Did an international court prohibit the use of covid-19 vaccines?

Claim: A WhatsApp image making the rounds and an online publication by Creekvibes have claimed that an international court, international common law court of justice, has issued a public warrant prohibiting the use or imposing of COVID vaccines.

Verdict: The claim is False. Findings show that the court that issued the warrant does not exist and the only person affiliated to it is a Canadian conspiracy theorist, with the aim to fuel hesitancy in receiving the vaccines.

• 24 to win scholarship as forum urges Nigeria to up games on Mathematics deficiency
• The 2022 Committee and Nigeria’s leadership crisis

Full text

A WhatsApp user posted an image that contains a court verdict which called for the prohibition and confiscation of COVID-19 vaccines on the premise that pharmaceutical giants, Pfizer Ltd and GlaxoSmithKline Ltd., have been convicted. Before then, this reporter saw the image on the WhatsApp status contact list accompanied with a text urging people to share it in a bid to educate others on their human rights.

The image states; “PROHIBITING THE USE OR IMPOSITION OF COVID ‘VACCINES’”

“Issued from the verdict of the International Common Law Court of Justice In the matter of Crimes against Humanity by Pfizer, GlaxoSmithKline, et al (Case Docket No. 09152021-A001, January 15, 2022). Let it be known that the Court has outlawed all COVID ‘vaccines’ and prohibited their use or imposition after lawfully convicting their manufacturers, including the corporations known as Pfizer Ltd., and GlaxoSmithKline Ltd., of Crimes against Humanity and of producing the COVID ‘vaccines’ through the trafficking, torture, organ removal, murder, and genocide of children, Indigenous people, and other Involuntary experimental test subjects.

“Accordingly, as a dangerous substance derived from crime and genocide, the COVID ‘vaccines’ have been ordered by the court to be seized and prohibited from sale, distribution, use, or application.

“This warrant of the court authorizes the bearer to lawfully decline and refuse to receive the COVID ‘vaccines’ without legal or other consequences, in accordance with their own health and safety, and the lawful verdict and sentence of the Court. Let it be known that anyone who attempts to impose or administer the COVID ‘vaccines’ on the bearer of this warrant or on any other person, or who otherwise compels them to receive the said ‘vaccinations’, is in violation of the Law and this warrant, is engaged in criminal assault, obstruction of justice, and the aiding and abetting of convicted felons, and can be arrested and charged as an accessory to a crime. This warrant has the full force and effect of the law.”

Brief on Covid-19 vaccine

The COVID-19 vaccine was produced a year after the discovery of a SARs-like virus, that attacks the human respiratory organs, in the tail end of 2019. The virus, which has become a pandemic, has spread to almost every country in the world, infecting millions of people and killing hundreds of thousands of others.

Its quick spread led to the invention of vaccines which carried the hope of emasculating the virility of the virus by injecting weakened or inactive parts of the virus into the body to stimulate the immune system to fight back and protect itself from future attack from the real virus. It has been recorded that its recipient often has symptoms but the vaccine has been touted as the only hope for the world to get back to its feet after years of disruption.

According to the American Centre for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the vaccines and their major producers could be categorized into; mRNA vaccines, (Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna) contain material from the virus that causes COVID-19 that gives our cells instructions for how to make a harmless protein that is unique to the virus. Protein subunit vaccines (vaccines under development) include harmless pieces (proteins) of the virus that causes COVID-19 instead of the entire germ and Vector vaccines (Johnson & Johnson’s Janssen) contain a modified version of a different virus than the one that causes COVID-19.

Vaccine hesitancy

The phenomenal of vaccine hesitancy is not peculiar to the Covid-19 vaccine as a report by the World Health Organisation (WHO) describe vaccine hesitancy as “the delay in acceptance or refusal of vaccines despite availability of vaccine services” stating that this is often “complex and context specific” differing in location, time and vaccines and influenced by factors “such as complacency, convenience and confidence.”

For instance, a report by the Africa Portal stated that when wild poliovirus resurfaced in northern Nigeria, “religious leaders boycotted the national immunisation days organised in the context of the global polio eradication initiative due to widespread rumours” that the vaccines may have been inoculated with “antifertility agents, HIV and carcinogens.”

However, it pointed out that the scenario may have occurred due to the previous case of death of some children who participated in a drug trial on immunization by Pfizer.

For COVID-19 vaccine, a study conducted by the National Institute for Pharmaceutical Research and Development (NIPRD) concluded that its hesitancy is fueled by concerns over safety and side effects.

Africa Portal said it may be so in Africa due to fears of it causing infertility in men and women; that the vaccines were developed differently in Africa to encourage depopulation and that it contains aborted fetuses.

However, COVID-19 hesitancy is not limited to Africa as it has led to various concocted stories on reasons why it was created especially in the United States, leading to its president announcing a measure that requires workers in big companies to be vaccinated or face weekly testing.

The Executive Director and Chief Executive Officer of the National Primary Health Care Development Agency, during an interview with Trust TV noted that the vaccine hesitancy is a global phenomenon and the social media has been a platform to “develop conspiracy theories about vaccination.”

To combat the menace, Dr. Faisal said “what we’ve done is to work with our sister agencies, like the National Orientation Agency and the federal ministry of information to also push the current information out there, debunking that misinformation and disinformation, by really demonstrating to Nigerians that, it is not true that you will die two years after taking the vaccine.”

“Nobody knows when he or she will die. So, why would anybody believe that exactly two years after you take the vaccine you will die? And we’ve seen that in the course of the vaccination, over 15 million people have been vaccinated. 15 million Nigerians cannot be wrong. We’ve not seen these Nigerians fall like a pack of cards after taking the vaccines,” he said.

Verification

A google reverse image search brought out numerous images that are similar to the verdict. One of the images led to a fact check done by the AFP regarding another verdict made by the court. The report stated that the court was not in existence but a conjecture of a Canadian conspiracy theorist called Kevin Annett. The report also found out the logo of the court on the document was similar to that of the International Court of Justice.

Similarly, a word search on Facebook of the initials of the court, ICLCJ, propped up a video which Annet said was an international press conference. He described himself as a chief adviser to the Common Court of Justice and its prosecutor’s office located at Brussels, Belgium.

Word search on Tweet deck using the method brought out a tweet by a user, @Dr.Ali.Ibu who says that “Kevin Annett runs a fake court, “international common law court of justice” ICLCJ has no legal standing, seems to be an invention of Annett- former pastor removed from his ministry in 1997 for spreading conspiracy theories, as per a regional council of the United Church of Canada.”

Another user, @wellness, states “Fake don’t believe this guy. He writes all the news about this court” himself. Whenever u see something about his ICLCJ, it is just a share of something he has put out there. It is not a real court.”

Another word search on google to locate the website of the court did not yield result as the domain names similar to the court’s name belonged to different companies and used to promote businesses.

Conclusion

Findings show that the court does not exist but the claim was made to further subvert government efforts to achieve maximum numbers of people who are vaccinated from the morbid disease.