Claims circulating on social media that Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese is facing a legal case at an international court have been categorically dismissed by legal experts and the Liberal Party. The allegations stem from posts asserting that former opposition leader Peter Dutton had accused Albanese of vote-buying to secure his party’s recent election victory.
The posts, which have gained traction on platforms like Facebook and Instagram, falsely assert that Dutton had lodged a complaint against Albanese at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) or the International Criminal Court (ICC). These claims suggest that Albanese made unfulfilled promises and paid parliamentarians for their votes to achieve a landslide win in the May federal elections. However, the Liberal Party confirmed to AFP that these assertions are “obviously false.”
Legal Framework and Jurisdiction Limits
Legal experts have emphasized that neither the ICJ nor the ICC has jurisdiction over such personal or electoral disputes. Richard Garnett, an expert in international legal arbitration at the University of Melbourne, explained that the ICJ only adjudicates cases between states, not individuals. “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,” Garnett stated on December 5, 2025.
Furthermore, Natalie Klein, an associate dean at the University of New South Wales, reiterated that there is no procedural avenue for Dutton to bring such a claim against Albanese at the ICJ. The court’s information department confirmed via email that “individuals cannot be parties to cases before the Court.”
In terms of the ICC, which deals primarily with war crimes and crimes against humanity, Garnett noted that it would not entertain claims related to vote-buying. He described the circulating claims as “complete nonsense.”
Response and Context
The false narrative surrounding Dutton’s alleged accusations emerged shortly after the Labor Party secured a significant victory in the national polls, marking a notable shift in Australian politics. Dutton’s Liberal Party not only lost the election but he also became the first opposition leader to lose his seat during a federal election. The spread of misinformation has not only affected public perception but has also drawn attention to the broader implications of disinformation in political discourse.
A spokesperson for the Liberal Party explicitly stated that the claim is false. Additionally, the ICC confirmed on December 10, 2025, that no such case exists before the Court. Previous fact-checking efforts by organizations like AAP Factcheck have also debunked similar claims targeting Prime Minister Albanese.
As misinformation continues to circulate in the digital age, the importance of verifying claims and understanding the legal frameworks governing international disputes becomes increasingly crucial. The legal community remains vigilant in addressing and clarifying false narratives that could have significant implications on public trust and political integrity.
