued the judge, secret service, prosecutor for around $30,000,000,000,000 which got thrown out of court with the judge saying Oesch's arguments "deteriorated into ramblings" in his Sovereign Citizen style. 

The story is long and an interesting read in how someone fakes so many things. He faked his background, his jobs, his competences, etc. -- back in Switzerland he said some big lies to Swiss public that are all well documented and debunked in my investigative report about him. 

He had plenty of chances to contest the contents of the report but he never was able to challenge any of the content because of the high quality level of the research.

Instead he started a smear campaign against me, in order to damage my reputation, in order to discard my research report about him.

He took that ridiculous smear campaign to a new level when he filed a bogus defamation complaint against me which contained lies, omission of key facts, a fake irrational plot-line, and no legal standing. 

He did a mass campaign advertising that he filed that complaint against me -- on Telegram, LinkedIn, and his website which makes the matter searchable by internet search engines. 

Therefore, it is absolutely fair, that I hereby publish my answer to his bogus, dishonest complaint, so as to clear my name when someone comes across his announcement of his (bogus) complaint. 

So here it is: 


Oesch's frivolous, bogus, dishonest complaint comprised of only one alleged violation of law which was absolutely not a violation of law: An email I sent on 9 January 2023. My email said nothing new that wasn't in the investigative report I wrote which was published a couple of years ago, and Oesch received a copy and couldn't contest any of the content because of the high quality and diligent research I put into it. So instead he chose the path of trying to damage my reputation with lies so in his mind, he can discredit my investigative report. It seems that was one of several bad reasons he filed the complaint.

So knowing he has a bogus case, he padded with irrelevant things that are totally outside the Statute of Limitation -- e.g. he whined about me mentioning the fact in my video to Swiss Federal Council, that Oesch disrupted my project with Professor Hardell and lied about it. That's a fact!! He's claiming it was defamatory, and doing so way past the deadline. I don't think he's so unintelligent to know what I sad was NOT defamatory. But he used that bad argument just to pad his frivolous complain.

And he padded it with other irrelevant things -- the investigative report itself -- Duh! Two years ago he could have filed a complained, and he would have lost because I had two Swiss lawyers go through the report, before publication, to make sure his rights are not violated. 

And he omitted key facts -- like the fact that he sent two group emails lying about me, in the days and weeks preceding my email I sent -- and the email I sent was a response to his lies about me -- lies he had said again, to try to discredit my report about his own life, past, which he doesn't seem to like -- but he is not leaving it behind -- he's lying to the public about it -- even recently mischaracterized his past to a ultra right wing extremist TV channel that's pro-Putin (when Oesch gave a talk called Switzerland is a sham democracy). 

When he lies to the public, that he's a biotech executive or biotech consultant or that I wrote the investigative report because (God forbid) I'm jealous of him (big joke!!) and other such nonsense, then his lies will get called out. He doesn't like it but that's how it is when you set yourself up as a public figure and you make fake public claims. 

He also omitted other key facts, like what led to me investigating his past. He lied and said he had no idea - that it was an arbitrary aversion -- no it wasn't! I investigated him because he disrupted my project and lied to my activist team and lied to the public about his past, and big fat other lies, and lied about his self-imposed minimal last minute hijacking of the most important phase of my project which he incompetently messed up and then went on the air in 4 languages and lied to the public saying he had coordinated the project, blah blah -- all lies. 

So his entire plot line in the complaint was bogus. I didn't target his contacts in the email I sent -- I used the emails that were in an email I received that included an email from Oesch where he lies about me -- and everything I said was related to his public words and actions.

By the end of his complaint his arguments deteriorated into ramblings, just as a judge said in the US when Oesch filed a crazy lawsuit against justice authorities for about $30,000,000,000,000, and Oesch lost the case. 

Oesch even lied to the prosecutor in the complaint. He claimed that UBI forcing SRF to remove content was because of Oesch's complaint 😂😂😂 -- BIG FAT LIE. I got a letter from UBI that debunked yet another Oesch lie !! 

He also lied saying I said his ONLY motives in activism are ego and money while I said ULTERIOR not ONLY. HUGE difference!!  Even if I had said only -- that would have been my opinion and assessment of motive is always subjective, and a protected opinion. 

That's how bad his complaint was. 


My email did not say anything that's not already in the investigative report.  Oesch lied in his complaint that I said his "ONLY" motives are financial and egotistic glory which is not what I said. I said ULTERIOR not ONLY. He also lied that I said that in relation to his 5G activism but I said activism in general. There are so much evidence that Oesch has shown ulterior motives in his activism. From the first time I met him (unfortunately I met him two times in my entire life -- two too many times) he was showing ulterior motives, trying to win credibility so he can push his woowoo unscientific EMF feel-good gadgets. 

He's had ulterior motives when he was telling people to take their money and life saving out of the bank and store it in safes they can buy from him at a discount! 

He's had ulterior motives when he sends an email to activists with a link to a PAID self-promotion "recognition" of himself as a business leader, and refers to his experience pushing BX Protocol scam cancer drug, etc. -- his desire for people to think he's a very successful business leader, biotech executive, etc., is an ulterior motive -- he's not doing this selflessly. There's no mystery that more recognition can lead to more people who would donate money to him or buy whatever he's selling. 

Oesch lying to the prosecutor about his (non existent) role in the UBI/SRF issue could only have one reason: trying to impress the prosecutor to think Oesch is what he is not -- to think of him, wow, as the man who got UBI to force SRF to get content deleted. Well it my mostly my work and some work from Rebekka Meier and Oesch had nothing to do with it. This recurring theme of Oesch trying to take credit for other people's work to me seems like an egotistic problem, a desire to shine, get egotistic glory, to be thought of as the hero -- and that's ok if he did the work but in multiple occasions Oesch has just bluntly called other people's work as his own -- I'm calling it egotistic motive but much worse terms can be used to describe such behavior.   

Anyway, assessment of someone's motives is a subjective matter, an opinion, and cannot be defamatory when it's a reasonable opinion, and mine absolutely is.

Evidence: Letter from UBI confirming Oesch was NOT a party in the SRF case as he claims to be. Evidence: Chapter "Glory By Association" in the investigative report. 

Evidence: ISOBL paid "recognition" section in the investigative report.

Evidence: Sections on motives in the answer to Oesch's bogus complaint

My References

Comments from real people I have dealt with:

EXCERPTS FROM MY FILING (without visuals and pictures which would be too labor intensive to add to this page)


"Commonwealths fall and perish when good citizens cannot be distinguished from bad." ~ Antisthenes (444-371 B.C.)

“I wish you much strength and trust in God to get through this time well. The lie is a short sprinter and the truth is a long distance runner. I pray for you Reza” ~ Oesch’s former colleagues who was mistreated by Oesch.


...<intro> ...



You claim that Mr. Ganjavi called you a liar. You have not provided any evidence of that. Where is your evidence? He has said that you have lied, but there’s no evidence that he called you a liar, which is different. I've provided many reasons why his complaint is abusive and in bad-faith and the public treasury should not foot that bill.

Mr. Ganjavi’s statement in the email he sent on 9 January 2023 referred to your “ulterior” motives. You claim he said “only” motives. Do you have an evidence of that?

You claim that Mr. Ganjavi purportedly developed an aversion towards you for reasons that you did not know (therefore it was purportedly arbitrary). Do you recall Mr. Ganjavi bringing to your attention the issues with you not having coordinated your participation in his project with him – that you taking false credit for what you had not done, which were later deleted from your public statements in different languages? Do you recall telling Mr. Ganjavi’s mailing list of activists that US Government defrauded you and stole $4,200,000 of your money, etc. which all turned out to be lies? Do you recall Mr. Ganjavi’s email of 11 January 2020 to you where he communicated some of the issues with you and you responded by insulting him? Weren’t these reasons for Mr. Ganjavi’s “aversion” which caused him to start investigating your background? That means you lied to the prosecutor in your complaint.

Your story collide. Was it an aversion, jealousy, or <Oesch-BS-snipped> that caused Mr. Ganjavi to research your background? (Right Answer: none of the above – it was Oesch’s own dishonest, malicious actions, words).


Swiss Citizen

Academics: Three university degrees (computer science, philosophy, business administration), with high honors, multiple scholastic honor societies.

IT Expert: Decades as IT professional, project/program manager, business analyst, solution architect, software engineer. "Imported" to Switzerland as IT expert. Served top Swiss banks, Swiss Federal Government, Swiss multi-nationals, UN, many more. See:



Musician, Record Producer: Two best-selling CDs produced in Canton Bern, Switzerland. See:




Writer, Philosopher, Activist, Certified Investigative Journalist, with focus on ethics. As a concerned citizen, I cannot be quiet when I see someone deceiving the public by lying to them, when I know 100% what is said is a lie -- if I notice it I have to speak out. That's not defamation and to the contrary, it is helpful to the society and it is fulfilling an important role journalists play in a civil society.

I researched Oesch’s background extensively as a public service, in light of numerous lies he told the public. Currently, several activists who know Oesch have expressed their sympathy and regret that I have to spend more time on the latest nonsensical drama Oesch has cooked up, with his bogus complaint.









·   List of charities I donated to:

·   A primary driver in my life is to help people and help make the world a better place.

·   I have helped many people including Swiss youngsters, get off cigarettes, drugs, alcohol, suicidal thoughts.

·   I have helped various causes as investigative journalist, primarily around ethical issues.

FICO Score (creditworthiness) above 98% of population:


In assessing Oesch's baseless, abusive defamation complaint it's important to know a bit about his background and my background, and his own actions which have affected his reputation.

Christian Oesch is a public figure in Switzerland and has promoted himself heavily on traditional media and social media. Oesch runs an association that has a Telegram channel that promotes all kinds of conspiracy theories. It has with more than 6300 members. According to his own recent admission he’s given lectures to some 5000 people, and his recent interview was seen 150,000 times.

Über 50 Vorträge durch Christians schweizweites Engagement (Total gegen 5000 Teilnehmer)

Christian wurde durch AUF1 interviewt - dieses Interview wurde auf Telegram über 150,000 Mal angesehen und geteilt


A section in the investigative report is dedicated to showing why Oesch is a public figure: and as such he has availed himself to public scrutiny. All my comments about Oesch, including the email of 9 January 2023, were about Oesch’s public character, activities, statements.

Like most uneducated or lower-educated people, Oesch himself subscribes to many conspiracy theories – or he pretends to, because of convenience and marketing agenda (to cater to his followers most of whom are conspiracy theorists).

I guess there’s a link between level of education and belief in conspiracy theories, because people with higher education can often think independently, they don’t need to follow a doctrine, and they are stronger intellectually and do not need to resort to beliefs which are mostly rooted in human weakness, e.g., desire to believe that everything in the world is under control. The magic question for them is: “who is them, who you think are controlling the world, and all events, who purportedly planned out the pandemic blah blah” – they don’t like that question and always give the same vague answers: Rockefellers, blah blah – Oesch thinks it’s the Vatican, WHO, blah blah.

In a lunatic sounding letter to Swiss Military leaders and Federal Council, Oesch said the Swiss military should invade UN and WHO buildings in Switzerland and confiscate them … I guess in order to stop WHO from being a world government blah blah J. And people donate to him. Oesch thinks the pandemic that killed millions of people was not real – it’s so unreal that he doesn’t call it Pandemic – he calls it Plandemic, which is the word used to pass through the filters of social media which I guess believes are run by Them! He also seems to believe Coronavirus is not a virus. Try telling that to people who were hospitalized or died. He believes in a lot of conspiracy theories – some are mentioned later herein. More in the investigative report.


As a teenager, Oesch did an apprenticeship as a cook, worked in food business, and went to USA around age 30. The following extensive research report is a deep dive into the public claims Oesch made in Switzerland after he came back from a 20+ year sojourn to the USA filled with dodgy engagements such as:

·      Unethically selling "energized" sugar-water as cancer therapy "bio medicine", "alternative medicine", in reality scam, for starting price of $17,000 wired to Cayman Islands. A real biotech senior scientist friend of mine who examined BX Protocol wrote: "This BX Protocol is so bad that it makes a grade B horror movie look like an academy award winner.” The investigative report has a detailed assessment on why BX Protocol was a scam despite all the "scientific sounding" gibberish Oesch's company promoted.

·      Oesch was the CEO, a salesman, and apparently deeply involved in the global money flow with entities around the world. See section: “Global Money Flow Map” in the investigative report.

·      From:

[Multiple visuals and photos presented as evidence]


·      From the scam company’s portal:

·      BX Protocol scam shut down of the scam operation by United States’ FDA

·      Ponzi Scheme Shut Down By US Federal Government

·      Registering numerous shell companies involved in dodgy "tax strategies". This is a list of his companies - full details and registration papers in the investigative report. Some were mixed with BX Protocol seemingly even after they were dissolved.

·      Insight about his “tax strategies” come from a testimony of a woman who alleged her husband lost $500,000 by putting it in the “enterprise” where people would get “doled out” supposedly “tax free” money from time to time but ended up losing it. The court filings show connection of Oesch with Kenneth Leaming (pictured herein) and the Sovereign Citizen movement.

·      Bizarre lawsuits including against a Federal Judge, Prosecutor, Secret Service that was dismissed with a judge noting Oesch's arguments "deteriorated into rambling".

In Switzerland Oesch unsuccessfully ran for the National Council. He got engaged in anti-5G activism but he seemed to have ulterior motives to make money -- e.g. pushing unscientific gadgets -- and to get recognition, e.g., self-assigning false title, taking credit for others' work, etc. -- precisely to get egotistic glory / recognition!

He made an association and a Telegram channel which seems like a den of conspiracy theories in Switzerland, and he solicits public donations, selling things to make money associated with activism (e.g., a safe when he told people to take their pension funds and savings out of the banks), pushing woowoo topics like silver water which the US health authorities have strongly warned against (some conspiracy theorists use it as Coronavirus treatment), and pushing all kinds of strange conspiracy theories, and catering to conspiracy minded people, and apparently making money from it. So it is not defamatory to say he has ulterior motive to make money from activism. It's a fact. He even knows that -- so he twisted my words saying I said "ONLY" motive, which I never did.

Oesch knew perfectly well his "alternative medicine", BX Protocol was a scam. They even made a joke of it (pictures from video below). Oesch is taking the video -- you can hear his voice. The other two are his colleagues at the scam company he calls "biotech"!  -- the guy on the right has been on the run from FDA's criminal investigations unit for years (he was the number 1 guy at the scam company -- Oesch was number 2 guy as CEO). I found out that recently his lawyer made contacts with FDA so they're in negotiations, I guess for his surrender.

The criminal investigation into the BX Protocol scam is ongoing at the FDA – I can provide the contact info for the lead investigator. At a minimum it seems that Oesch acted utmost unethically and irresponsibly in pushing that scam, but he's absolutely unremorseful and recently touted the BX Protocol scam gobbledygook he calls science on his Swiss association's website and his Telegram channel, on the same page/post where he accused me of crimes for having called out his lies!

But he's quick to call people unethical and accuse them of defamation because he doesn't like his lies to be debunked. He seems to think people are stupid and will just believe his lies without fact checking things that are so simple to check if someone has an analytic mind and doesn't blindly follow what people say.

Full details in my investigative report:



These are some of the people who took BX Protocol, who died.

The mother of the 7 year-old Olivia wrote: "Clinic gave her a BX injection vaccine….which most definitely worsened her condition. gave her torturous pain…then her lungs filled with fluids. we never got to hear her voice again…or see her eyes open…I emailed the clinic and called, asking for a breakdown of the ingredients in the BX Protocol. my questions ignored. they took us over there got the money...finished Olivia off ".

Many more tragedies are associated with that scam “wonder drug”! One man wrote: "I completely blame BX for my father's early death."

Yet Oesch told Swiss people he spent the last 20 years in EMF health research, and called himself a biotech executive (which is a lie), and claimed he worked in some places that he never did, and accused the US government of defrauding and stealing his money (after they busted the illegal Ponzi Scheme!) and so on.

His plan was apparently to build a fake persona based on lies -– gain credibility to help him push the unscientific devices he was selling -- but the fake claims on his resumé was debunked by my research and he pulled down his LinkedIn profile and made a new one that doesn't show any experience except the Swiss association -- but sadly for him, he never changed his behavior! People who know him, including myself, were hoping that he would become a new and better man but he continued to continue down the same path.

He said many falsehoods as facts, he tried to get glory or credit from other people's work regardless how much he disrupted them, he posed himself as a hotshot successful international executive which he is not, he still calls himself a Biotech Executive which he's not, and a health blah blah which he has no credentials or credible experience in, and he became a conspiracy theory promoter.

He lied to my activist contacts and took over my high profile project without coordinating with me (and he messed it up), and then publicly lied about his role in 4 languages, etc, and then defamed and insulted me when his preposterous behavior and lies were called out. So I had no choice to research him to understand who I was dealing with -- and I published the research as a public service because he made his fake claims and deceptive lies, to the public.

Oesch has propagated many false conspiracy theories and fictions. There are many examples. A few: He seems to believe that the FTX collapse was orchestrated by the government; that the Swiss Federal Government is run by Vatican; that Switzerland is a sham democracy; that Swiss banks are part of a global cabal; that as promoted on his Telegram channel: "Biden's war in Ukraine" (notice, Oesch's conspiracy theory den believes that Biden started a war that in reality Putin criminally started). "the entire conflict may be designed to protect U.S. military labs conducting illegal biological experiments" blah blah which has been proven to be part of the Russian disinformation campaign but on Oesch's Telegram channel it has fervor believers who probably also think the Earth is flat, and getting vaccinated means getting tracked by Bill Gates. Oesch wrote (in German) blaming Bill Gates: "we'll soon be getting the next vaccination completely unnoticed via a head of lettuce that we eat with relish. But it goes even further. These enemies of mankind want total control over our food".

His latest conspiracy theory and fiction is that I am part of <Oesch-BS-snipped> (which is absolutely untrue) and there's a conspiracy to defame him -- he has actually said that a number of times including on a 9 January 2023 email he sent me -- as well as calling me a bunch of nasty names such as a <Oesch-lie-snipped>, <Oesch-lie-snipped>, etc. -- all because his ultimate goal is to discredit my report about him and in the process he has tried to destroy my reputation by lying about me. "Lepitus" is Christian Oesch.

