Claims asserting that Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese is facing legal action in an international court have been categorically dismissed by legal experts. The claims originated from social media posts suggesting that former opposition leader Peter Dutton accused Albanese of vote-buying to secure a victory in the federal elections held in May 2025.
These allegations emerged shortly after the Labor Party won an outright majority in national polls, with Dutton’s Liberal Party confirming the assertions to be false. Legal experts clarified that neither the International Court of Justice (ICJ) nor the International Criminal Court (ICC) would have jurisdiction over such a matter.
False Claims Circulated on Social Media
A post on Facebook dated November 28, 2025, contained text claiming that Dutton accused Albanese of paying parliamentarians for votes and making unfulfilled promises. It also suggested that Albanese escalated the situation on social media, leading to heightened controversy. These posts referenced the significant electoral defeat Dutton faced, where he not only lost his position as opposition leader but also his seat in parliament, marking him as the first opposition leader in Australia to lose their seat in a federal election.
The misinformation spread across various platforms, including Instagram, where similar claims were repeated. A spokesperson for the Liberal Party clarified in an email to AFP on December 6 that the accusations were “obviously false.” Legal experts reinforced this statement, indicating that Dutton could not possibly file a case against Albanese in either the ICJ or the ICC.
Legal Experts Weigh In
According to Richard Garnett, an expert in international legal arbitration at the University of Melbourne, the ICJ handles disputes between states, not individuals. He explained, “For example, if Australia and France had a dispute, that could be heard in the International Court of Justice, but they don’t deal with cases involving individuals.”
Similarly, Natalie Klein, an associate dean at the University of New South Wales, stated that it is impossible for Dutton to make such a claim at the ICJ. The ICJ confirmed to AFP that it does not entertain cases involving individuals, stating, “Individuals cannot be parties to cases before the Court.”
Garnett further emphasized the absurdity of the claims, noting that the ICC focuses on war crimes and crimes against humanity and would have no jurisdiction over allegations of vote-buying. He stated, “So it’s more than disinformation. It’s completely absurd, complete nonsense.” Klein added that she was not aware of any Australians currently indicted before the ICC.
The ICC also confirmed in a December 10 email to AFP that no such case exists before the court. This misinformation has previously been addressed by AAP Factcheck, highlighting ongoing efforts to clarify false claims targeting Australian political figures.
As the political landscape continues to evolve, it remains crucial for the public to distinguish between verified information and misinformation circulating online.
