Compulsory vaccination is a crime

By Sonnie Ekwowusi

Forcing citizens to take the COVID-19 vaccination which has caused the death of some people and severe adverse reactions and blood clot in the body and brain, known as cerebral venous sinus thrombosis (CVST) of other people, is, to say the least, a crime against humanity. Why force Nigerians to take COVID-19 vaccination when the manufacturers/profiteers and suppliers of the COVID-19 vaccines had expressly exempted or absorbed themselves from any liability for any death, injury, bodily impairment or any other damages directly or indirectly traceable or resulting from taking the vaccination?. Why compel Nigerians to take COVID-19 vaccination which a priori had not been subjected to clinical test or trial by Nigerian physicians and NAFDAC to first ascertain whether it is good for Nigerians?. Why force Nigerians to take the COVID-19 vaccination which is not a cure for COVID-19 but only a preventive measure competing with other preventive measures? Why force Nigerians to take the COVID-19 vaccination when the manufacturers/profiteers and suppliers of COVID-19 vaccines had expressly stated that they would not indemnify any taker of the vaccination or his or her legal representatives and assigns for any losses, damages and detriments whatsoever caused or to be suffered and/or incurred by the taker of the vaccination?

It is no longer news that Edo State Governor Godwin Obaseki has commanded from his Olympian height that with effect from the second week of September 2021 all unvaccinated people in Edo State would be barred from worshipping in Churches and Mosques and even entering banks and other public places in Edo State. In other words, no vaccination, no freedom of religious worship, no freedom of movement. But ruling on an application brought by an aggrieved citizen Charles Osaretin against Governor Obaseki and five others, the Federal High Court sitting in Port Harcourt has granted an ex-parte restraining the Governor from enforcing his command pending the determination of the substantive Motion on Notice of the applicant to enforce his fundamental human right. But apparently undeterred by the restraining ex-parte order, Governor Obaseki is still talking tough and has vowed to enforce his command no matter whose ox is gored. As if this is not enough, the Federal government is threatening to make the COVID-19 vaccination compulsory for all public servants in Nigeria.

Considering that the case of Charles Osaretin V Governor Obaseki & others is still sub-judice I would refrain from commenting on the merit or demerit of the case until it is determined by the court. But suffice it to say that it is trite law that a court order must be obeyed to the letter until it is set aside or lapses by effluxion of time. Disobedience to a court order or ridiculing a court order or subjecting it to scathing criticisms or disparaging the integrity of the court in public or in the media is not only contemptuous of the court but a recipe for anarchy. The rule of law ought to reign supreme above any arbitrary or capricious exercise of executive power. More importantly, the function of the judiciary as a dispenser of justice, sustainer of good governance and a bulwark of justice in the causes of the citizenry is endangered by the growing incidence of executive lawlessness and executive disobedience to court orders.

Neither the Federal government nor a State government nor any employer of labour can force or compel any Nigerian to take any COVID vaccination. Why? Because there is no known Nigerian law backing compulsory vaccination or compulsory medical treatment. A Governor’s directive is not a law and therefore not binding on the citizens. Everyone has to give his or her informed consent before receiving any vaccination. This is the law in Nigeria. Relying on the case of Denloye v Medical & Dental Practitioners Disciplinary Tribunal the Nigerian Supreme Court held in the case of Medical and Dental Practitioners Disciplinary Tribunal v Dr. John Emewulu Nicholas Okonkwo(2002) AHRLR 159 that failure to extract a patient’s informed consent before administering a blood transfusion on him constituted an infraction of his fundamental human rights to privacy (section 37) and right to freedom of religion and conscience (section 38). The Supreme Court held that the patient’s constitutional right to object to medical treatment or, particularly, as in this case, to his tissue, blood or blood products or his organ being taken away from his body is founded on fundamental rights protected in the 1999 Constitution under the (i) right to privacy: section 37; (ii) right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion: section 38. The Court further held that the right to privacy “implies a right to protect one’s thought, conscience or religious belief and practice from coercive and unjustified intrusion; and, one’s body from unauthorized invasion. The right to freedom of thought, conscience or religion implies a right not to be prevented, without lawful justification, from choosing the course of one’s life, fashioned on what one believes in, and a right not to be coerced into acting contrary to religious belief…”.

Under the English Law, the consent of a living person to medical treatment or for vaccination is absolutely mandatory. In fact the person can maintain an action in tort or civil wrong for damages for trespass against his person against a medical practitioner or a hospital for forcing him to undergo any medical treatment or take a vaccination against his consent. The UK Vaccination Act of 1853 compelled parents to vaccinate their children. But the Vaccination Act of 1853 has since been repealed. The current law in the UK is that a patient cannot be vaccinated without his or her informed consent. A combined reading of the UK Coronavirus Act 1984 and that of 2020 reveals that the Minister is not allowed by law to compel anybody to take the COVID-19 vaccination.

It is obvious that the COVID-19 vaccination media propaganda was prompted and propelled ab initio by a huge commercial interest. The COVID-19 vaccines manufacturers/profiteers and suppliers simply want to rake up huge profit from selling their vaccines. This is why they are discrediting other COVID-19 preventive measures. Which means that these manufacturers/profiteers and suppliers have placed their financial gains over and above the precious lives of the citizens. Sad. In the video which has gone viral, Dr. Sean Brooks, PhD Oxford, author of about 48 medical publications and 23 books on health matters, says that the people who have taken the COVID-19 vaccination are eligible to die in the next one year; that the vaccination cause body organ failure, blood clot; 35% immune system decrease and sterilization of men and women. But impelled by commercial profit, the promoters of COVID-19 vaccines care less about the danger of the vaccines. All they are after is to maximize their profit even if it means destroying other people’s lives. As far as they are concerned, the government should make the taking of the vaccination compulsory so that they can sell the vaccines and make more profit.

Therefore the government and employers of labour have no right to force the citizens to take the COVID-19 vaccination. No citizen should be deprived of anything or suffer anything or any discrimination on account of his or her refusal/failure to take the vaccines. Federal and State governments and employers of labour should obey the law and allow the citizens to freely decide whether or not they want to take the COVID-19 vaccination or subscribe to other competing COVID-19 preventive measures.