9 January 2023 email from Oesch to me:

“Sounds like <Oesch-BS-snipped> is sponsoring a <Oesch-lie-snipped> ??? Whoever is writing this, should be seeking immediate professional HELP!!!”

But this is not a case against him (I may just brush it off and not file against him once this bogus case against me is rejected by yourself hopefully -- since I've spend enormous amounts of time on this case). This filing is my defense of his bogus case against me, where he used the same approach: say lies and fictions in order to wishfully try to get me convicted, so that he achieves his ultimate goal of discrediting my report. It's a publicity stunt. It's a shot in the dark for him, using taxpayer money and prosecutor time; and so far it has cost me 3 weeks of my life to address, and much negative publicity for being falsely accused by him, intentionally, as described herein.

Here's another example of where Oesch has alleged that I'm part of <Oesch-BS-snipped> -- and he thinks it's <Oesch-BS-snipped> that is trying to defame him because of his activism for all the silly conspiracy theories he believes in. He didn't mention <Oesch-BS-snipped> in his bogus complaint against me but that was an underlying part of his fictitious plot. He's also spread a similar conspiracy that when his scam "drug" was ousted as scam, that it was Big Pharma that was behind it. He's even said that my calling out his lies is because he's an "alternative medicine" person blah blah -- fact is I like alternative medicine but real things not scams, and surely Pharma companies were not worried about Oesch and his scam "drug".


Original German Text:


English translation:


January 13, 2023

Pascal Najadi,

Statement of Pascal Najadi on the defamatory statements of Christian Oesch about Reza Ganjavi.

I, Pascal Najadi, declare that at the beginning of January 2023 I had a conversation with Christian Oesch "Oesch" (3619 Eriz BE), in which Oesch told me that Mr. Reza Ganjavi was a <Oesch-lie-snipped>, was a member of <Oesch-BS-snipped> and criticized Oesch because he was jealous of Oesch's alleged success.

I believed what Oesch said, and his statement formed in my mind an extremely negative opinion about Mr. Ganjavi. I made the mistake of further expressing these negative statements about Mr. Ganjavi to a third party, calling him a <Oesch-lie-snipped> and a member of <Oesch-BS-snipped>.

Mr. Ganjavi found out about this and contacted me. I sincerely apologized to him and he agreed not to press charges against me and we settled the case peacefully. I now know that everything Oesch told me about Mr. Ganjavi was false.

I deeply regret having made such damaging statements about Mr. Ganjavi and promise never to disparage him again.

Yours sincerely,

Pascal Najadi

Summary of Oesch's Reputational Issues

I believe Oesch has had reputational issues for a long time because of his dodgy past engagements. before we met. Unfortunately he didn’t change his ways. Some of us who could see his weakness were hoping he would change his ways. But he continued the same modus operandi. One key activist believes he doesn’t learn – perhaps because he doesn’t see what he is and believes his own façade. 

I have absolutely done nothing to damage his reputation. I've simply pointed out facts vs. his public lies, because I believe truth is important. It’s the role of a philosopher, and journalist, and prosecutor, and judge, to stand up for truth. If we lower the priority of truth, our morality vanishes and with it all that’s important.

·      There’s an entire playlist devoted to the scam cancer treatment he was pushing in the US for many years:

·      “Christian B Oesch/Ösch/Olch, CEO of Delta Institute International Ltd, (a/k/a "BX Protocol" scam).”

·      This video depicts how Oesch (who is running the camera) knew that the “alternative medicine” they’re selling is bogus:

·      News segment shows Oesch’s face associated with the Ponzi Scheme, and scam cancer treatment:

·      This RationalWiki page has a picture of Oesch, and description of Oesch being a key figure in the BX Protocol scam:

·      This discussion board is devoted to the BX Scam where Oesch was a CEO and seller for a long time:


·      Die Evangelische Informationsstelle Kirchen – Sekten – Religionen

·      In Switzerland I know several people and groups who do not want to be associated with Oesch, or do not have a positive opinion of him, because of his behavior, his lies, and his extreme conspiracy theory mindset.

·      Oesch has said numerous documented lies; when people find out the truth, this can hurt his reputation. But that is not the fault of anybody’s who points out Oesch’s lies. It’s his own fault for lying. Selling BX Protocol scam in Switzerland. Oesch was apparently also selling BX Protocol scam in Switzerland. Someone reported that Oesch allegedly contacted him as a “cancer coach” who said he knew a lot about medicine. His wife had cancer, and they attended a meeting in which Oesch offered BX Protocol as a treatment for her cancer. Oesch said later they “were informed of treatment modalities available, since Mr. Oesch does provide consulting work for international clients in the health industry”. Health industry?!?! Due to the astronomical price-tag, they walked out of the room but wrote on a public platform: “if you want the truth please about this man, Google the name Christian Oesch as well as his companies: BX Protocol”.

·      Oesch has sent strange letters to Swiss Federal Council and top Swiss military officers that he calls "Legal Notices". They are like tabloids, in my opinion, and are full of crazy ideas like the Swiss military should seize the properties of UN and WHO in Geneva, blah blah -- and go from denying the pandemic, to chemtrails, to Bill Gates and the Great Reset and Agenda 2030 and predicting Switzerland will be a Chinese style dictatorship, to totally off remarks on the Ukraine war (Oesch also had a talk at a pro-Putin TV channel), to attacking Swiss public prosecutors and judges for not caring about evidence blah blah, and extreme ideas like accusing that Bundesrat "wants to wipe the Swiss Confederation off the map as a sovereign state". In my view this is very bad for a person's reputation if a sane, educated, intelligent person reads these letters. So Oesch does his own reputation plenty of disservice. Also Oesch who sold a scam cancer treatment for profit rants about "the profit-hungry Western capitalists". He stopped short of trying to convince the Bundesrat and Swiss military that the Earth is flat!

More details on the above in the investigative report.


This section is discussed in detail in the extensive response should you need it. In summary, I am absolutely innocent and will fight for my innocence fiercely under Article 32 of the Swiss Federal Constitution. I expect my due process rights, and rights to a fair judicial assessment are fully respected at every step of the process, despite my non-Swiss ethnicity.

·      Oesch has entirely failed to bring any discussion, indication or evidence that anything I said about him is false. He has not provided any factual or legitimate argument to show that I'm guilty, and instead fabricated a fake, factually defective plot-line that eliminated key facts and stated falsehoods as facts.

·      I have provided evidence in this relatively short response to show all my statements were true or I had legitimate reason to believe they were true. And everything I said was related to Oesch's public statements and actions, thus applicable to the public. And what I said was in response to recent emails Oesch had sent, in which he lied about me and disparaged and defamed me.

·      The bulk of Oesch's frivolous arguments are related to artifacts and events which are far before the 90 day Statute of Limitation of the articles of law he invokes. Therefore, as the Prosecutor has astutely detected already, the entire case revolves around the legality of the 9 January 2023 email I sent.

·      I am wholeheartedly convinced, based on extensive research and legal consultation that I am 100% innocent; therefore this is a moot point, however, cross-border jurisdictional issues should be considered regarding differences in how much value a society gives to freedom of speech, which is related to presumption of innocence and burden of proof (e.g. The Securing the Protection of our Enduring and Established Constitutional Heritage “SPEECH” Act of 2010).




Oesch has had a history of abusive litigation, and allegedly making empty legal threats to people he wants to bully. His favorite attack is to think people who criticize him are defaming him. He seems to have no respect for freedom of speech, despite all the woowoo conspiracy theories he promotes about so-called "freedoms" that are purportedly taken away by all the conspiracy theories he at least pretends to believe in.

One of the roles of media and reporters (including freelance reporters like me) in a civil society is to help interpret and disseminate facts, and at times take on an adversarial roles as challenge to propagated falsehoods, and that is exactly the role I have played in light of numerous lies and disinformation and fake claims Christian Oesch has told the public about a variety of topics.

In that regards, Oesch has shown lack of respect for journalistic integrity despite his trash-talking "Main Stream Media" -- as one witness noted, Oesch has promoted falsehoods via so-called alternative media that Main Stream Media would never do. I am not saying Main Stream Media is perfect, but some of the garbage promoted in alternative media is unbearable -- such as an interview Oesch had with the Putin sympathizer, AUF1, an Austrian far-right TV channel. The title of his segment was “Switzerland is a Sham Democracy”, which is an insult to the core of our nation and democratic values. Yes we can question certain aspects of the running of the government which we may not be happy about, but to call our entire democracy as a sham, is too far out. I believe the arguments he brought on the program were not coherent.

As one of many examples, Oesch tried to pull down a YouTube channel of a critic who posted important video about Oesch and BX Protocol scam. He was unsuccessful. YouTube sided with Freedom of Speech.

·      Oesch does not seem to understand the meaning of defamation. There are a number of cases where he calls things that he doesn't agree with or are critical of him as Defamation!

·      Oesch has set himself up as a public figure and therefore has availed himself to scrutiny. He doesn't like to be criticized. He's thin skinned and doesn't respect freedom of speech despite all his rants about Mainstream Media and the Global Elite trying to take control. Based on my own experience, and multiple witnesses I can name if necessary, he sometimes flips out when he's challenged (says nasty things, etc.). He doesn't seem to respect that others can have differing opinions as him, and he doesn't seem tolerant to having his public statements challenged -- which is exactly the role of reporters like me, and anyone else who knows the truth of the falsehoods he promotes. So he calls it defamation!

·      Oesch's own actions and words have repercussions. When he publicly lies, and that gets exposed, the person who is exposing his lie is not committing defamation!

There are several examples of Oesch making bogus defamation claims. Here is one, he sent to Ms. <>, a highly educated, highly respectable professional who became very bitter because of Oesch's behavior, making fake assertions (e.g. that he was a co-initiator of her Petition, which he was not), and trying to take control of her large contact list, etc. -- he wrote this preposterous message to her to force her to delete my comment where I had pointed out Oesch's nephew who reportedly has posted for him on Facebook before, posted a total lie about Oesch's involvement in my project. My message was simply to debunk lies in that message, like Oesch being the co-author of the letter -- which was absolutely false.

·      Excerpt of a letter from her about Oesch:


“Dear Reza

Thank you. His communication gets very aggressive, when he gets exposed. It’s the same game he did with me. His strategy is really strange. I never would fight against someone when I did something wrong. I would apologize and try to find a consensus. He attacks in very ugly way and doesn't give in.

I believe he is afraid to get more exposed and instinctively doing the wrong thing. He is only harming himself and he doesn't notice it. He thinks we are attacking him. But we only try to find a way to make him clear, his acting is totally unacceptable. And then he starts again and again to attack.

It was a hard time for me at the end with him and I´m happy it is passed. From my point of view, he received enough consideration. But he has nothing to do with the initiation period of the Petition, he stepped in later. He was not a Co-Author or anything like that. I really think he is a strange person and I don't look through it. I hope you find a way to get the situation sorted.

A lot of strength for the difficult time.


·      Another example of making a bogus defamation threat is when Roger Bittel interviewed Oesch and published the video on YouTube and I realized Oesch was lying through his teeth about his background. I posted a comment pointing out that Oesch was not being truthful. A nightmare ensued -- where Oesch tried to bully and pressure Roger to delete my comment but Roger said "get the lawyer involved" and refused because he said my comment was not impolite, and was not in violation of any rules and was an exercise of freedom of speech which he respects. Oesch went on insulting me and falsely accusing me, and saying many lies, and threatening Roger with legal action. Oesch said horrible things that were false and I will not go through it but point is, he seems to have a tendency of calling statements that debunk his lies as Defamation.

o   Christian Oesch to Roger Bittel: "If we don't delete this post, I will have to get my lawyer involved, and I certainly don't want that to happen."

o   Christian Oesch: "I'm trying not to get the Bittel channel involved in a criminal case here, because if this <Oesch-lie-snipped> doesn't get blocked as a Google user, I'm going to have to follow through now."


·      Oesch also made defamation threats in Switzerland to people for various reasons (e.g. manipulate them to deleting comment that exposed Oesch's lies, or people he disagreed with). For example, he's calling something Defamation (again) which doesn't seem to be defamation at all -- just because Oesch doesn't like it, and he's called out, he thinks it's defamation. He puts his favorite "Verleumdung" on anything he doesn't like (and he makes fun of Main Stream Media for being intolerant to opposing opinions!)

Von: C.S. <>

Betreff: Wtr: Offener Brief

Datum: 11. September 2022 um 08:06:22 MESZ

Nun wurde mir der Artikel zugesendet, von Dominik Weingärtner über Triengen / Christian Oesch.

die Gemeinde dort ist gut.


Herausgekommen ist genau was ich vor einem Monat Christian Oesch geschrieben habe:

«Bitte lass NWO und Klaus Schwab und ähnliche Dinge weg, damit erreichst Du nichts»

Und herausgekommen ist genau das


Der selbe Dominik Weingärtner und auch die Chefredaktion der CH Media (Patrick Müller / Doris Kleck (stellv.)) haben uns aktuell super Artikel geschrieben - habe ich ebenfalls angehängt


So verhindern wir keine Antennen



From: Christian Oesch, Präsident Schweizerischer Verein WIR <>

Date: 9/12/22, 3:45 PM

"Verleumdung weiter bestätigt, ich werde mich absprechen und jetzt wahrscheinlich Anzeige machen müssen. So ein absoluter Vollpfosten!!!"  


A newspaper article after one of Oesch’s “5G” talks ridiculed how it was mixed with other conspiracy theories around Bill Gates, “Plandemic”, The Great Reset, etc.:


Oesch disparaged the reporter and a very credible activist who challenged Oesch and also pointed out the reporter was not bad but the content of the talk was inappropriate for what the presentation was advertised to me (anti-5G). Here’s another report by the same reporter which shows the problem was not the reporter, as Oesch purported:


As explained herein, in my opinion, Christian Oesch has filed the most stupid, abusive, dishonest, cunning, deceptive, frivolous, meritless bad-faith complaint because:

·   Oesch wants to quash my right to free speech which is protected by our great country's Federal Constitution. Oesch is not happy that I did a long investigative report about him which debunks the lies he has told Swiss public. His intention to quash free speech is evident in his demands in the complaint. And Oesch has relentlessly tried to discredit me in order to discard my factual report. Now he's abusing prosecutor time to help him achieve that goal.

o   In Switzerland, Articles 173, 174 are often abused or misused by people, because there's no cost associated with filing a complaint under these articles. Former Zurich Attorney General (Oberstaatsanwaltschaft) who is now the head of Zurich City Police, Mr. Beat Oppliger, believes defamation plaintiffs should be obliged to pay a cost up front so as to reduce the number of frivolous defamation claims.

o   Zurich Cantonal Police cites a large number of defamation claims and states that about 3% of all the defamation claims have merit. 97% are dismissed; many are rejected at the police stage, many are rejected at the prosecutor stage, and only 3% lead to convictions.

·   I believe he knows that I have received new evidence of how he has allegedly violated my rights, and given the previous warnings I gave him, he suspects I would file against him -- so he wanted to file first so as to trade his complaint with mine. But, I have not decided to file against him yet, and given the extremely bitter experience of having to waste so much time responding to his allegedly abusive, dishonest complaint, I will likely move on with my life after you hand him a Non-Acceptance Order (Nichtanhandnahmeverfügung) or Abandonment Order (Einstellungsverfügung).

·   Oesch has apparently used the bad-faith complaint as a publicity campaign, apparently to get egotistic glory, recognition, as well as financial benefit as he calls for donations on some places he posted the false accusation, with my picture attached. He has advertised his complaint all over the place, on Telegram, LinkedIn, and he even set up a web page -- which accuse me of criminal conduct! His false-accusation defamation claim is promoted which is in itself defamatory for me. If you have the power please order him to remove these false accusations postings. Many thanks in advance.


Oesch says a number of new lies in his complaint, which aside from trying to deceive the prosecutor, it seems he want to deceive the public by publishing his complaint – which he promised his conspiracy followers he would try to get permission to do – to keep them entertained and glued to his channel by throw some sizzling gossip at them, at the expense of my reputation! Why else would he lie about his (non-existent) role at UBI/SRF to the prosecutor, if there’s no egotistic motive involved?

And multiple posts on Telegram and LinkedIn, e.g.:


And on the same page he's promoting silver water that some people have called "snake oil" he's involved with -- and even the BX Protocol scam despite all that the fact that show it was a scam, including shutting down of the company by FDA's Criminal Investigations Unit. Oesch goes on to babble untrue conspiracy theories that two large pharmaceutical companies colluded to get hackers to hack the website of that scam operation which further proved it's a scam !! But Oesch is still proud of it and promotes it -- just as he's proud that he sued the US Government in an absolutely crazy lawsuit that was dismissed with the judge ridiculing Oesch.

On the same page that he falsely accuses me, he’s boosting BX Protocol scam by posting some science sounding gibberish which I assume was used to deceive people into believing BX Protocol was scientific. Oesch is clearly associating the falsely accusing me and his promoting BX Protocol, in order to try to discredit my investigative report on him which is about BX Protocol but a lot more.

Unfortunately, Oesch has taken his attacks on my reputation to the next level in trying to deliberately damage my reputation in order to discredit my report about him. But that’s outside the scope of this document.

On the page he made about me, there’s a comment which looks and smells just like a comment Oesch would write which says the same lies and insults that Oesch says about me, and the line of thinking behind the message is every bit Oesch himself, in my opinion. I’m investigating it. It’s a part of the circus he made about this abusive complaint and further proves my point about his ulterior motives in filing this complaint.


On 26 February 2023 I sent a Takedown Notice to Oesch (in German and English)

Sent to: Christian Oesch Switzerland <>, 'Christian Oesch, Präsident Schweizerischer Verein WIR' <>


Formal Takedown Notice


Mr. Oesch

You're hereby notified and requested to remove the following content from

1) The page you made about me <> is unlawful and needs to be pulled down, as it falsely accuses me of criminal conduct which is not true, and that is not an adjudicated fact either. You apparently already knew your complaint was bogus, else you wouldn't try to pad it with lies you said to the prosecutor, and omit very important facts which debunk your imaginary plot-line.

