Refill to remove duplicate in the header
Social media users sharing reports that the International Criminal Court (ICC) has “accepted” a complaint alleging that Israel’s COVID-19 vaccination program violates the Nuremberg Code is missing a key link. Anyone can submit information about alleged crimes to the ICC’s Office of the Prosecutor (OTP) – and the OTP has warned that the acknowledgment of receipt is not the same as a decision on the merits of the information.
The reports have been shared on numerous accounts since March 13th. Several contain the caption: ‘International Criminal Court accepts the lawsuit against Pfizer’s illegal experimental trial in Israel, which violates the Nuremberg Code’ (here, here), while others contain selective screenshots of articles with captions such as: “The International Criminal Court accepts the complaint of violation of the Nuremberg Code by the Israeli government ”(here, here, here). The full articles can be found here, here and here. Another Facebook post, from March 14, reads: “The International Criminal Court (ICC, The Hague, the Netherlands) has accepted the filed complaint of human rights violation by the Israeli government” (here).
Since mid-March 2021, Israel has vaccinated more than half of its 9 million population against COVID-19, making it the world leader in such a program (here, here).
The Nuremberg Code of 1947 is a set of research ethics principles designed after World War II. It contains an outline of ten principles in the “Permissible Medical Experiments” section of Part II of the trials of war criminals before the military tribunals in Nuremberg, seen here and here. The Nuremberg Code was adopted as part of the 1949 Geneva Conventions (here), meaning that a breach of the code would be a war crime (here).
The filing of the ICC, which explains why the complainant believes that the vaccination program of Israel is a crime against humanity, can be found on the Facebook page of one of the lawyers involved (here) and can be seen here.
However, the ICC’s Office of the Prosecutor (OTP) warned in an email to Reuters against the interpretation of ‘acceptance’ with reference to the filing. ‘We can confirm that we’ve received a notification since the sender announced the fact. As we do with all such communications, we will analyze the material submitted, as appropriate, in accordance with the Rome Statute and with full independence and impartiality. The first step of the process is to assess whether the communication has matters that apparently fall outside the jurisdiction of the court. As soon as we decide on the appropriate next step, we will notify the sender and give reasons for it, ”reads the e-mail.
Some of the articles shared in the social media reports say the lawyers are waiting for a response to their filing (here, here), while the claim itself does not appear on the ICC website list of cases, investigations or preliminary investigations ( here, here, www.icc-cpi.int/pages/pe.aspx). The OTP website states: “Any individual, group or state can send information to the OTP about alleged crimes that fall under the jurisdiction of the court. […] The OTP is conducting a preliminary investigation to decide if there is a reasonable basis to initiate an investigation. ”(Www.icc-cpi.int/about/otp)
The OTP email states that the office receives many messages and that acknowledging receipt does not mean that they have yet to assess or accept the claim: ‘The office regularly receives countless communications about various situations around the world when alleged crimes are reported. Acknowledgment of the letter of receipt by the office in response to the senders of such communication should not be read as any indication that the office has made a decision on the merits of the communication (s). ”
Reuters had earlier claimed that health workers administering the COVID-19 vaccine and mask mandates were violating the Nuremberg Code (here, here).
VERDICT
Missing context. The ICC has acknowledged receipt of the complaint, but has yet to assess its merits.
This article was produced by the Reuters Fact Check team. Read more about our fact-checking work here.