Which Big Nobs are Apparently Being Shielded by Olivier Jornot & Politicians?

An International School of Geneva whistleblower has written to the PPDT (Préposé à la protection des données et transparence, Geneva Data Protection Commissioner) in light of the revised LIPAD (Law on public information, access to documents and protection of personal data) of May 3rd 2024, having been advised that Geneve Attorney-General Olivier Jornot, and the Geneva Ministère public are not exempt from it.?

In a May 22nd 2022 letter from Olivier Jornot, in response?to her letter of November 30th 2021, it seems that Olivier Jornot apparently feels differently about this as well as "Every person has the right to equal and fair treatment in judicial and administrative proceedings and to have their case decided within a?reasonable time." Federal Constitution of 1999, Article 29, paragraph 1.

The whistleblower has not only been denied access to data from cantonal bodies, including relating to criminal proceedings confirmed to have taken place by several bodies (including repeatedly by the Geneva Police) but she has apparently been repeatedly denied any rights as a victim and plaintiff. Worse, she contends that she has been prosecuted instead of her criminal complaints - and criminalised in alleged SLAPP proceedings by a prosecutor she has never met who has admitted that her forced appointment of a state lawyer was unjustified.

At least the Geneva Police, the Swiss Federal Audit Office and the London Metropolitan Police have duly referred complaints, dating back to 2013, to the Ministère public and it has been confirmed that criminal proceedings have taken place related to these complaints, which are in file?P/17792/2021. This is further supported by confirmed records in at least Ireland and the UK. The former Detective Chief Superintendent of the Irish Serious Organised Crime Unit has made clear that the data held by the Irish Police is linked to Switzerland.?

With the now enhanced powers of the PPDT and and no apparent legal right for Olivier Jornot or the Ministère public to apply any 'secrecy' restrictions to accessing of data, the whistleblower has requested data relating to ALL proceedings (not just those in?P/17792/2021),?including the names of the defendants, the 'offenders' - and their legal counsel(s).

So who are the well-connected big nobs who have been facing criminal proceedings and are so well shielded, and not just apparently by Olivier Jornot?

The case began?whilst?VICKY TUCK (FORMER HEAD OF CHELTENHAM LADIES COLLEGE), MARK POOLE (Virgin 'special advisor)), DAVID OGDEN (OFFICIAL UN REPRESENTATIVE), Melaye Ras Work (Efficio, PPE), Nick Thornton (Czura Thornton) and Geneva state representative, PASCAL EMERY, were amongst those at?the helm of the International School of Geneva.?

The Board was informed of alleged breaches of the work contract from late 2013 by at least Vicky Tuck. The whistleblower wrote to management and Vicky Tuck on numerous occasions asking that she be provided with a safe work environment, especially after she respectfully raised that Vicky Tuck had concealed the key documentary evidence of an alleged crime during a formal grievance process. The Board was made aware of this.

In 2015, Pascal Emery unilaterally assessed complaints about Vicky Tuck at her behest & apparently with the benediction of the executive committee of the Board (Poole, Ogden, Ras Work & Thornton). His defamatory letter in which he medically diagnoses a whistleblower he has never met (and when he is not medically qualified) was written three weeks after an allegedly corrupt forced psychiatric evaluation with the unauthorised presence of Michael W. Birchard. Vicky Tuck was exonerated. Poole invested in the startup business of Tuck's son in the UK in 2015, at the time when he was responsible for supervising her and ensuring that Board policies were respected.

Thornton and Ogden were in copy of Emery's letter and Ogden had received evidence and accounts of untold alleged wrongdoing, including alleged stalker harassment.

In November 2021 another whistleblower's court verdict, JTPH/439/2021, deemed the school to have failed to respect its own child protection policy and names Pascal Emery. The Ministère public refused to provide access to this public documents (deemed to be not in the spirit of LIPAD by the PPDT). It seems that this case dates back to Vicky Tuck's time as Director-General as well.

It seems that certain management members and former Board members at the International School of Geneva members can't be held to account! If they are, then it seems that the Ministère public & other bodies withhold public data, even if it is required for a fair trial and in the public interests.

Who are the defendants?

There is a list in file P/17792/2021, which the whistleblower has requested transparency over, including from the Board, especially since the list seems to date back to the 2016 Board. The list includes Poole, Ogden, Falvert & Diane Bedat, who also appeared in the response to the whistleblower's civil case.

Former UN representative Barrit appears. Questions have been raised the appointment of UN representatives and there is currently no UN representative.

Thomas and Strebel work at the WHO, but were not official representatives, are on the list.

Emery and Dose Sarfatis are amongst the Geneva state representatives on the list.

Williamson and Falvert are the only present serving Board & management members.

Ogden, Falvert and Ras Work are signatories to a mysterious dormant foundation with 9.5m.

One of the whistleblower's unresolved complaints in file P/17792/2021 is alleged legal corruption in relation to a property development looming over her home. The land was apparently purchased in 2016. The Geneva Police seemed to have linked this complaint to file P/17792/2021.

Records exist in several jurisdictions.

'New' Board members have apparently externally reported non-compliance with Swiss reporting standards. It seems that financial reporting is not a new problem, and parents have disclosed information to the community and asked specific related questions - including over if and why the school is funding whistleblower litigation of management and FORMER Board members. In spite of this, the new Director-general 're-appointed' Falvert, the Director of Administration Finance, raising further questions.

The Board seems to have reneged on its promise to conduct independent reviews of all whistleblower cases dating back to 2012, again calling into question if big nobs are being protected at any cost to whistleblowers. The Board - like the Ministère public & others - is also not disclosing the identity of the defendants in file P/17792/2021.