2) The comment you wrote and/or approved on that page that starts with "Herrn" is unlawful, and needs to be removed as it contains insults and falsehoods which are in violation of my rights.

Remember, any further promotion and propagation of lies and insults you and your website promote increases your criminal and civil liability.

This removal needs to be done immediately. Your cooperation is appreciated.


R. Ganjavi


I wrote a comment (in both German and English) that addressed a comment that sounded like something Oesch wrote using an alias – but Oesch did not approve my comment – which shows:

1. He approved the comment that he probably wrote that insulted and lied about me, therefore he’s responsible for it.

2. He rejected (did not approve) my comment which set the record straight, because he did not want the intentionally and maliciously defamatory and insulting comment he wrote and/or approved to be challenged – which further confirms his continuing vicious and intentional malicious motive to damage my reputation and deceive the public, in order to discredit my research report about him. 

But again, this is not my case against him, but it’s mentioned in the context of how far Oesch is willing to go to quash freedom of speech, without any disregard for my legal rights.



There are many reasons why Oesch's complaint is allegedly intentionally abusive of my rights, and abusive of prosecutor resources, insincere, deceptive, and in bad-faith:

·   Oesch’s latest plot-line contradicts with other lies he’s told people. He told the prosecutor a plot-line of arbitrary aversion, selective targeting, blah blah which is 100% false. On other occasions he’s used the plot-line that there’s no arbitrary aversion – that it’s orchestrated by <Oesch-BS-snipped> blah blah (100% false). On other occasions he’s said the motive is not arbitrary or <Oesch-BS-snipped>, it’s jealousy!! That in his brain, he thinks he’s such a hotshot, that someone with my kind of profile should be jealous of him blah blah (100% false). It’s a typical case when a person lies it’s inconsistent.

·   Oesch purposefully left out key events which he knew would debunk his malicious, fabricated plot-line -- e.g., the emails he sent to defame me, prior to the email I sent on 9 January 2023, which were the very reason I sent that email!

·   Oesch's manipulative twisting of facts in his complaint:

o   Oesch wrote that I called him a "liar". I have never called him a liar. To say someone has lied, or even that someone has said many lies, is different than saying someone is a liar. I know several courts have ruled to that effect. It’s an indisputable fact that  Oesch has said many lies. But I have never called him a liar, which is a big statement about a person’s character. And there was no systematic portrayal -- there are no systems involved here, but he thinks this is another conspiracy theory orchestrated by <Oesch-BS-snipped> blah blah. Or maybe he "systematically lies", whatever he means by that!

o   Oesch wrote that I said his "only" motive is money and ego -- I never said his only motivation is money and glory. I said ulterior motive and not "only motive". Huge difference. And Oesch knew that. He lived in the USA for over 20 years, and knows the difference between “ulterior” and “only” perfectly well, but twisted my words intentionally. I even provided an English version of my email which was the original language (he conveniently did not mention that in his complaint).

·   Oesch's entire argument is based on a dishonest plot that I purportedly developed an arbitrary aversion (not true), and he has no idea why (he is absolutely lying); that eventually led to me purportedly trying to defame him by "strategically targeting" his contacts (Big Lie). The fact is there was a number of concrete reasons that Oesch created friction, by his dishonest and disruptive conduct, as explained herein. His fake plot-line includes the following points as well, e.g., selective omission of key facts.

1. He deceptively said multiple big lies about his background to my contacts, and pretended to be what he was not.

2. He interjected himself, did not coordinate with me, and disrupted my project.

3. He lied, defamed and insulted me.

4. He lied publicly about his involvement in my project to get praise and egotistic glory.

5. He took credit for the work that I had done.

6. He lied to the public about his background and competence.

7. He made scientifically unsound claims to the public about the gadgets he was marketing. Real experts debunk Oesch’s Bacteria tests and Dark Field Microscopy as scientific evidence of effectiveness.

So there was no arbitrary aversion. I began researching him because of his own lies, fake claims, and disruptive behavior. But Oesch said it was arbitrary because he thinks that helps form his dishonest, untrue, stupid plot-line, as part a fake, fabricated, baseless defamation case against me. This is not the first time Oesch is cunningly (but not so intelligently) fabricating a deceptive dishonest plot.

Here are some examples of his lies to my activist circles, and proof that he lied. And now he claims he has no idea what happened, there was an arbitrary aversion, blah blah -- big fat lies!!

Early on, Oesch stated a number of lies to my circle of activists in order to show off that he's a wealthy executive blah blah -- my later research determined multiple claims he made were fake. For example: he lied to my contacts that the US Government had "stolen" $4,200,000 of his money and defrauded him. In reality the government forfeited about $50,000 of his money which was in an illegal Ponzi Scheme. He then sued the judge, secret service and prosecutor, for about $30,000,000,000,000 and Senior Judge Christine Miller of the U.S. Court of Federal Claims ridiculed Oesch while dismissing the case, saying Oesch's arguments had "deteriorated in ramblings". Same thing happened in the bogus complaint he filed against me as illustrated below.

From email Oesch sent on 7 December 2019 to my circle of contacts -- his email included several huge lies:


[American date format -- 12 December 2019]

His email was signed with two links: one LinkedIn profile that contained multiple lies about his background; and a Isobl "recognition" page that is in fact a paid service -- you pay to get recognition.

He sent the email to over 20 people, which was my selected key activist contacts.  In the email he lied about his past multiple times (I found out later). For example he wrote:


[image of quote with Oesch lying about his background]


Reality: US didn't steal and defraud Oesch -- they shut down an illegal Ponzi Scheme and forfeited the funds.

Reality: the amount USA took was $54,055 and not 4.2 million.

Reality: It had nothing to do with Merrill Lynch banking mess except the amount that Oesch unsuccessfully sued the judge, et al., was more than the size of the entire banking bailout !!


The Federal Judge Oesch "convicted" and (unsuccessfully) sued!!

Oesch convicted the judge in his head. He wrote to her:

·   Judge Collyer Is Guilty As Charged because…”. Oesch “charges” the judge, and “convicts” her, in his mind, and declares her guilty – in a petition that asks her for something!

·   Clerk of the Court and the Judge…both are Guilty of… among other Felony Violations…”. Oesch falsely accuses a US Federal Judge of having committed a crime, for having confiscated his money that was in an illegal operation!!

·   Their refusal to Obey Their Judicial Oath… disqualifies them”. By obeying their judicial oath Oesch really means obeying Oesch's demand to not take away his money that was in the illegal operation! So because the judge did not obey Oesch she's disqualified as a judge!! This is how far Oesch is willing to go in making false accusations, and he didn't stop there -- he sued her for ~$30,000,000,000,000 !!

This is an utmost disrespect for judicial authorities, and is in line with the Sovereign Citizen movement who think they're not subject to the laws of the land.

The list of the lies he said goes on -- and included, with evidence, in the long version of my response if you should require it.

On 16 December 2019 Oesch wrote to me

Message-ID: <!&!>

"trust me, I had some very large fights in the past, one of my lawyers in the USA is still in jail over it."

That turned out to be a lie too! Who he was referring to, is Kenneth Leaming (pictured below) who was convicted of crimes more than once but never because of Oesch, as Oesch falsely claims. Last time around, he was sentenced to 8 years for filing false liens against United States Federal officials, harboring Federal fugitives, and being a convicted felon in possession of firearms.

Leaming was a close, long-term associate of Oesch. He was a co-plaintiff with Oesch in the ASD Ponzi Scheme case, and was Oesch's partner in the shell "tax strategies" companies -- Leaming did a lot of bad things -- details on his convictions in my investigative report. And he was not a lawyer, but in Sovereign Citizen circles fake lawyers are common. Someone posted this online to Oesch's son who was also involved in BX Protocol scam:

·   In writing his abusive complaint, Oesch looked at defamation laws and even (unrelated) case law and apparently did some irrelevant copy/pasting, and he still decided to falsely accuse me. He knew that my statements:

o   were true (unless he lost memory of his own actions, but they've even been documented in my investigative report so he couldn't have forgotten)

o   or protected opinion

o   and that they pertained to the public, let alone a small circle of people whose emails I obtained from an email I received which contained an email where Oesch falsely accused me!

·   Oesch purposefully left out Paragraph 2 of StGB Article 173, in his legal "analysis" knowing fully well that that would exonerate me, because Oesch knows that what I said was the truth and my opinions were based on facts. His purposefully leaving that paragraph out is a clear testimony of his malicious, deceptive, bad-faith intent to falsely accuse me. He referred to Paragraphs 1 and 3 several times and every time he left a Paragraph 2 which states if the statement is true or sincerely believed to be true then article 173 is not violated -- which is exactly the case, and he knew that, and that's why he left that out.

o   Paragraph 2: "If the accused proves that the statement made or disseminated by him corresponds to the truth or that he had substantial grounds to hold an honest belief that it was true, he is not liable to a penalty.” And that is exactly the case and Oesch knew that, and that’s why he omitted that paragraph

·   Oesch did not provide any argument, indication or evidence that what I said was false! Because he couldn't. He could not argue with his own past actions and words which were the basis of my statements.

·   Oesch's selective omissions is to paint a false picture that the intention of my email was to defame him whilst the intention was to inform, and my email did not contain any defamatory statements.

·   Oesch's complaint has been extensively padded with irrelevant, out of scope, and old items which are far before the 90 day Statute of Limitation for the articles of law he invoked.

·   Oesch intentionally stated some falsehoods as facts, e.g., regarding his (non-existent) role in the UBI/SRF decision.

·   And so on -- There are many reason why his false accusation was purposeful, and his complaint is abusive.



In the dialogue with himself towards the end of the complaint, it seems that Oesch realized himself that he doesn’t have a case, despite leaving out key facts and key areas of law, and a fake story line, and dishonest remarks, and not providing any argument that what I wrote was purportedly untrue. So his argument deteriorated into rambling: “It must still be noted that the defendant is guilty of defamation in one way or another.” “One way or another” is not evidence or rational legal argument. 

Oesch wishfully asserted without bringing any substance: "The factual allegations made by the defendant are simply untrue". Notice not once he asserted any of the specific statements were untrue by any substantial, rational, articulated statement. So lacking substance he just stated another empty, frivolous statement without bringing any argument or reason.

He makes a similar nonsensical, unsubstantiated assertion “and, in the opinion of the private plaintiff, are also made against his better knowledge.” -- I just spent tens of pages explaining why what I said was true and well-founded opinions I believed to be true! Notice Oesch didn't provide any argument or evidence or indication for his pie in the sky assertion. 

Knowing his case was legally defective, Oesch tried to divert and pad it with irrelevant arguments, and falsehoods posed as facts, which is typical for some persons when they do not have a case. When a person has a legitimate case, they can argue their points rationally, clearly, honestly, and provide evidence. Oesch did not do that.

The bulk of Oesch’s arguments are irrelevant arguments that relate to the time period which is prior to the 90 day Statute of Limitation for StGB Articles 173, 174, aside from material falsehoods stated as facts.

However, because Oesch stated a number of falsehood, a number of intentional lies, in order to deceive the Prosecutor and Judge, I am obliged to respond to his statements – both in-scope, and out-of-scope (noise). This is done in detail in the long-form of the response should you require it.

Such cluttering of facts and fabrication of a bogus complaint is right in line with his Sovereign Citizen ideology which he employed when he made a mess in US courts. See CHAPTER 9 of the investigative report: “Oesch & The Sovereign Citizen Movement”:

·   (EN)

·   (DE)öffentlichen-falschbehauptungen-lügen-bx-protocol-etc#h.mkdqx3b9xs6j




I hereby declare under penalty of perjury, and swear to God the Almighty, and to the honor of my father, who was an honest and compassionate judge, Judge of Judges, Supreme Court Justice, Law Professor; and to the life of my mother who dedicated her life to service to humanity, that all of the statements that I wrote in the disputed email dated 9 January 2023, were true or were sincere opinions that I believed to be true.


Article 173 and 174 are wholly inapplicable because:

·   I did not say anything defamatory in the email.

·   I did not accuse Oesch of any dishonorable conduct. I stated facts and sincere, well-founded opinions about his own conduct.

·   The factual allegations in that email were true, and I believed them to be true. Plenty of evidence is provided herein.

·   Oesch has not provided any arguments, let alone evidence, to show my statements were not true!!

·   The opinions were absolutely sincere and based on well-founded research, credible sources, and my own and others’ experiences. My opinions were held and expressed under protection of Articles 16, 17 of the Swiss Federal Constitution.

·   I neither held, nor expressed, any arbitrary opinion, or any opinions without a legitimate cause, linked to Oesch's own public actions and words.

·   Oesch is a public figure and has availed himself to scrutiny (evidence:

·   Oesch has said a number of lies to Swiss public about his background, expertise, and about me (evidence:   and and so on).

·   Everything I said pertains to Oesch's public persona, public actions/activities, public statements, public fake claims, public lies, public deceptive behavior, disruptive behavior impacting the public, and therefore there are no issues with applicability to the audience.

·   I expressed facts which pertain to the public because Oesch has lied about them in the public domain -- and I expressed sincere opinions that cannot be defamatory.

·   The only reason I wrote the email of 9 January 2023 was to set the record straight on several lies which Oesch had stated about me prior to my sending that email. Oesch entirely omits that fact from his complaint. I wrote it immediately after receiving copy of yet another terribly damaging email that Oesch had sent around, behind my back, to lie and defame me. There were no other intentions or motives, such as any intent to harm Oesch’s reputation. A person's reputation is the result of their own actions and words.

·   My intention is not and has never been to damage anyone’s reputation, including Oesch, and I have never defamed Oesch. I do not have a creepy dirty heart. I have a compassionate heart which has sympathy and empathy, and I am in this world to help others, not hurt them, and I believe to hurt another is to hurt oneself. I have many positive things going on in life to even have time or interest in toying with another person's reputation -- I have absolutely no motivation for that. I have nothing to gain from it. It's of no interest or concern to me.

o   I would derive no benefit whatsoever from trying to defame Oesch. He's done his own reputation more damage than anyone could, in my opinion, and Oesch's reputation is not my business. In his complaint he also totally failed to mention any motive to support his fake allegations. In fact every minute spent on Oesch is a wastage of my time. I would rather not deal with him at all -- but sometimes I have no choice, when someone brings something to my attention, like the emails I received early January 2023 that caused me to write the 9 January 2023 email which was 100% lawful.

§  Oesch has tried to defame and dishonor me many times including insulting me, because in his mind, he has something to gain from that: disparaging and discrediting the investigative report I wrote about him. That has been his major driver and motive in all the nasty things he has said about me. But I have nothing to gain from trying to defame Oesch. Oesch's reputation is not my business, it's not a motive for me to act. I only act in relation to Oesch when I see he is either deceiving the public, or lying, defaming, insulting me.

o   It's a sick mind that would spend time trying to defame another person -- there has to be some motive behind it, something to gain, some insufficiency to fulfill. None of that applies to me. If I have a problem with someone I try to solve it. I don't try to run a covert operation to "throw darts at him" - that's not how I operate. I either solve the problem or consider it as hopeless and move on. I am of the school of J.S. Bach who said the aim and final goal of all music is the glory of God. I am here to serve humanity, not to hurt anyone.

o   I am driven in life by goodness, compassion, affection, caring for others. My extensive personal, professional, academic, artistic references depict who I am. Doing wicked things to people, or trying to damage people’s reputation, or do other bad things to people, is absolutely not who I am and what I do.

o   I have never had any inclination or motive to defame Oesch or anyone. My life is fulfilled, both inwardly and outwardly. I am a happy person. Thank God, I have always had everything I need, materially, emotionally. And psychologically I am very simple and not bogged by image making, comparison, envy, jealousy, cravings, etc. I have an excellent reputation because I have lived a life of honesty, integrity, diligence, positive values and good intentions. My creditworthiness is higher than 98% of population according to major credit reporting bureaus: TransUnion, Equifax, Experian.

§  To try to discredit my research report, Oesch has accused me of being jealous of him but his profile offers absolutely nothing for me to be jealous of. His profile is one from which I want to be as far as possible.

o   My motivations for statements and opinions that I express about Oesch, in general, are twofold:

§  When he attacks my character with lies, insults, defamatory statements: To protect my reputation against numerous lies he has said about me. He has lied extensively about me, insulted, and disparaged me, in order to disparage and discredit the extensive investigative report I published about him which debunks his many public lies and fake claims.

§  When he lies to public: To help the public know the facts about the deceptive, misleading, fake claims that Oesch has publicly made. It was my moral duty to society to do. Several people have thanked me for the investigative report on Oesch.

o   These and more factors (in the extended response) provide plenty of circumstantial evidence that Oesch's accusation that I sat down and figured out who to target blah blah is absolutely false -- on top of direct evidence that I wrote to people whose names were in the email I received where Oesch had lied about me


·   I received an email on 9 January 2023, prior to the email I sent, referred to nasty stuff said by Oesch. It included a number of emails Oesch had sent that I had never seen before. I was mentioned by Oesch and I was falsely accused of having defamed Oesch because of the small segment I have in my video to Bundesrat where I stated some absolute facts about Oesch's conduct in my project. The picture of his that I used was from a public source, and I used it in full compliance to copyright laws, for journalistic purposes.

o   He has used my picture without my permission, in trying to falsely accusing me with a crime. I will deal with that separately if this case is not closed, including a criminal copyright complaint, given the characteristics of Oesch’s abusive post.

·   The recipients were in the email I had just received which contained Oesch's trying to defame me and lying about me. So the idea that I selected the recipients strategically blah blah is absolutely false and is part of Oesch's mental state that is so fertile for conspiracy theories. There was no conspiracy; there was no <Oesch-BS-snipped> involved (I have never been associated with <Oesch-BS-snipped> except in Oesch's mind).  Here's the proof. I received this email a few hours before I sent the disputed email:

    Message-ID: <00d901d9240c$b0a8f2d0$11fad870$>

                                 Lieber Reza

                                 Nochmals besten Dank für den gestrigen Telefonaustausch.

                                 Nasty stuff made by CO


·   Everything I said in that email was true, and specifically addressed Oesch's public words and actions.

·   Everything I said about Oesch in that email could be for public consumption regardless of who the audience because everything I said is related to Oesch's public words and action, and Oesch had said the same lies to other members of public. So who the recipients were is irrelevant.

·   Oesch made a huge public noise and public fake claims about my project which he messed up -- Oesch has tried to make money from his activism -- Oesch has associated himself with a number of great efforts, and even taken credit for things he had not done to get egotistic glory, publicity. I sincerely believe this because of his own actions and this is deeply documented in my investigative report, and to a certain extent in this response. So everything I said is related to Oesch's public actions and words.

·   However, the emails listed in the email I received on 9 January included the three witnesses Oesch names. Osi is Kathryn's friend who receives emails. They're both good friends of mine. The copy paste below is from the email I received on 9 January 2023. It shows that those people were in the email I received. So Oesch's argument that I looked for and selectively targeted his contacts etc. is absolutely false. Oesch is also entirely wrong in alleging that I was "choosing new ways and means to systematically damage, blah blah", or "chose the form of a circular email, blah blah". There was absolutely none of that.

·   I simply received emails that contained very damaging statements about me, said by Oesch, and I responded in a fully lawful manner, and I chose email as the medium because I had received emails, and it's the main mode of my electronic communications. There was no conspiracy about that. There was nothing more to it than that. I have much better things to do in life than to spend a second of my time on Oesch and his bogus conspiracy theories. I don't need to attack him. I don't attack people. Debunking someone's lies is not an attack. But he doesn't like it. He thinks he can go in the public domain, lies, and get away with it. As soon as his lies are called out he puts a DEFAMATION stamp on it and "cries" publicly that he was defamed.

·   The email I received was sent by one of Oesch's contacts who forwarded me the nonsense Oesch had said about me. In the body of that email my name was mentioned, I was falsely accused, and I sent my email to people whose emails I could see in the email that I received. I was extremely distressed and wanted to act urgently. It was the straw that broke the camel’s back having received a streak of lies from Oesch in the previous days – and I had to respond. Oesch has clearly been on a rampage to try to destroy my character and good reputation, in order to discredit the highly factual investigative report I wrote in response to his public lies and fake claims and highly egotistic, disturbing, unprofessional behavior. I didn't do any selective targeting, or looking for new ways blah blah. I simply responded to material which were violating my rights. Regardless, everything I said pertains to his public activities and statements. 

·   These emails were in the email I received. Message-ID that contained Oesch’s email that : <00d901d9240c$b0a8f2d0$11fad870$>


Regardless of who I sent that email to, everything I said in that email pertained to Oesch's public statements and actions so it was entirely lawful. A sentence by sentence walk-through is provided below, including assessment of StGB Article 173 Paragraph 2, for every statement I made -- aside from the fact that everything I said was true and well-founded opinions -- which together show my email was 100% lawful, and Oesch's complaint is 100% bogus.

·   In the email I received on 9 January 2023, there was the following image, which Oesch had sent around with negative comments, disparaging and falsely accusing me of a crime.


The fact is my tiny segment about him in the video was ABSOLUTELY FACTUAL, IT PERTAINED TO PUBLIC, IT WAS NOT DEFAMATORY. So Oesch was falsely accusing me, which set up the ground for me to send the 9 January 2023 email defending myself with facts and well-researched opinions.

Prior to my email of 9 January 2023, on 7 January 2023 was from a 15 December 2022 email Oesch had sent to an unknown group of people, which is fair to assume it included his circle of contacts as he has done mass mailings in the past that included many people. Early on he even included my circle of activists most of whom he did not know -- after I trusted him and included him in the open distribution list -- in his propaganda email distributions which contained big lies such as link to his LinkedIn profile that contained some big lies of having jobs he never had, etc.

So he's not a stranger to sending emails to big distribution lists. Even after his disturbing and counter-productive behavior in my project where he interjected himself with after lying to my contacts -- he sent a mass email to Professor Hardell's contacts which contained links to his dishonest LinkedIn profile -- and his bogus self-promotion piece which is a paid service but he makes it look like he was really "recognized" as an international business leader! Which I find funny but sad. Details and evidence are in the investigative report. Behavior like that makes it absolutely fair to assume egotistic glory is big in Oesch's mind -- images of others' image of him.

First I received an email on 7 January 2023 from a very credible, very respectable Swiss activist. Here's an excerpt:

    Message-ID: <004c01d922a9$bf47a020$3dd6e060$>

Lieber Reza

Bitte erlaube mir, Dich zu duzen. Dein 5G Engagement kommt mir so vertraut entgegen, dass ich an Dir einen Bruder im Engagement erkenne...und dies ist der Auslöser – auch zuletzt auch Christian Oesch anwesend war... Nicht dass wir Ch. Oesch als eine unproblematische Person angesehen hätten, aber ein letztes Mail vom Ihm, datiert vom 15. Dez., mit dem er Dich in seiner bekannten Aggressivität angreift, hat mich nun doch aufmerksam werden lassen und so habe zu Deiner Recherche zum «Lebenswerk» von Ch. Oesch gefunden. Danke für Deine diesbezüglich akribische Recherche...

Mit bestem Dank für Dein Engagement und herzlichen Grüssen


[Auto-translated] "Dear Reza, Please allow me to call you by your first name. Your 5G commitment is so familiar to me that I recognize in you a brother in commitment...and this is the trigger - also last Christian Oesch was present.... Not that we have considered Ch. Oesch as an unproblematic person, but a last mail from him, dated Dec. 15th, with which he attacks you in his known aggressiveness, made me now become attentive and so I have found to your research on the "life's work" of Ch. Oesch. Thank you for your meticulous research in this regard... With best thanks for your engagement and warm greetings"

Further to the above email, on the same day he forwarded me the email Oesch had written on 15 December 2023, probably to a very large group, where Oesch said absolutely awful and untrue things and did an allegedly indirect ... (just as his colleague had allegedly tried to do and entered a legal settlement with me in 2020) based on a total lie Oesch fabricated of an absolutely normal incident in activism sphere which Oesch twisted and turned and manipulated and falsified. I have multiple witnesses that can testify what Oesch has said in different occasions about the matter is false. Oesch's aim in all these disparagement have been a deliberate attack on my personality so as to discredit my research report about him

Message-ID: <005701d922b1$83ac8e60$8b05ab20$>


From: "Christian Oesch" <>

To: "Christian Oesch" <>

Subject: Reza Ganjavi

Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2022 16:14:17 +0100

Message-ID: <010801d91097$e6d9f490$b48dddb0$>

"... Ich dulde keine Erpressungen, aber wir haben 2 Filme über Reza, die er ganz sicher

nicht möchte, dass wir das über ihn veröffentlichen! So ein gewisser Abstand,

könnte nun Weisheit bedeuten, denn es könnte mit meiner Besonnenheit bald am

Ende sein."


"we <blah blah snipped for web posting>"

That email was apparently sent to his general email list -- and that is precisely why I said in the 9 January 2023 that I would do another email to a wider audience to debunk Oesch's attack on my reputation with his lies and false accusation. What I said about him on my video was absolutely true -- it was not defamatory and it was about his public actions. What I said in my Facebook post which he reprinted as an exhibit was absolutely true, and a matter of public concern. Hopefully the prosecutor will wisely kill this meritless case, but if it does drag on, Oesch should be subpoenaed to provide the authentic, verifiable source of the email he sent on 15 December 2023 so we can see who he sent it to but I'm willing to bet it was to a large group, based on information I have.

He falsely accuses me of some things in the email, lies about me, states irrational stupid thing that don't add up logically, and indirectly threatens me. He knows that I have friends on that email list who would get it to me so it was his way of trying to...

Among the nonsense he says in that email is that I live with my grandmother (which is not true and has never been true) -- and he says that I want him to file a criminal complaint against me -- which is absolutely false. I don't know which corner of his mind he pulled out these latest lies from.

I have been very respectful to his rights; even the investigative report about him was reviewed by two lawyers before I publish it to make sure I respected his rights. I expect the same. But he has been out most disrespectful to my rights and has gone out of his way to try to damage my reputation in order to discredit my factual report about him. 




NOTE: Swiss penal defamation laws (StGB Article 173, 174) have two key ingredients:

·   Truth or legitimate belief of truth of the statement.

o   I have extensively argued in this response, supported by evidence, that everything I said was the truth or sincere, well-founded opinions that I believed to be true.

·   Applicability to the audience (Article 173, Paragraph 3)

o   Every statement I said was applicable to the general public as a whole, let alone the small audience who received the email.

o   I have argued herein that the recipients were part of an email someone forwarded me the same day that included disparaging, defamatory statements about me

o   The email addresses for the audience I sent the email to was in that email I received (which totally debunks Oesch's theory about selective targeting blah blah)

o   Nevertheless, in each of the sections below, I provide an assessment of Article 173, Paragraph 3 to help the Prosecutor with the assessment.


"This is going to a small circle of people. Apologies if you receive this again, since in due time I have to do a larger mailing."

·   This statement does not make any allegations and therefore cannot be against Article 173 Paragraph 2.

That statement cannot be defamatory -- it's explaining a fact, and projecting a future event. Oesch's argument that this is part of a plot-line has many holes in it because as explained already, his plot-line involves

a) selectively omitting facts that are not convenient for his fictitious plot-line that clashes with reality;

b) falsifying facts in order to build his fictitious plot-line


The reality of the situation was, as explained already, I received two emails that Oesch had written recently. One was part of an email chain I received on 9 January 2023 where Oesch falsely accused and defamed me -- and one was a 15 December 2022 email Oesch had written that I received on 7 January 2023, where again, he lied about me and defamed me. The 9 January 2023 email I received had some email addresses in it, and those were the email addresses I used in my 9 January 2023 email.

There was no strategic targeting, conspiracy theory, <Oesch-BS-snipped> plot blah blah -- very simple.  The 15 December 2022 email, the list of recipients were hidden -- so I planned to do a larger  mailing in due time to set the record straight in light of Oesch's attempts to defame and attack my reputation in order to try to discredit my investigative report about him. That is the whole story. There's absolutely nothing defamatory or improper in it. All of Oesch's statements pertain to the public -- he's publicly defamed me -- and all the comments that I have written in the email of 9 January 2023 are about Oesch's actions and words in the public sphere, as illustrated herein.


"Christian Oesch has stated a number of lies about me"


·   That is a fact that has been illustrated herein in detail, and Oesch has said many lies about me publicly, therefore, that statement is not in violation of Article 173 Paragraph 2.

That is a fact. I have evidence that he's told people that I'm a <Oesch-lie-snipped>, that I live with my grandmother, that I'm poor, and other such lies.

Here are some examples. There are many many many more if you like to see them but what I said was absolutely a fact.

Christian Oesch has said these and many other lies about me:

·   "He is a jaelouse Iranian" - False! I'm a non-jealous Swiss. I'm certainly not jealous of anybody especially Oesch. Just look at his profile and look at mine. I would rather die than to one day have a profile and background like Oesch!

·   "Lives with his grandmother" - False! My grandparents are long dead and I have never lived with them.

·   "Is broke" - False! Thank God, given my formal education and career, I’ve never been broke in my life and have always had money to live a modest, honest life. And I’ve always worked hard for my money. And I always earned my money from honest ways, with a good heart and clear conscience, and always tried to help other people, and have never stepped on anyone. I have an impeccable reputation which Oesch has tried hard to destroy. See stellar personal and professional references at the links above.

·   "He is mentally unstable" - False! I've never had a history of mental issues. To the contrary, I have helped many people with their mental health issues, including helping a young Swiss woman who had tried to kill herself a few days before we met, and had been in clinics for years. After we met and had many conversations about her problem (bulimia) and explored it in depth, she was able to solve the problem that 6 years in clinics did not solve, and she went on to have a happy life, a family, and never went to a psychiatrist or psychologist again. Another case off the top of my head, is a case of a Swiss alcoholic who was binge drinking since a young age, and stopped drinking after our talks and became completely free from alcohol. There are numerous cases like this where I have helped others live a better, happier life. And I’ve helped numerous people stop smoking.

·   Oesch has said that I have defrauded Stephan Seiler. That's a cold-blooded lie. See Seiler section below. Seiler entered into a legal agreement with me via my lawyer, which Oesch preposterously and stupidly and viciously calls fraud.

·   Oesch has said that my brief statement in the video to Bundesrat defames Oesch. That's a lie. Everything I said was factual and related to Oesch's public activities.

·   Oesch has lied that I was kicked out of the St. Gallen talk of Martin Röösli. That's a flat out lie.

·   Oesch has lied about the second talk of Röösli -- that I was kicked out almost by force blah blah which is a flat out lie. Even Martin Röösli is ready to testify that Oesch is lying.

·   "and tries to attack everyone who is successful." That's a lie. Look at my references linked above. And I've never "attacked" Oesch - debunking someone's lies is not an attack. And Oesch is not successful at all, in my opinion. He has a history of failures and wrong decisions and dodgy engagements.

·   "Reza this online troll" - that's a lie. I am not and have never been an online troll.

·   "The post of Reza is total slander" - that's a lie. My post debunking Oesch's fake claims was absolutely factual. Oesch likes to call some things he doesn't like "slander", "defamation", "fraud".

·   Oesch has accused me of "unprofessional jealousy". That's a lie. Why would anyone want to be jealous of Oesch? Especially professionally!

·   "Mr. Ganjavis does not speak or understand German". That's a lie. I'm a Swiss citizen and had to take a German test for my citizenship and the Geminderat told me "your German is very good" -- it is not, but I can get by -- but all the jobs I did in Switzerland were for large companies like UBS, CS, Nestle, in highly international environments, so we spoke English. And my Swiss friends preferred to speak English than High German which is what I learned. My grammar is not good but many Swiss people cannot write a fully grammatically correct letter in High German which is the official language. Also, Swiss German is very different than High German so what you hear in the street doesn't support your learning. But I still can get by in German, and Oesch lied. To say I do not speak or understand German is a lie. Oesch uses every excuse to defame and degrade me in order to discard the truth against his lies.

·   Oesch has said I'm a member of <Oesch-BS-snipped>. That's absolutely a lie.

·   Oesch lied about my role in my own project, and said I had just suggested the Hardell letter. What a disgustingly crazy unbelievably rude and shameless lie which Oesch absolutely knew was a lie.

·   See the Najadi testimony herein. There's concrete evidence of Oesch lying about me, that I'm a <Oesch-lie-snipped> blah blah.

I hope 16 examples is enough! I can probably list a bunch of more lies he's said about me. Evidence for all the above is available.


"and his engagement in the Hardell-Ganjavi project"

·   Oesch's dishonest, self-imposed, disrupting engagement with my project is a public matter -- Oesch has made numerous statements about it publicly, therefore, that statement is not in violation of Article 173 Paragraph 2.

That is a fact. Oesch has said numerous lies in relation to my project with Dr. Hardell.

1. Extensive evidence shows how his colleague gave me access to the YouTube account so I delete the lies Oesch said about his minimal, last-minute, self-interjected-via-lying-about-his-background and disruptive behavior regarding my project.

2. Oesch lied about his engagement in my project in four languages (English, German, French, Italian).

3. Oesch claimed he had coordinated the project in a series of YouTube videos that Stephan Seiler made for Oesch under Oesch's direction. The text said, verbatim: "The coordinator of the letter is the Bernese entrepreneur and 5G activist Christian Oesch.” -- which is an ugly big lie by Oesch. Seiler eventually gave me access to his YouTube channel so I can go delete these lies.  Seiler claims he didn't get  money from Oesch so maybe Oesch was using him for free as an activist - or giving him tips / donations -- but Seiler said he only put in the video what Oesch told him to, so this big lie came from Oesch. 

4. Oesch claimed Dr. Hardell wrote the letter at his suggestion! Crazily and shamelessly taking credit for what I did, again!

5. Oesch claimed that he had saved the project which is an utter lie. I ran my project successfully -- I call it Hardell-Ganjavi out of respect for Professor Hardell but this was my project -- I conceived it, initiated it, recruited Professor Lennart Hardell (MD, PhD) for it, worked extensively with him, and professionally managed it. Oesch did NOT save the project -- that's a cold blooded lie. Details available if you like.

6. Oesch's nephew who posts for him on Facebook wrote that Oesch co-authored the letter. Oesch denies it but I believe the admin who knows them both and said the nephew would not have posted that without information from Oesch.

7. Oesch lied he was working with Dr. Hardell even after Dr. Hardell expressly told them that their minimal contact was over.

8. Oesch lied that he terminated his contact with Dr. Hardell.

9. Oesch lied to Dr. Hardell about having introduced a donor whom Dr. Hardell says he had contact with independent of Oesch.

10. Oesch lied that Dr. Hardell had "ordered him" without stating that it was Oesch who proposed doing the translations and it was Oesch who went around me and didn't even have the respect to coordinate with me, and he did that exactly for egotistic reasons -- so he can have a piece of the action of my high profile project.

11. Oesch deceived Dr. Hardell to believe Oesch was a hotshot blah blah. Oesch said a number of lies about his background to win Dr. Hardell's trust.

12. Oesch lied about my role in the project and said I had just suggested the letter. What a disgustingly crazy unbelievably rude and shameless lie which Oesch absolutely knew was a lie.

That should suffice as proof that my statement was true. I can provide much more info and detail on the subject if you like. Also see the next section for info related to the above.


"and a lot of lies and fake claims about his competence"

·   Oesch has said numerous lies about his competence to the public, in words and in writing including on the internet. Therefore, that statement is not in violation of Article 173 Paragraph 2.

It is a fact that Oesch has said many lies publicly about his competence and background. That's well documented in the investigative report. For example, he said "I've been working in biomedicine since 2003"-- that's a flat out lie. BX Protocol was not a biomedicine - it was a scam. And in 2003 Oesch started 8 shell companies involved with dodgy "tax strategies” blah blah. Here's a list of some of the shell companies he started and none were in biomedicine!


·      Limited International Funds  - 12 Oct 2003 – 31 Dec 2010

·      Dynamic Financial Services LLC  - 10 Sep 2003 – 6 Jan 2005

·      Global Debt Solution LLC  - 9 Jul 2003 – 20 Oct 2004

·      Hot Planet Ventures, Inc  - 22 Jul 1999 – 17 Jun 2002

·      4Axis Inc.  - 5 Feb 2002 - 18 Nov 2003

·      Megatrend International  - 1 Jul 2004 – 31 Jul 2010¬

·      Creations Stewardship Association  - 1 Jul 2004 – 1 Nov 2010

·      Stewardship Holding Group - was active in 2004  – No company by that name was registered but “Stewardship Holdings” (WA) has Oesch’s name on it.  – 10 Dec 2003 – 01 Apr 2014 – but this was used later for BX Protocol.

·      AAA Claims Management Corp  - 7 Jul 2011 – 11 Jan 2012¬¬

·      Human Economic Resources Solutions (HERS)128 - ¬30 Jun 2004 – 10 Jan 2010

·      Human Investment Services (HIS)129 – ¬30 Jun 2004 – 10 Jan 2010

·      MYHUB Group172 (NV) – 24 May 2007 - ¬¬¬

·      Asset Protection Monitor  - 1 Jul 2004 – 1 Nov 2006

·      Federal Asset Holdings LLC  (NV) – 23 May 2007 – 10 Nov 2011

·      Federal Asset Holding  (WA) – 9 Dec 2003 – 1 Apr 2014

·      Visual Perfection Corporation  (with Kenneth Wayne Leaming, Cindy Burningham, Conrad Cyr, Richard Cyr) – 29 Jul 2008 – 1 Nov 2010

·      Federal Asset Management Service  (WA) – 9 Dec 2003 – 1 Apr 2014

·      And one going back to mid-90’s, Abiento, LLC  – that company lived only 4 months.

·      Limited Asset Holdings America  (WA) – 19 Dec 2003 – 31 Dec 2013


He also lied to the public about his competence when he said he spent the last 20 years "in health optimization integrity and electro-smog solutions”. That's a crude lie about his competence.

He also lied to the public saying he was a biotech executive, and a biotech consultant -- both of which are big lies. When I show Oesch’s profile to real biotech executives and real biotech consultants I know, they laugh and characterize it as something I’d rather not repeat. Let’s call it fake!

Any professional working in biotech can verify the scam Oesch was involved in was not biotech, and Oesch has no competence in biotech, biology, life sciences, healthcare, etc. -- selling "silver water", an unscientific device, a scam cancer treatment, doesn't make a person a biotech executive or biotech consultant. I have several friends who are in real biotech and not what Oesch fraudulently calls “Biotech”. Their profiles are typical profiles of biotech consultants and executives. Oesch’s profile with training as a cook, and never working for a biotech company and having no peer-reviewed or non-even reviewed publications in biotech of pharma, and no scientific background at all, and no university education at all – it’s like a baker saying he’s a rocket scientist because he played with toy rockets as a kid!

A friend of mine is a biotech consultant. Compare his profile with Oesch’s!! He has a PhD in Anatomy and Neurobiology, Science Master and Bachelor degrees in Biology, and Post-Doctorate Studies in Immunology, Molecular Biology, and Transgenic Disease Models. That’s a biotech consultant for you, not someone who sold sugar water, funny devices blah blah that he calls science.


That should be enough evidence to show my statement is true. Here’s some more.

Just in the Hardell-Ganjavi project, one of the key factors behind the mess Oesch created (proof is that years later we're still talking about that project and Oesch's disruptions!) I've done numerous high profile projects for world-class clients, including managing a $40 million project. We do projects, we deliver them, we learn from them, we move on. Years later, we're still discussing that project which Oesch interjected himself by telling lies about his competence and background and made a mess of, due to his incompetence and egotistic motives. That is my professional assessment based on decades of professional experience. See:




We didn't vet Oesch, we just took what he said at face value, that he is this and that blah blah, but it turned out he was lying about his background and competences. And he didn't coordinated with me despite my express directive. He just took over the most crucial phase of my critical project, pretending to have had competences he did not have. That should be enough grounds to justify the truth of my statement.

Oesch lied about his competence/background so we didn't know:

·   what a dodgy background he had;

·   that the "Biotech" experience he's talking about is about a scam product based on gobbledygook gibberish he calls "science", and that his so-called biotech company had not done a single credible regulated trial, that there was not a single credible published scientific research about his scam drug;

·   that he had lied about his past job engagements;

·   that he had been engaged in things I view as highly unethical;

·   that there are no success stories that I can see in his resumé (which he pulled down after my report exposed his lies), I would not even have him on my mailing list.

Had I known the truth, I would stay as far as possible from him. But he tricked us by entering our sincere, diligent, truthful, hard-working, ethical, well intentioned circle, with his ulterior motives in mind, in my view: to get egotistic glory, recognition, and to help him make money by getting credibility and access to wider network of people, and he even tried to get Dr. Hardell on debate stage with the creator of the woowoo device he was pushing, in order to get credibility and help his sales.

Oesch lied about his competence and background when he interjected himself in the project. He presented a resumé that had a number of fake claims, and he messed up the project because of his lack of competence, lack of being synchronized and coordinated with the project manager, and he made promises he did not keep, and we totally lost track of distribution, and even after Dr. Hardell specifically asked him for accountability he gave a gibberish non-answer. He also lied to use about sending the letter to a large number of journalist; he was so incredible irresponsible and unprofessional despite his fake facade of being a hotshot executive. He passed the buck to Seiler while he told us he (Oesch) would take care of it and Seiler never did it.

In my opinion these things were a combination of Oesch's incompetence and conflict of interest and ulterior motives that were more important for him: to get egotistic glory and recognition. In my opinion, that was the main reason Oesch behaved as he did otherwise he would have fulfilled his promise to pay for the translation which he promised two times but backed out because the important thing for him was what I call egotistic glory, i.e., publicity, recognition, (fake) credibility by being seen as a critical part of a critical project -- which he absolutely was not.

I have had a history of bringing projects and programs to success, and we would have had a much better chance at making this project into a success had Oesch not lied about his background and competence and had not undermined the project for his egotistic and financial purposes (such fake credibility would help his sales -- being associated with a great professor/scientist would help Oesch push his unscientific gadgets).

Professional project managers understand the subject of risk management because some types of projects including this one are highly risky. Oesch didn't understand that or more likely didn't care -- it seems that he was willing to do anything including paying money to have his name associated with my project, even at the cost of disrupting and hurting the project.

Those were some of the risks he introduced that became serious issues that undermined the project, while Oesch was going around bragging about how great he was, and lied about how he was such a crucial part of the project (in reality, he showed up last minute after our letter to the Bundesrat was completed and signed by numerous scientists), blah blah.

Oesch has a history of doing this. See:

Ms. <> whose project Oesch also distressed, and he treated very badly and tried to bully her and insulted her, and she's cut all contact with him -- told him once she cannot appreciate it when someone adorns himself with someone else's feathers.

The list of lies about his background are long and well documented in the investigative report:

He claims he's a biotech executive, he's claimed to have worked for Knights of Malta, he claimed to have been a victim of fraud by US Government, that US government stole his money, that he was the co-initiator and Vice Chairman of the Stop5G in Switzerland Petition, all of which are lies. His resume contained a number of fake claims. And other such lies about his background. See details here: -- Also see above section on Oesch's profile.

Lying about one's background and job experiences is lying about one's competence because competences are acquired as result of jobs one claims to have had -- so when those claims turn out to be fake, those competences are missing.

Oesch also lied saying he was a Plaintiff in my UBI/SRF case. Evidence provided herein (search for UBI). Oesch's entire argument in his complaint about his role in the SRF/UBI process is a lie. He played no role whatsoever. The truth behind what he said about my talk with SRF report is as follows:

·   I did not say any lies to SRF journalist about Oesch. If Oesch had read the UBI briefings he would have known that -- but he was not a party to the case. He's just trying to take credit for my work, again!

·   I in fact filed a criminal complaint against SRF and the journalist, and that complaint included the fact that they had misquoted me about Oesch.

·   I dropped that complaint which I filed in Bern, after the SRF case was settled at UBI for reasons that are outside the scope of the current case but details are available, and I will publish them in due course.

In one of the several cases where Oesch lied about his background, on his resumé Oesch claimed that he was a "Director of Business Development" for "Knights of Malta Hospitallers (O.S.J.)".

I contacted the real, only genuine Knights of Malta Hospitallers (O.S.J.) and they said they've never heard of Oesch! Perfect example of how Oesch lied about his background. They made the declaration in writing:


Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 13:22:09 +0000

Message-ID: <>

References: <>



Fabiana Giovannoni

Assistant to the President of the

Commission for the Protection of the Names and Emblems

Sovereign Military Hospitaller Order

of St. John of Jerusalem of Rhodes and of Malta

Magistral Palace

Via Condotti 68 - 00187 Rome

Tel:  +39-06-67581-251

Fax +39-06-6797-202


“Dear Mr. Ganjavi, thank you for your e-mail. The organisation, the Sovereign Order of Hospitallers of Saint John of Jerusalem, O.S.J., Knights of Malta as well as Mr. Woodall and Mr. Oesch, about which you have inquired have not, and never have had, any connection with the Sovereign Military Hospitaller Order of Saint John of Jerusalem of Rhodes and of Malta, also known as Sovereign Order of Malta, Order of Malta, or the Knights of Malta. This organisation is not authorised to use our name and emblems, which are legally registered as service marks or trademarks in many countries including the European Union, the USA, and the Russian Federation.

Mr. Thomas L. Woodall and Mr. Christian Oesch, never have, and never have had, any connection whatsoever with the Sovereign Order of Malta. Moreover, the Sovereign Order of Malta has never knowingly had business dealings of any sort with these individuals. The Sovereign Order of Malta is more than nine hundred years old and remains dedicated to living the Roman Catholic faith and to the care of the sick and poor regardless of nationality or creed...” Commission for the Protection of the Names and Emblems, SMHO of SJoJoRao

“Dear Mr. Ganjavi… Christian Oesch and Thomas Woodall are not members of our Order. We have never had any connection with these persons. Oesch has never been our Director of business development (a role that does not exist in our Order). Moreover, we do not operate financial services, property development schemes of any sort. We are not involved in metal mining and biotech. The letter you sent me is not ours. For more information please read:


Swiss Ski Team: On the BX-Protocol site Oesch claimed “He is a former member of the Swiss-Ski Team”. It sounds like the Swiss National Ski Team – but it wasn't. Oesch’s business partner in seemingly dodgy shell companies, and also a fake Knight of Malta, Thomas Woodall, told me on the phone that Oesch was part of the Swiss Olympic Team – a claim which the Swiss Olympic committee could not verify, therefore it’s false – another lie. Woodall wrote Oesch two reference letters related to a fake Knights of Malta, and has himself faked about being Knight of Malta (which the real Order has repudiated as unauthentic).


"I also understand in December he made some threats against me,

but behind my back, and again made some fake claims."


·   Oesch has made threats against me in public (falsely accusing me of defamation for example which is a legal threat). He also threatened me indirectly ("behind my back") in his 15 December 2022 which apparently went to a big audience. Oesch also has made many fake claims publicly, in speech and in writing and on the internet. Therefore, that statement is not in violation of Article 173 Paragraph 2.

That is a fact. In a 15 December 2023 email he falsely claimed that I had defamed him, and he made a public threat in an email that I was not copied on (but received a copy from a friend) -- therefore it's an indirect threat, behind my back,

It's a tragic comedy that someone would threaten someone behind their back and not have the character to do so directly. It's because they know their threats are fake. The videos Oesch mentioned, he has misrepresented and lied about before, like lots of other things he has misrepresented and lied about. His threats of defamation and legal action are nothing but hot air because he absolutely had no case -- you can be sure if he had a case he would file it, but he did not because my investigative report, and the video I made for Bundesrat are legally compliant. I had the report checked by two lawyers. And Oesch knows that. He has already made remarks about that when he accused me about being part of <Oesch-BS-snipped> which is absolutely false. Oesch wrote about me without mentioning my name but the context made it clear it was about me, and it was understood as such:

"die Rechtsanwalt-Kanzlei geprüftes <Oesch-BS-snipped> Mitglied"

Oesch said in his complaint he never took legal action, but didn't say why. The real reason is it's because he never had a case. And still he doesn't have a case. This complaint he filed is completely bogus. Articles 173 and 174 were not design to shield a person who lies to public from having his lies debunked!

He's also told some people he did not take legal action against me because he didn't want to hurt the movement. That's a lie too. He doesn't care to hurt any movement, in my opinion. And I'm not in any movement with him. And with regards to the 5G activism, it's my sincere belief that he's done the movement more damage than good. What he did to my project is a perfect example. Also his mixing his woowoo conspiracy theories with 5G is very bad for those of us who argue points from a scientific standpoint not unfounded delusional conspiracy theories.


"I really wish I didn't have to waste so much time on

uncovering Oesch's streak of falsehoods and fake claims."


·   Oesch has said many lies and fake claims publicly. Therefore, that statement is not in violation of Article 173 Paragraph 2.

I expressed a wish that I had. A wish is not a statement of fact. It is an opinion, an idea, and as such, it cannot be defamatory. It’s protected by Article 16 of the Swiss Federal Constitution.

I call that sincere wish a waste of time but in reality it was not a waste of time. First and foremost it was my moral duty to the Swiss society. It was not a matter of choice. I cannot remain silent when I see someone is deceiving people. Oesch would have spread many times more lies than he has already if it weren’t for my report debunking his lies. So the Swiss society and cyber space and other places where Oesch was reaching out to is a better place as a result of my report -- at least there are less lies there -- at least Oesch's LinkedIn profile with all the fake claims is gone. And so on.

And I've had feedback from people who have appreciated the work I did. It was a painstakingly long and diligent work. I never thought it would take so long, but the more stones I turned, the more I found about Oesch's deceptive, dodgy, and in my opinion, unethical practices.

Nevertheless, I could have spent my time playing the guitar for example. Look at this very filing, the answer to Oesch's ill-faith complaint. It has taken about 3 weeks of intensive more-than-full-time work. It's a waste of time but I have to answer the prosecutor in response to Oesch's absolutely bogus, dishonest, bad-faith, frivolous, abusive complaint which he filed, I believe primarily because he knew I had new goods on him, and I could file against him, so he wanted to have a head start.

Given it was a bogus complaint and he had no legitimate care, he had to resort to lies and omissions. His abusive, dishonest complaint has had a huge cost on my time, money, nerves, and most importantly health. I am sick right now as I write this because of lack of enough sleep in the last three weeks since I started working on this response. It has paralyzed my life. It's an evil attack that I have to surmount. I'm not saying Oesch is evil. He has done evil things. I'm not saying he's a liar. He has lied.

It's a fact that Oesch has said a lot of lies and has made a lot of fake claims. Just in the present document I've outlined numerous lies of his -- e.g. in the section about his lies about me. Please see the investigative report and search for lies and you will see much more instances of his lies.



The word "streak" was on my mind because just prior to writing the email on 9 January 2023, I had received a number of artifacts that showed a bunch of lies and dishonest claims from Oesch about a variety of things -- new lies I had not heard before -- so they all came like a streak of lies, e.g. the lies Oesch said to Pascal Najadi as illustrated above -- the lies he told to Roger Bittel which I did not include in this filing but can provide you a copy if you need it. And much more -- new lies and false accusations about Professor Hardell for example. Not just lies but also insults towards me and others and reckless threats. I have the list of the streak of lies I received recently if you like to have it as an exhibit.

In fact the entire "wish" was related to the streak of lies I had received just before writing that email. I was feeling, "oh no, I have to spend more precious time on Oesch's lies -- I'm tired of it" -- that was the gist of that statement. What I said in the phrase is absolutely true. It's sincerely how I felt and still feel.

Since December 2022, I received a number of artifacts that showed a big number of Oesch’s lies and false claims. They were so many that they appeared as a streak which is the term that I used in the email -- the DeepL translation is apparently as "flood" -- it's not quite the same but I stand behind it as a flood as well. If there was just one lie or two lies, I would not have formed the opinion that they appear as a “streak” which is a subjective characterization of significant frequency of occurrence. For example, in one Telegram chat transcript I received, numerous lies / falsehoods were stated as facts. So many occurrences in one artifact appear as a “streak” in my mind. In my view, even two or three lies is a streak because I am not used to dealing with people who lie. I care for truth and try not to even say one lie. Even one lie is too many in my ethos. And my circle of friends don't lie otherwise I would not associate with them. Thou Shalt Not Lie.

My impression that his many lies appear as a “streak”, and expressing that, is protected under Swiss Federal Constitution Articles 16 and 17.


"But I did it as a public service"


·   My research about Oesch is a public matter and is based on his public claims, actions, presence. He has been perfectly aware of my research which was released two years ago. I even sent it to him to get his feedback in case there are inaccuracies. He has never objected to any of the content, except to tell people that he has an answer for everything but he has never been able to refute any of the contents of the report, add he never filed a complaint about the report. The report has been in the public sphere since 2021. Therefore, that statement is not in violation of Article 173 Paragraph 2.

o   Oesch also said that in his complaint, that he could refute the investigative report, and pointed the prosecutor to Exhibit 2 of his complaint which is nothing but screenshots of the first page of my report in different languages (which are the same languages as Oesch said his public lies in). Fact is Oesch has had since 2021 to refute the contents of the investigative report but he has failed to do so. It's outside the scope of this complaint anyway, and outside the Statute of Limitation, but it's a "noise" Oesch brought up, so it needed to be addressed. Oesch is lying that he could refute the content later in the process. He has had . If he could he would have done it by now since the report has been out since 2021. And in his complaint he did not provide even one sentence, challenging any of the contents of my factual, well-researched report.

Note: Comments in the last section incorporated in this section by reference.


Indeed I researched Oesch's background and debunked his lies, as a public service. That's a statement of fact.

I started my investigation of Oesch for two reasons:

·   He falsified his background to deceive my circle of activists and interjected himself and undermined my project, and then lied about it publicly and took credit for my work and insulted and defamed me when I called him out. Before I could respond I needed to understand who Oesch was, especially in light of his many dishonest and self-glorifying big façade about how successful and wealthy he was, and big (fake) claims he was making.

·   He said some hard-to-believe statements to the public which I felt needed to be verified; such as his (false) accusation that US Government defrauded him and “stole” 4.2 million dollars of his money!

More discussion:

·   I published my findings because Oesch made a number of false claims to the public which was misleading and deceiving the public. I felt an obligation to publish my findings in order to help the public understand the truth that contradicted Oesch’s lies and false claims.

·   I had every right to do so under Swiss Constitution Articles 16 and 17.

·   Public has derived benefit from my meticulous research. I have had feedback from various people who highly appreciated the tremendous effort I put into this research, and said that it helped them at a minimum understand that what Oesch did to them was not a one-off ordeal, and some derived other benefits from my research.


"and also to enable me to know who he is, since he interjected

himself and messed up a very important project."


·   Oesch's disruption of my public project, and public fake claims he made is a public matter. Therefore, that statement is not in violation of Article 173 Paragraph 2.


That's a fact. He lied to my contacts, interjected himself, without coordinating with me, took over my project, messed it up, made promises he didn't fulfill, we totally lost track of distribution, he ignored Dr. Hardell and my request for accountability, and was utmost incompetent.

He boasted himself as a successful executive and sent around link to a LinkedIn profile that contained multiple fake claims (deleted after my report came out -- but I have it saved); and he sent around link to a paid service he deceptively promotes as a recognition of how successful he is (not). Real successful people don't have to pay for being recognized.

He lied about his role. He insulted and attacked me in writing when I called out his disruptive behavior and fake claims. I had to research him to address him properly. I couldn't approach a problem individual who'd acted dishonestly without understanding what he is about first. It's not my style to reciprocate insult with insult. I need to understand the root cause of a problem before trying to solve it. As Einstein said, you can't solve a problem at the level it was created. So what I said in the 9 January 2023 email in that regard was absolutely true and factual.

I explicitly informed the people around (and Oesch had just shown up) not to go directly to Dr. Hardell and coordinate the communication via myself, for the sake of streamlining and efficiency. As a seasoned project/program manager I knew that streamlined communications is extremely important, especially with a "rare" resource. Many groups around the world like to have Professor Hardell help them, but his time is very limited. It took me months of trying via different channels to get him to respond and become interested in the subject. Here comes Christian Oesch, last minute, wants to have a piece of the action for his egotistic, publicity, and financial motives (as explained here), and explicitly disrespected my wish about my project!!

If he truly wanted to help he could have done so. We would have welcomed it. And we did welcome it initially. He said he wants to pay for the translation. I accepted. I found a translator, then Oesch said it's too expensive, then we found a professional in Germany who charges less, and Oesch again didn't come through, and then to my shock and surprise, Oesch weaseled his way without coordinating with me -- apparently manipulated Dr. Hardell to believe Oesch is a hotshot -- and took over the most critical phase. Even if Dr. Hardell was manipulated by him and agreed, Oesch should have kept me in the loop but he came to me only after having taken over and asserted his like theft in my view -- taking credit for another person's effort -- I felt my project had been hijacked by Oesch, for his egotistic glory, publicity, and financial ulterior motives.

I already had the letter on a translator's desk, an activist and professional translator who was willing to do it as part of her activism -- so we were absolutely not desperate. Oesch lied to people that he was the savior, the hero, that he saved my project!! Ms. <> knows Oesch very well, and has pointed out his apparent need to be the hero in any situation. You have a great project going? Hang on, Oesch may come around, take it over, and call himself the hero.

Just recently, he did that to Pascal Najadi: Oesch went on a podcast with a fellow BX Protocol scam pusher, Sherri Tenpenny, and in the caption claimed that he was part of the criminal case Pascal filed against Alain Berset. I had a chat with Pascal later (see his declaration above). Pascal was shocked. He told me (I have this in writing) that Oesch was absolutely not involved, and Pascal was angry and told Oesch to get that text deleted -- and Oesch changed it but still cunningly made it sound like he was involved!!

A bit of detour:

Oesch's new approach is to raise money for the causes he wants to be involved in and then take credit by apparently exaggerating his engagement. He raised money for one activist who is suing Swissmedic -- and Oesch claimed how he was associated with it in an exasperated way. Then he tried to raise money for Pascal, and as one person said "hell broke loose" in Oesch's Telegram channel as the other (mostly) conspiracy theorists revolted that they don't want to give money to Pascal because he's a banker, and in that conspiracy world, bankers are considered evil 😂 or as part of the New World Order blah blah. Same with anyone associated with United Nations.

I worked for two United Nations bodies including a multi-year project for WIPO (OMPI) in Geneva. And my IT specialty is in banking, and I served several Swiss banks, including as an IT Security Program Manager. So some of Oesch's conspiracy theorists don't like my profile but I'm just an ordinary guy and am not part of <Oesch-BS-snipped>, New World Order, Banking Cabals, Rockefellers, Rothschilds, Vanguard and Blackrock, Bill Gates and Agenda 2030, Club of Rome and Budapest blah blah, oh Soros, Elon Musk, Mark Zuckerberg, Global Elite -- who's always THEM. If you ask the conspiracy theorists who is THEM there's always the standard answer: Rockefellers, blah blah, and the arguments that follow are usually utmost ignorant -- and most people who believe in these things are lower-educated or the uneducated. Oesch fits the profile.

Summary of why what I said in that sentence is absolutely true and it fully related to Oesch's public claims, activities, statements, lies:

·      Oesch disrupted the project by going around me to organize translations which I was already organizing, while knowing fully well that he should have coordinated with me because it was my project! I had informed people around, via email, for the sake of efficiency and streamlining of the communications, to go to Dr. Hardell via myself, or at a minimum I should have been kept in the loop.

·      Oesch took over the most critical phase of the project without coordinating with the project manager!

·      Oesch introduced multiple risks that became serious issues. We totally lost track of the distribution, target audience, and thereby the demand strategy I had in mind. The artifact was never intended to be a petition.

·      Oesch publicly lied by taking credit as the coordinator, co-author, or that the letter was written at his suggestion, all of which are lies.

·      Dr. Hardell discovered that Oesch had lied to him, so he terminated his contact with Oesch and informed him accordingly via email on 22 June 2020. I have a copy of it.


·      Months after Dr. Hardell fired Oesch from his life, Oesch still lied publicly lied that he’s working with Dr. Hardell !! Recently Oesch said he stopped his contact with Dr. Hardell -- but this totally contradicts the evidence I've seen: a) Dr. Hardell's email to Oesch  b) Oesch's behavior around the topic. So I believe Oesch is lying, again.

·      Dr. Hardell and I wasted a lot of time having to deal with the dramas Oesch was creating, including the extremely offensive email he wrote to me when I called out his fake claims about his role in the project. That was what kicked off my long investigative report about him, so I can understand what he is about, and to check some of his claims, which turned out to be fake.

All of this was highly disruptive to the project and relationship with a world-renowned oncologist, scholar, scientist, researcher, and author of over 400 scientific publications, who should not have spent a second of his time dealing with Oesch’s dramas, lies and fake claims.


"So it's clear that Oesch's ulterior motives are money and boosting his ego."

·   Oesch is making money from the public, and getting recognition and glory publicly, and that statement is about Oesch's public activities. Therefore, that statement is not in violation of Article 173 Paragraph 2.

Motives cannot be objectively measured with certainty, therefore, assessment of another person’s motive is subjective, an opinion, and in this case, based on his words and actions. Therefore, 100% lawful.

Oesch having ulterior motives is very clear to me. I hold that opinion and I have every right to hold that opinion since assessment of motive is always subjective -- and it's based on Oesch's own behavior as illustrated with some examples presently. There are more examples too. It's important to note that those two motives are related and I and others have observed both those motives in Oesch. More recognition also means more sales, money.

That is not a statement of objective fact, it is a statement of opinion because assessment of motive is subjective, and assessment of another person's sense of self is always subjective. I held these opinions based on very credible indications and facts.

Oesch has publicly said that I'm jealous of him, which is a big lie. If anything I think he's jealous of me -- he wished he had the kind of resumé and education I had. I'm not arrogant. But some people who have dealt with Oesch extensively say he projects his shortcomings onto others. He's quick at defaming or insulting me and he projects it onto me. I have heard stories about how he turns the table around and blames you for his shortcoming.

Motivation can't be measured objectively -- even in psychology, self-reports is an essential part of measuring motives, so it's always subjective. My subjective opinion is Oesch has ulterior motives, and I believe that to be true, and it's based on his own actions, e.g. pushing safes while he tells people to take money out of the bank because of some conspiracy theory he believes in; pushing unscientific devices when he gives talks about 5G; taking glory by associating with other people's work, etc.

As I understand and use the term, which is the conventional meaning in English, it means a secondary motive, or an additional motive, a side motive. I fully stand behind this opinion and believe it to be true for numerous reasons explained herein. I would never be so arrogant to believe I know the entirety of someone’s mind and motives, and contents of his consciousness – to assert anything to be his “only” motive. Oesch lied to the prosecutor saying I called it his only motive. Another Oesch lie!

Stephan Seiler who made the videos in which Oesch lied about his role in my project, told me that Christian Oesch's problem is his ego.

Having an ulterior motive is not unethical, depending on the motive. Having the opinion that someone has ulterior motives is not defamatory. It's not unusual for people to have multiple motives at the same time, thus the expression: shoot two birds with one stone. 

In my opinion and opinion of some other activists, some of Oesch's ulterior motives have been problematic because they involve promoting products that gave wrong sense of protection to people, for example, or risky things like silver water as treatment for viral disease -- and disrupting projects because he wants to get undue recognition. I did not qualify my statement in that email to say he has evil motives or unethical motives. I just said motives. And I believe what I said was true because he has ulterior motives. See Bianca Ball's testimony below "BIANCA BALL'S TESTIMONY ABOUT OESCH'S ULTERIOR MOTIVES".

Also notice how in his complaint Oessch cunningly lies again saying I said his “only” motive in “5G activism” is money and ego. I never said “only”, and I didn’t say the ulterior motive is only about 5G activism. He cunningly said 5G in order to limit my response spectrum -- but I didn't say 5G -- and I have plenty of evidence to show even within 5G sphere Oesch has exhibited ulterior motives.



Any assessment and communication of another person's motive is a subjective opinion; therefore it is protected by Swiss Federal Constitution Articles 16 and 17. Of course defamatory statements can be cloaked in the form of opinions or even questions as Oesch sometimes does -- but that was not the case in my statement because it was absolutely genuine, on strong factual grounds including Oesch's own behavior and words, and my experience and experience of other activists who feel exactly as I do regarding Oesch's apparent need for egotistic glory. There's a long chapter dedicated to it in my investigative report which spells out many examples that support my statement. See:

I am not a psychologist so my use of the term egotistic motive is a layman’s use of the term.

Oesch seems to have a strong desire to shine, to get glory. This is what I call egotistic motive. He has done this so many times. He has attached himself to great projects, or otherwise taken credit for what he hasn’t done, or given himself fake titles, and put on pretenses , has even lied to portray himself as what he is not, has "faked it" so many times. I'm not a psychologist but this apparent need seems to arise from some insufficiency, of not having achieved anything great in life in terms of education or career, at least during the 20 year period I researched him in detail.

As a seasoned project/program manager who gas built and run many teams of people (e.g. at Credit Suisse, I ran a project involving over 80 people, in 10 global locations and 5 time-zones) -- I have to be very cognizant of people's motivations because a motivation mismatch can break a project and is considered as a primary cause of conflict which wastes time and energy and puts the project at risk. In the professional settings everyone is stringently vetted so I don't have to worry about getting someone in the team who has lied through his teeth about his background, like Oesch did. In my professional opinion, Oesch had a key motivation of getting egotistic glory, recognition, credibility by being part of a high profile project, credibility by being associated by Dr. Hardell. I can write 10 pages on this topic and bring much evidence if it's required, but what I've said in related sections of this response may be sufficient to give the prosecutor an idea of why my statement was based on genuine grounds.

Oesch's dishonest and disturbing self-interjection in my project was purely motivated by egotistic motives of wanting glory and recognition.

Oesch's ensuing unethical, dishonest, inappropriate words and actions were very evident for his need to shine, be the hero, get glory, get egotistic boost, get recognition. He said utterly dishonest statements about his engagement in the project. Why would someone lie? What did he have to gain from such lies? He obviously thought he could get away with his lies, but my professional ethics didn't allow me to let him get away with his lies. So I held him accountable. And here we are now, years later, still immersed in a disorder that Oesch's fragmented, selfish, unintelligent, unethical actions created. His motive was clearly egotistic glory. He did silly things to maximize his egotistic glory. He sent around receipts from the post office, like anybody cared, all over the place, bragging about how he had successfully sent some envelopes! Big accomplishment!! And he padded it with link to his LinkedIn profile that had many lies, and his paid self-promotion which is perfect evidence about how he has an ulterior egocentric motive.

Oesch trying to get endorsed by Dr. Hardell by participating in a debate with maker of his gadgets had an element of desire for egotistic glory / recognition. The two motives are related. More publicity also means more money. Please see next section for further details.

Oesch trying to be named as the co-initiator and then Vice Chairman of the Stop5G in Switzerland Petition was for egotistic glory and dishonest.

Oesch trying to get <>'s mailing list, and giving her so much hard time when she refused -- I was witness to some of the communication he had with her on that topic -- chastising her preposterously, because she was wise enough not to turn over her mailing list to Oesch which he would have surely used for his ulterior motives of egotistic glory, recognition, and to push his products. He would have sent an email to everyone with the link to his LinkedIn resumé that had several fake claims -- and link to his "paid recognition" which of course he doesn't tell people he paid to be recognized. Who would ever do that? Pay for recognition? Someone who is in dire need of recognition, who has not been able to get it via his own hard, diligent work. That's what I meant, and here are the facts to support it.

Oesch has a history to trying to get credit from other people's work, or associating him with great works to get egotistic glory, recognition, praise, publicity. See chapter "Glory by Association" in the investigative report, which has many examples of Oesch's apparent egotistic motives that led him to strange actions:

Oesch gives me the impression that he has a big self-image as the best things since sliced bread, and because that self-image is fake (all psychological images are fictitious as they're based on memories - they're bundle of memories and as such transient, but thought gives them continuity and calls it the self - the psychological sense of self. And that image needs feeding -- that's a part of that ulterior motive of self-glorification. There's another side to it, which is glory and recognition he has tried to get by associating himself with great works. It seems crazy to me -- I would humorously characterize it as: if there's anything great going on, you can be sure that Oesch will want a piece of action -- and will do anything to be a part of it. In my project, he weaseled his way in by lying, etc. as stated already.

On several occasion Oesch disparages others and puts them down as “amateurs’ and boasts himself about being so competent and professional (without having the legitimate track record that would give me an impression of the competence he claims to have. I have looked at a ton of resumes during my career. Oesch's resumé is not even in the league of 99% of resumés I've seen. Oesch would never be able to get a job at UBS or Credit Suisse for example, with the resumé he was touting around, because they dissect your resumé and verify everything, and there were multiple claims on his resumé that a) could not be verified  b) was verified as fake.

Yet Oesch has called me an amateur 😂, and others amateurs, compared to his image of his own sense of self, which is for the most part not associated with the reality of what he has been engaged in during the 20 year period I looked at. And since then, it doesn't look that different to me.


From the very beginning that he entered my life, he was talking about his wonder devices that he was about to launch, which were supposed to diffuse, normalize, blah blah, the radiation. I looked into it and it was evident that they devices were bogus. He has excuses for why they are not, but I have a big section in the investigative report that dissects the topic in consultation with experts, with the conclusion that the devices have no credible scientific basis.

But Oesch was promoting his "feel good" placebo-effect devices (based on evidence presented in the investigative report) at his 5G events and to his activist and in media and public mailings, and trying to get a network of sellers similar to his marketing of BX Protocol. He even hinted that I may want to sell the junk devices, and buy one, which I refused. I had a sense that his saying he wanted to build credibility with activists sounded creepy because credibility is something one earns and it's not a deliberate thing. I had a feeling from the beginning he had an ulterior motive to make money from this -- which I found troubling because I and many other activists spent so much time and energy on this cause, and the cause was our primary concern, but his mind seemed to have an ulterior motive: to sell his devices and he was doing this actively -- pushing them actively -- sending links around, and even set up a public event in Bern to showcase them. See:



Oesch refers to Dark Field Microscopy which is not a reliable method for measurement of efficacy. And he relies on a German lab which did tests on bacteria. Humans are a lot more than bacteria and most things that work on bacteria don’t work on humans, and that is why Swissmedic, FDA, EMA, etc. have stringent testing guidelines. Of course devices Oesch has marketed have not been through such tests, yet he claimed they're in use by many "doctors" but he was not able to provide any names of medical doctors. There were some rogue osteopaths and even a medical doctor whose license was revoked, who were pushing BX Protocol in order to get a big commission off the starting price of about $17,000. 

This is one of Oesch's many mailings, pushing his placebo-effect gadgets to activists:


Von: Christian Oesch

Gesendet: Dienstag, 23. Juni 2020

Betreff: Ihre persönliche Antwort zum Thema Elektrosmog in Ihrer Umgebung von Christian Oesch  

"As you probably already know, the constant bombardment of electrosmog, cosmic radiation and environmental toxins severely disrupt and impair the processes in our cells that are essential for survival. After extensive development time, we have a joyful message and want to bring to your attention the current happenings from the VIVIPRO platform with new and high quality products, the library and studies, curricula and courses.”

Of course there is absolutely no credible scientific basis for any of those claims. See

Oesch wrote to a key activist an email which seemed to be an email sent to many prospective clients:

“We would very much like to motivate and invite you as a Stop 5G and Health Activist to create an account as a free member or even as a Health Advisor on the VIVIPRO platform. This will give you access & insight to all member benefits, products, interesting info as well as news.”

No other activist I know would ever do such marketing for making money, to other activists and in the activism sphere. Therefore, the opinion I expressed in the 9 January 2023 email is absolutely genuine.

Notice some reference to “library and studies, curricula and courses, Stop 5G and Health Activist to create an account as a free member or even as a Health Advisor…”. The term “Stop 5G and Health Activist” is clear he’s mixing activism with money, even using the specific word “activist” – add the word “health” to it, it means in Oesch’s world, that there’s money involved since these so-called health consultants try to sell you something. The “health activist” in this context is not an activist like most of us who never get paid for our work, but someone within a financial network who receives commission etc., similar to the model Oesch used for BX Protocol, with members and affiliates. There was always a financial side to it.

Another example, since his early contact with Dr. Hardell, he showed to have ulterior financial and egotistic motive. He wanted to get Dr. Hardell on debate stage with Kinotke, the maker of Oesch’s woowoo gadgets. Why? In my opinion, only to give Kiontke and gadgets Oesch was selling credibility. Oesch did not realize that Dr. Hardell would never go on a debate stage with someone who is kilometers away from him, in terms of scientific credentials, credibility, accomplishments.

On 30 December 2019 Oesch wrote to me:

“this is the only reason, why I would even get involved with Dr Kiontke in the first place. He would be a perfect panel member in a public debate, including and not limited to Dr. Hardell etc.”

And went on promoting his device in the same email:

“generate up to 11 different Schuman-Waves, various fractal, broadband and substance spectrums all mixed up and applied under each specific program (e-Relief Mobil will have 18 different programs).” Blah blah

Of course there’s no credible scientific evidence whatsoever that e-Relief Mobil protects a human against pulsed microwave radiation. That's described in detail in Chapter 16 of the investigative report:

Oesch's device was priced at around 1000 Swiss Francs. This is yet another proof that Oesch had an ulterior motive in this realm of activism. There was clearly an ulterior financial motive in wanting to get a highly respected, foremost, famous Professor (PhD, MD), on a debate stage with someone who is not a Medical Doctor, who is not a PhD, who has invented some overpriced woowoo gadget which Oesch markets. And it would give Oesch a huge egotistic boost and publicity which he could use to make more money. So the two motives are related.

Here's an email I wrote him on 11 January 2020 that already shows I had suspicion of his ulterior motive to make money from activism. His reaction was absolutely unhinged and he insulted and defamed me and called me unethical for having questioned his motives -- he knew I was not stupid and was waking up to the fact of what he is about vs. the fake facade he had dishonestly built. I was stunned at his vulgar reaction. Before I responded I had to understand who the real Christian Oesch was! That's how my research about him started! Notice he totally failed to mention any of this background in his complaint because it would refute the fake plot-line he fabricated to deceive the Prosecutor.

Dear Christian

What is going on?

1) Apparently your cousin posted on a group of over 1000 Swiss that you

co-authored the letter.

2) The author of the Swiss 5G appeal says you jumped in last minute and

then claimed to have co-authored the appeal.

3) We don't have any transparency on what you have done -- what is the

plan for distribution etc etc -- and the strategy behind it

4) I hope the motivation of getting this letter out is not diluted by

promoting your EMF related product.

5) I am not happy that the distribution is being done without any

consultation  --  as a sole runner -- and I am sure this way we will

miss some key target audience -- and lose efficiency -- and not provide

the strategic demand letter that was part of this strategy.

6) What was your engagement with the Hardell letter exactly beside

helping fix some email addresses and paying for the translation?

Please clarify.

Thanks & Regards


Oesch even sent an article to an Italian media which published his nonsense that contained lies about Oesch's background. He was promoting these devices widely. Details in the investigative report. That is a clear indication that he has had ulterior motive to make money in the activism sphere.

Here's an example where Oesch lies about his background, and promotes his devices, and conspiracy theories with a clear sales tactic in mind, and it is mixed with activism. There are many more examples if you like more evidence but this should be sufficient to show my statement was not arbitrary and was based on facts.  -- the publisher told me he published what Oesch had sent him.

"Christian has devoted his past twenty years and career to research in health optimization integrity and electro smog solutions." FALSE!

"co-founder of VIVIPRO electro smog solutions platform...This platform supports health care professionals and their clients with a comprehensive health recovery system that aims to improve optimized natural ambient environmental radiation, strengthen the body, increase its resistance to electro smog (harmful artificial RF &EMF radiation) and other negative influences.Experiments prove..."

...blah blah but such experiments are not scientific and are not applicable to humans -- Oesch should know that as a "biotech executive" which he has never been but still claims he is! Details here:




Side note:

It's not illegal or unlawful to make money on the side with activism, and I have never made such allegations. Some activists I know, including myself, were not happy about Oesch's pushing his devices because it gives people a wrong sense of protection. And it seemed that it was a key motive for him -- it seemed to be much more than just a side thing where something is available and is sold passively if someone wants it like a measurement device I was for some time offering as a middleman to help people measure the radiation they're exposed to. Measurement is very different than protection. I made enough money for a lunch as the device was low priced and I received a small commission, and it was 100% scientific (same principle as measuring temperature).


SRF in their program mixed me up with Oesch and accused me of selling a device that's a 1000 francs (Oesch's unscientific woowoo devices were that expensive). That was part of the correction UBI did (and Oesch had nothing to do with it -- it was mainly my effort -- and association Schutz vor Strahlung was also a Plaintiff and helped but I did the bulk of the very intense and difficult work to hold SRF legally accountable to fulfill their duties to Swiss population. Oesch was not in the picture at all. He was absolutely not part of the legal fight despite his lying about that too, to the Prosecutor. Here's a confirmation from UBI's Dr. Pierre Rieter which debunks Oesch's lie to the Prosecutor in his complaint against me.

He is responding to my email and confirming that I and SvS were the only Plaintiffs and Oesch absolutely was not. It was a very difficult and time-consuming work to win against SRF for the sake of Swiss people, so our national media is held accountable and is truthful. And Oesch had nothing to do with it but it's not his first time trying to take credit for another's work.


3 Feb 2023

Sehr geehrter Herr Ganjavi

Gegen die von Ihnen beanstandeten Publikationen gingen keine weiteren Beschwerden als die von Ihnen genannten ein.

Freundliche Grüsse

Pierre Rieder

Pierre Rieder, Dr. iur.

Leiter Sekretariat

Unabhängige Beschwerdeinstanz

für Radio und Fernsehen UBI

Christoffelgasse 5

3003 Bern

Tel. 058 462 55 33


My email to him:

Sehr geehrter Herr Dr. Rieder

Ich hoffe, es geht Ihnen gut und Sie haben ein gutes Jahr 2023 hinter sich, und ich hoffe, dass auch der Rest des Jahres ein sehr gutes Jahr für Sie wird.

Ich weiss nicht, ob Sie sich an den Namen Christian Oesch erinnern. Er wurde auf SRF von dem Mann erwähnt, der teure Geräte verkaufte, die angeblich vor Strahlung "schützen".

Soweit ich mich erinnere, waren ich und Rebekka Meier von Schutz vor Strahlung die einzigen beiden Kläger im Verfahren gegen SRF b. 896/b. 899. War Christian Oesch auch ein Kläger? Hat er in diesem Fall eine Klage eingereicht?

Vielen Dank und herzliche Grüsse

Reza Ganjavi


Dear Dr. Rieder

I hope you're well and having a good 2023 so far and I hope the rest of the year will be a very good one for you.

I don't know if you remember the name Christian Oesch. He was mentioned by SRF by the man who was selling expensive devices that purportedly "protect" against radiation.

As far as I remember, myself and Rebekka Meier from Schutz vor Strahlung were the only two plaintiffs in the case against SRF b. 896/b. 899. Was Christian Oesch also a plaintiff? Did he file a complaint in that case?

Many thanks and best regards

Reza Ganjavi


These are the Plaintiffs, one is me the other Rebekka Meier -- Oesch was NOT a Plaintiff. He lied to the Prosecutor.


·      I am stating it’s clear to me, meaning it’s very clear in my mind. Of course the clarity is subjective because we’re not measuring motivation empirically. And the preceding paragraph is key: Oesch’s own action of mixing money with activism gives me that impression. This is 100% protected opinion and lawful.

·      Speculation about another person’s motive is purely a matter of opinion which is protected under Swiss Constitution Articles 16. See EXHIBIT “Articles 16, 17 of the Swiss Federal Constitution”.

·      A motive cannot be objectively measured; therefore it cannot be stated as a statement of fact and supported by direct or forensic evidence. A motive can be assessed based on a person’s behavior which constitutes circumstantial evidence. Therefore, a statement about another person’s motive is an opinion which is protected by Swiss Federal Constitution. In this case, my statement was based on Oesch’s own words and deeds, so it was not arbitrary.

·      Even in Experimental Social Psychology, measurement of motive is largely subjective, e.g., observable cognitive (e.g., recall, perception), affective (e.g., subjective experience), behavioral (e.g., performance), and physiological (e.g., brain activation) responses and using self-reports.

·      It is not defamatory to say someone has a financial ulterior motive, especially when you sincerely believe that to be true because the person has exhibited characteristic that give that impression.

·      My opinion about Oesch’s ulterior motive being was absolutely sincere and I believe it to be true as much as we are able to form opinions about another person’s behaviour. My opinion was based on the fact that he was often combining activism with money making.

o   Oesch was marketing woowoo feel-good devices that had no credible scientific foundation – “dark field microscopy” and “bacterial test” are not credible, relevant, applicable.

o   Oesch was pushing safes (in which you hide your money in) in association with the Cash Initiative while he was telling people unfounded, uneducated, inept conspiracy theories about the banking system, and telling people to remove their money from the bank. See BIANCA BALL’S TESTIMONY.

o   Oesch seemed to give much more importance to money than to core values in a civil society like truthfulness, caring for other people, helping other people. Oesch’s motive was money in doing many bad thing such as selling a scam so-called “alternative medicine” which was nothing but sugar-water, to severely ill people who had cancer, etc., and taking large sums of money from them without any concern for their well-being. Or teaching people “tax strategies” which was just sham ways to avoid paying your fair share of taxes. Or being a part of a scam Ponzi Scheme where people were tricked into believing they get paid for clicking on internet advertising, etc. Both the “alternative medicine” scam and the Ponzi Scheme scam were shut down by US Government. They were not so kosher! When someone is willing to do such things to make money, it’s absolutely fair to form the opinion that I held.



Here's another evidence of Oesch's ulterior motive: make money associated with activism. He's telling people to take their money out of the bank, and store them in safes they can buy from him at a discount!!



Oesch promotes seminars in making silver water that's a woowoo so-called treatment for viral infections that some conspiracy theorists use for Coronavirus.

See detailed explanation of why silver water treatment is debunked as a viable treatment and health authorities in the USA have issued many warnings against it:

·   “A Common Snake Oil Reemerges for the Coronavirus - The pandemic has sparked an interest in dubious cures such as colloidal silver—and some are trying to capitalize on it.”

·   Missouri Sues Televangelist Jim Bakker For Selling Fake Coronavirus Cure

·   There's No Proof Colloidal Silver Can Stop the Coronavirus. Stop All That. It's not just hype. It's dangerous.

·   Court Orders Halt to Sale of Silver Product fraudulently Touted as COVID-19 Cure

·   Department Of Justice Acts To Stop Sale Of “Nano Silver” Product As Treatment For Covid-19

·   Attorney General James Orders Companies to Stop Selling Fake Treatments for Coronavirus. Sends Cease & Desist Notices to Two Companies Fraudulently Marketing Treatments

In the flyer below, Oesch lied that he's a "biotech consultant". I know the biotech field as an investor in biotech for decades, and having interacted with numerous C-suite executives and even provided consulting to them. But I would never call myself a biotech consultant. A biotech consultant usually has a PhD in life-sciences, or other such credentials, and not just an apprentice in cooking as educational background. Also, Oesch has never worked or consulted for a credible biotech company, otherwise you could be sure he was included in his résumé. His claim is about BX scam being biotech but it absolutely is not and does not fit any characteristics of biotechnology.

Oesch charges money for these sessions that he promotes on his activist channel and website.  I have not researched the Swiss regulatory landscape but I know in the USA regulators sternly warn against this silver water woowoo treatment and advise people to avoid it due to serious risks. A top Swiss activist pointed out that Oesch pushing Silver Water as inappropriate.


And needless to say he tries to collect money for his association which propagates, in my opinion, nonsensical conspiracy theories. It is so-called activism. It is making money at the same time.

Notice it's "Plandemie" (Oesch doesn't believe the Pandemic that killed thousands of people was real !!)





Here's a witness testimony that Oesch mixed activism with attempts to make money and his egotistic, self-centered motives. Full testimony follows. Here are key phrases relevant to this case. The rest relate to my case against Oesch if I decide to file it. Bianca Ball is a key activist who has worked with Oesch extensively.

·      "Während meiner Zusammenarbeit mit Herrn Oesch wurde ich in mehreren Fällen Zeuge, wie aus unseren ehrenamtlichen Bemühungen (Volksinitiativen) versucht wurde, Profite für sich selbst zu erzielen. Sein Vorgehen war dabei nicht selten rücksichtlos, egoistisch und die Sache zweckentfremdend. Nach dem Ausscheiden von Herrn Oesch aus unserer Organisation hat er bspw. Interne Strategiepapiere veröffentlich und als eigene Arbeiten ausgegeben, wobei Herr Oesch gegenüber seinen Lesern/Followern und Zuhörer stets darauf bedacht war, sich selbst als Urheber oder Koordinator zu bezeichnen. Wohlwissend, dass dies entweder nicht der Wahrheit entspricht oder er selbst seine Mitarbeit stark übertrieben darstellt."

·      "During my cooperation with Mr. Oesch, I witnessed in several cases how he tried to make profits for himself out of our voluntary efforts (popular initiatives). His actions were not infrequently reckless, egoistic and misappropriated the cause. After Mr. Oesch left our organization, for example, he published internal strategy papers and passed them off as his own work, whereby Mr. Oesch was always careful to refer to himself as the author or coordinator to his readers/followers and listeners. Knowing full well that this is either not true or that he himself greatly exaggerates his involvement."


Grafenried, 30. Januar 2023 

[Auto-translated from German]

Regarding statements by Christian Oesch against Reza Ganjavi that are damaging to his reputation

On 5.11.20 Mr. Oesch tried to get me to delete a comment in a Youtube channel of a friendly medium (I have the administrator rights) or to have it deleted by the owner himself. The comment of Mr. Ganjavi contained a correction to various claims that Mr. Oesch had made in this interview about his own background. The content of Mr. Ganjavi's commentary referred to extensive research that Mr. Ganjavi had done on the person Oesch, which contained many credible sources. For example, evidence that it was the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) that had shut down the company - of which Mr. Oesch was CEO for a long time. 

When Mr. Oesch also sought discussion with the channel owner, the latter referred to the freedom of expression among his posts and that Mr. Ganjavi's comment did not contain any insults or vulgar language. Thus, it had not violated any policy. As a result, Mr. Oesch threatened legal consequences for the Alternative Channel and made negative statements about Mr. Ganjavi in order to enforce his demand for the deletion of the comment:



(Auszug aus dem Chatverlauf mit Herrn Oesch, welchen ich archiviert habe)


[Auto-translated from German]

Statement on other experiences with Mr. Oesch:

In conversations, I and other team members of the organization I volunteer with were repeatedly "inculcated" that Mr. Ganjavi was just a jealous <Oesch-lie-snipped> and that we should not believe a word he said. Christian Oesch was vice president at this organization at that time. The statements of Christian Oesch about Mr. Ganjavi, who was unknown to me at that time, gave me a negative impression, because Mr. Oesch made very great efforts to make Mr. Ganjavi appear untrustworthy.

During my cooperation with Mr. Oesch, I witnessed in several cases how he tried to make profits for himself out of our voluntary efforts (popular initiatives). His actions were not infrequently reckless, egoistic and misappropriated the cause.

After Mr. Oesch left our organization, for example, he published internal strategy papers and passed them off as his own work, whereby Mr. Oesch was always careful to refer to himself as the author or coordinator to his readers/followers and listeners. Knowing full well that this is either not true or that he himself greatly exaggerates his involvement.

Should further details be relevant for the course of a possible proceeding, I am available for further inquiries.

Kind regards

Bianca Ball


<phone number and address snipped for security reasons but will be provided to judicial authorities if needed>

I believe Oesch knew perfectly well that my statement regarding his ulterior motive was absolutely true -- he better know himself that much -- he should know what he is about, I hope. Therefore, he twisted my words in his deceptive, dishonest, bogus complaint to deceive the Prosecutor. He said I said his "only" motive is ego and money. I never said that.


Oesch refers to my email to Daniel Laubscher, Andreas Pflugshaupt and Kathrin Luginbühl, the three witnesses he names. He also names Stephan Seiler, but he did not receive the email and is not an witness to the allegations Oesch makes about the 9 January 2023 email, but I will address him briefly here since Oesch mentioned him, without flooding you with a book worth of evidence to show how wrong Oesch is.

Oesch mentions Daniel Laubscher and Andreas Pflugshaupt as two of his supporters, in a deranged email he sent to a group that stopped their contact with Oesch because of Oesch’s own issues related to behavior, promise, etc., in which Oesch insulted and defamed me (out of scope here).

Like most people, Laubscher does not understand the legal meaning of defamation (Zurich Cantonal Police told me only 3% of defamation cases they get are legitimate). I did not say anything defamatory in the email of 9 January 2023. Also it's a sad fact that with a name like mine, some people may automatically feel opposed to me because of my ethnicity, due to their conscious or unconscious bias. And Oesch has tried hard to defame me, by having said so many lies and insults about me which I have evidence of. So negative feelings towards me, from some of Oesch's contacts is not surprising.

I never had any dealings with Daniel Laubscher or Andreas Flugshaupt but it seems that they were negatively influenced by Oesch. The letter I provided above by Pascal Najadi is one example of how Oesch has defamed me and succeeded at defaming me through his vicious and dishonest attacks.

I offered in my email of 9 January 2023 a conversation if anyone were interested. This is a standard, polite gesture. In the business world I signed so many letters and emails with that statement, "should you have any concerns or questions don't hesitate to contact me". Everybody else who was not interested in a conversation did not write back. Daniel Laubscher who is close to Oesch for the moment, and forwards to him things about him (not just my email but he also forwarded Oesch other things from other people), wrote me back an aggressive message saying he did not want a conversation! He could have just not written, like the others. But he wrote, and started a conversation, about not wanting a conversation! Laubscher sounded fanatic and aggressive and got his facts wrong. I responded to his message then he threatened me, and in my last message to him, which Oesch conveniently did not include in the complaint, I put him in his right place.

Note Laubscher is using two wireless microphones while giving a talk about harms of wireless technology!

Here is my email to him which I also sent in German -- which Oesch intentionally did not include in his bogus complaint:

Dear Mr. Laubscher

It seems that you do not understand some basic concepts regarding communications:

1) I said in the message I sent that if you want to talk about it you can contact me. You did not contact me to talk about it -- you contacted me to say you do not want to talk about it. If you didn't want to talk about it you could have just not contacted me.

2) When you contact someone with statements that require a response, you should expect to get a response. As a rule of thumb, if you do not want a response don't contact someone.

3) In the email you sent me you misunderstood a key point. Furthermore, you copied a 3rd party, which meant your misunderstanding was further perpetuated. These two reasons were grounds for responding to you and the 3rd party so the misunderstanding is clarified.

4) I had no plans to contact you any further but am not writing to you because you wrote to me -- and -- you threatened me legally which in itself requires that I write you back to inform you, since you seem very ignorant about the subject you threatened me about. No prosecutor would ever take your case. There is no laws broken here. Don't waste your time. If you do not want me to write you back, don't write to me.

Best wishes for a great 2023

R. Ganjavi


Oesch mentioning Stephan Seiler as a witness is purely noise to clutter up the fact that Oesch does not have a legitimate defamation case against me. In the long-response I have a 30-page Exhibit about Seiler which I'll spare you :-) But if you like I am happy to send it.

The significance of Seiler in Oesch's complaint about me is none. But since Oesch mentioned him. Seiler was Oesch's camera man and produced multiple videos of Oesch after he interjected himself and took over my project and messed it up -- in 4 languages -- which lied about Oesch's role.

Once I called it out, Seiler agreed to delete Oesch's lies from his videos. He gave me access to his YouTube channel and I deleted Oesch's lies.

Seiler also participated in an email exchange where I called out Oesch's lies to Professor Hardell and the public, where Oesch reacted preposterously, and Seiler ignorantly defended him, not knowing the facts. In the process he allegedly <> me that if I oppose Oesch Seiler will release a video which they thought would be embarrassing for me (which in reality it wasn't). I got a lawyer and called Seiler out... He apologized and settled the case with me (see below).

Before that, Seiler sent copy of the demand letter my lawyer sent him to Oesch. Oesch that night allegedly sent me a email while impersonating as Martin Röösli, and called me a "weak pussy" and other stupid insults. I felt bad for Martin whose right was violated. I contacted him and he wrote a letter that it wasn't him. I worked with the police, and analyzed the matter deeply and concluded Oesch had likely sent the email. I didn't press charges because I like to avoid litigation but I sent Oesch a Cease and Desist letter. Oesch has been telling people that I defrauded Seiler!! (which is absolutely a lie). And he's been sending Stephan Seiler's number around telling people to call him so he tells them about the video they think is embarrassing for me.

The video in reality is at an industry event I was asked to leave after I questioned Martin Röösli (we are idealogically different but we are friends). I simply left -- this is very normal in the activism sphere. Oesch lied (again) and told people that I was kicked out, almost with force which was absolutely false. Dr. Martin Röösli himself told me last week he's willing to testify against Oesch's lie. Oesch even shamelessly lied about another meeting too which I can prove to be false, with direct evidence, and he cannot prove to be true. I guess he expects Seiler to lie for him in his defamation campaign against me -- and he even provided Seiler's name as a witness here, which is just noise but I had to address it. Here are some documents I referred to in this section:


·      Impersonating Dr. Martin Röösli: The same day Seiler received my attorney's demand letter and sent it to Oesch, and only to Oesch (since Seiler looked up to Oesch as a legal advisor I guess given how much Oesch has bragged about his legal history, which contain some big losses), I received a harassing message that purported to be from Dr. Röösli. After a deep analysis including discussions with the Zurich Cantonal Police, all the circumstantial evidence pointed to Christian Oesch as the author of the harassing message which impersonated Dr. Martin Röösli. See the analysis and long list of reasons why the sender couldn't be anybody but Oesch or his proxy:


·      Dr. Röösli's letter:


·      Cease and Desist Letter To Oesch After Röösli Impersonation, Stalking, Harassment Following My Legal Notice To Seiler

[Translated from German]

U/Ref: 426848

Statements about Reza Ganjavi

Dear Mr. Oesch I am indicating that I represent the legal interests of Reza Ganjavi. A corresponding power of attorney is assured. According to the information provided by Mr. Ganjavi, you have for some time been uttering untruths concerning his person to third parties with the intention of damaging his reputation. Such actions are to be refrained from immediately. According to his own statements, Mr. Ganjavi has a number of pieces of evidence that prove the aforementioned actions. He has so far refrained from taking legal action due to time constraints, but this should in no way be interpreted as a sign of weakness or a green light for the continuation of the aforementioned actions.

In recent weeks, Mr. Ganjavi has received written evidence that you have made false statements about him to a third party in connection with a legal dispute between Mr. Ganjavi and Stephan Seiler. According to Mr. Ganjavi, you were the only person whom Mr. Seiler had informed about the mentioned case and Mr. Seiler had stated that you had also been informed after the misunderstanding of Mr. Seiler had been clarified. Mr. Ganjavi subsequently received an anonymous, insulting and harassing e-mail regarding his letter to Mr. Seiler, this immediately after you had been informed about the mentioned letter according to Mr. Seiler. According to Mr. Seiler, you are the only person who knew about the mentioned letter.

I would like to point out to you that Mr. Ganjavi takes his rights very seriously. On behalf of Mr. Ganjavi, I therefore request that you immediately cease and desist from spreading untruths concerning his person.

Kind regards


Kathrin Luginbühl is a friend of mine and we’ve known and cooperated for a long time. She’s an angel and has helped many groups in Switzerland in their fights against mobile phone antennas. Oesch named her as a witness. She can testify that she received my email. But I do not dispute that I sent the email. Kathrin is well aware of the Hardell-Ganjavi project. She appears towards the end of my video to the Swiss Federal Council, and thanks me for my efforts:

Minute 36:54 she says:

·      (EN) “I would like to take this opportunity to thank the renowned Swedish oncologist, Prof. Dr. Hardell, for his valuable support, as well as the program manager and Swiss citizen, Mr. Réza Ganjavi, for his great work on this extremely important project.” Kathrin Luginbühl

Addressing remaining noise Oesch made in his complaint:

·      Oesch's comment about my use of his photo for a few seconds in the video is wholly unfounded. My use of his photo was fully compliant with copyright law (fair use).

·      Oesch's story about his engagement with UBI is a big lie. The only reason UBI issued the ruling against SRF (for the benefit of Swiss population) was because of my fierce legal fight with SRF for a long time -- and efforts of Schutz vor Strahlung who was the second Plaintiff and much less engaged. Oesch was absolutely not a part of the reason for UBI's ruling as Dr. Rieder confirmed in the email I reprinted above. It's absolutely pathetic that Oesch is lying to the Prosecutor and again, claim credit for other people's work. I provided a statement from UBI above that debunks Oesch's lie about his (non-) participation in the case.


On 17 July 2023 I sent the investigative report to Oesch. So he can give me feedback if there are any inaccuracies so I can correct them. He never did. Instead of giving feedback if there were any inaccuracies, he chose the vicious way – of trying to destroy my character with insults and lies, in order to discredit the report.

On various occasions he has said that he can debunk everything in the report – but that’s a lie. He even said that in the complaint, that later in the process he will – but he’s lying. He’s also said the report is just based on comments of people – what’s a lie too. Court of the Docket of the US Federal Court is a credible source!


Subject: Closure of research on your public statements vs. your background

Message-ID: <>

Date: Sat, 17 Jul 2021 01:04:12 +0200


The loopy-sounding stuff you wrote in your last email don't deserve an

answer -- but the public lies you've said about your background and all

the fake claims do. Your last reply was apparently what you were trying

to tell yourself -- and that gets more evident as one looks at your

background while examining your public statements. Your background

speaks for itself.


I'm now done with this research. Since accuracy is important to me,

despite your loopy-sounding reply to my last email in which I asked you

to substantiate your claims, I still decided to send you this draft in

case you see any factual errors that need to be corrected. I will only

consider sane, rational, _honest _statements and not remarks about

alligators and your self-monologue like your last reply.


As I am closing this topic, I'll assume you don't see any factual

statements that are incorrect, if I don't hear any factual corrections

from you by Wednesday 21 July 2021.





Honorable Mr. Wiedmer, I am at your disposal should you have any questions or need any clarifications. I beg you to issue a Nichtanhandnahmeverfügung or Einstellungsverfügung based on the evidence I have provided that show all my statements were true, or were fact based opinions, and pertained to Oesch's public activity and statements, and Oesch's complaint has not met the elements of the pertinent articles of law. God bless you.

Many thanks and best regards

R. Ganjavi

24 February 2023

/s/ Reza Ganjavi


ADDENDUM: 2 March 2023, Updated 10 March 2023




In the response I showed several reasons why his complaint was an abuse of the legal system and prosecutor's time, including illustration that Oesch allegedly knew his complaint was not legally grounded, therefore, he said a number of falsehoods as facts, and he omitted several key facts, and employed a bogus, irrational, dishonest plot-line which I illustrated how it clashes with well-documented facts – facts that I illustrated with concrete evidence including his own statements.

One of the key wicked benefits of filing of this abusive complaint has been for Oesch to wickedly use it as a PR campaign.

Unfortunately, he has now taken this to a new level of wickedness, and ridiculousness, which grossly violates my rights. But he is doing so as part of this case, therefore, it would be kind of you to address it within this complaint; since what he is doing is directly part of this process, and it’s very very very wrong and abusive of the legal system.

As illustrated in my complaint, together with evidence, Oesch has makes a big publicity campaign and announced his complaint to the public using Telegram, his website, LinkedIn, etc. – to falsely accuse me of totally bogus, meritless allegations.

His malicious intent is further illustrated in the fact that on the page that he set up for that specific purpose, he is also posting promotional material about the BX Protocol scam which was shut down by FDA’s Office of Criminal Investigations (I provided the proof in the Response). That by itself should be grounds to order him to delete that page because it deceives the Swiss public about a terrible scam, related to public health. 

He's using science-sounding gibberish to deceive people into that belief, and is going against the holy grail of medical research, i.e., the peer-review process, which he discards (just because the scam drug has absolutely no peer-reviewed publications, and there was never any regulated or unregulated, proper scientific trials because it's a scam. It's "energized" sugar-water Oesch was selling for $17,000+, and was promoting it in Switzerland too -- which people are again led to believe it cures cancer. If you show any doctor or scientist what he posted about BX Protocol, they will laugh because it is gibberish, it is nonsense, but his cultist followers and average people are deceived into believing it's legitimate. 

The only reason Oesch posted that BX Protocol gibberish on the unlawful page he set up was because my investigative report about him has two large sections about that scam, and Oesch's wicked ideas is apparently to discredit the investigative report by his dishonest, bogus attacks on me, e.g., defamation, false accusation, insult -- and he's coupling that with promoting BX Protocol on the same page in order to deceive the public into believing BX Protocol is legitimate. So his wicked idea is apparently that these two wicked approaches could help him achieve his goal of discrediting the investigative report about him which debunks his public lies and fake claims. 

There are numerous reasons that illustrate his malice, since his lies were debunked. He expected to come back to Switzerland, and lies to Swiss public, and engage in the same modus operandi as his 20+ years in the USA, and get glory by associating with other people's projects, like how he disrupted my project and lied about his role publicly, -- and get away with it. Sorry, Swiss people are smarter than that. Mr. Wild West was debunked, and he doesn't like it, so he's engaged in these wicked ways to discredit me -- and his abusive, meritless complaint was part of that scheme -- aside from having other motives as illustrated in my Response.

The BX Protocol gibberish he posted recently on that infringing page about me, also includes strange conspiracy theories (not strange for a conspiracy theory guru) that seeks to debunk criticism of the BX Protocol scam, by saying it was big pharma which conspired against it because it is jealous of it, blah blah -- which ignores the fact that legitimate pharmaceutical companies are not jealous of non-scientific gibberish. To bring a new drug to the market often costs a pharmaceutical company over a Billion Swiss Francs, and many years of regulated, stringent research and testing. BX Protocol as Oesch joked, came out of the toilette! I provided the link and picture of that internal company joke since they knew BX was nonsense, a scam. But he has the nerves to publicly post that BX is legitimate and bring scientific sounding gibberish to support it. This is extremely deceptive for the public.

It's the same line of thinking as Oesch's foolish, dishonest remark that I am purportedly jealous of him (which is absolutely false)!! Who in their right mind would be jealous of him?! And jealous of what?! I don't see anything impressive in his background or profile that anyone would want to be jealous of -- and to the contrary, there's plenty in his current and past profile that I believe an average person would not want to be associated with, let alone be jealous of. Pharma was surely not jealous of BX Protocol either!

Oesch is allegedly also doing another very very very terrible, abusive thing with that page he set up. Remember, he set up the page as part of the legal process, and his excuse is that he filed a complaint against me, therefore he can abusive it for publicity.

I spoke with Bern Cantonal Police, Cybercrime division. They said the page he set up is illegal. It is against the law to publicly accuse someone as he has done.

Oesch’ new terrible, abusive action related to his abusive complaint is that he is apparently abusing the Comments section to post or orchestrate bogus, fake, manipulative comments -- or at a minimum approve abusive comments -- crafted to achieve his ultimate goal which is to try to discredit my investigative report by damaging my reputation, using lies, false allegations and insults.

Oesch has had almost two years to complain or give feedback about my investigative report but he did not and could not because my report is lawful, and the content is accurate and based on credible sources. He knows that. So he was never able to oppose any of the content.

Instead, he has chosen the wicked way – right along with a lot of wicked things he has done in his life – to abuse this complaint process as an excuse to set up that page, post/approve/participate in disparaging, absolutely false, insulting comments against me – to try to discredit me – so he can discard my report. That's the wicked game he's playing at the cost of my reputation, and the cost of deceiving the public to believe a scam drug is legitimate, and to believe the lies and insults he says about me are true. And it has worked. There's evidence that the lies he has said are believed by some of his cultist followers who also seem to believe in every conspiracy theory under the sun. 

If you read the bogus comments they’re very specifically geared towards that end...

As this is all done as part of the complaint he filed, it ought to be handled within the same complaint, so I shouldn't have to file a complaint and start a new fight. It should be part of my defense process in the existing complaint. I hope you agree.

The process of handling it should be simple I suppose. When...

Also please note that:

Bernese Cantonal Police told me that... The simpler approach would be to...

The terrible comments that he wrote / approved also attempt to influence the prosecutor against me, by the insults and lies. If you read the abusive page with a critical eye you will notice that everything said is towards the goal of discrediting my investigative report about Oesch – that is the underlying theme and goal which Oesch is trying to achieve – which is a very dirty, nasty, wicked way of trying to destroy my reputation in order to quash my constitutional rights, which I exercised to help the society. And there is legitimate feedback where people have appreciated and benefited from my research who may have otherwise been deceived by Oesch.

It’s extremely painful. Being subjected to so much insult and lies is tough even on the toughest people -- it's very injurious emotionally, very painful. Perhaps if you have not been subject to such harassment you don’t know how it feels, to open a page and read all these lies and insults posted about you that are 100% false, vicious, wicked, and clearly abusive of the complaint process which he apparently abused so he can build this platform to try to discredit me and therefore my investigative report.

The complaint process is for people to file genuine complaints. Oesch’s complaint was not genuine. I illustrated it in the Response. As he walked down the articles of law, he came to realize he has no case. But he filed anyway, for a number of wicked reasons which I illustrated in my answer. And not having a case, he had to pad it with a bunch of lies, and omit key facts, and use a fake plot-line...

7 March 2023


Everything I said in the email of 9 January 2023 was already said in my investigative report. There was nothing in there that was not said before publicly. Oesch's ulterior motives are discussed in depth in the investigative report. The recipients were perfectly aware of the investigative report which was release two years ago. Oesch himself has publicized the report, including to the recipients, calling it defamation. He never filed a defamation claim about the report because he could not. I had two Swiss lawyers review it to make sure Oesch's rights are respected. I respect everyone's rights. 

And as illustrated in the answer I filed, everything I said in that email pertained to Oesch's public statements and actions....


21 February 2023 Update



I just spend 3 weeks night and day working on responding to his bogus complaint.

He set up a web page, and posted on Telegram multiple times, and on LinkedIn, to defame me by making a false accusation which the Cantonal Police...

Then he did something extremely vicious... 


Another Oesch Lie In His Dishonest Complaint


I forgot to state in the Response that Oesch falsely accused me of stating things about his on Instagram. That is yet another lie by Oesch. He has said several lies in his complaint, about his (non-existent) role at UBI/SRF, about “Only” vs. “Ulterior”. About “Liar”. About the beginning of the frictions he caused. And so on.

I have never posted or commented on Instagram about Oesch. I have on Facebook, because I own a group where people post articles, and once in a while I run into something Oesch has said or done, and I point out the facts if it’s applicable. Generally, I do not follow Oesch’s actions since the report was published, except when something comes on my radar, and then if I hear him lie, I call it out. If I see him trying to deceive the public, I call it out. It’s absolutely fair and legal.

Further Propagation of Infringing, Illegal Page


To amend and update my Response regarding this matter, I have discovered that Oesch has propagated his illegal page that contains false accusation, insult and defamatory statements about me to more places than stated in the Response, including on a page where he touts "silver water" as having anti-viral properties, which is against Swissmedic rules. His aim is clearly to get maximum benefit from disparaging me with lies and insults, in order to try to discredit my investigative report.


Regarding use of Oesch's picture, which he included in his complaint -- I obtained expert legal advice on it. The Swiss Federal Copyright Act does not cover this subject, but it's covered under civil law, and I am fully in compliance with the law because:

Therefore, his complaint about the photo is meritless, and it's outside the subject matter jurisdiction of the Public Prosecutor.

Related Documents