Disinfo: The advance of ISIS in Africa is supported by the International Criminal Court


The International Criminal Court (ICC) began preliminary investigations on the situation in Nigeria in November 2009. Naive enthusiasts of “International judiciary” believed that the ICC prepared charges against the terrorists of “Boko Haram”. But no charges have been filed under more than ten years of “investigations”. From the latest report of the ICC prosecutor Fatou Bensouda we can learn that the army of Nigeria is persecuting… supporters of “Boko Haram”. ICC is in reality defending the terrorists against the government’s forces.

The advance of ISIS in the world generally and in Africa particularly is a result of coordinated actions of institutes for global control, like the International Criminal Court, using this terrorist organisation as their armed branch.


Recurring pro-Kremlin disinformation narrative claiming that the US and other Western states are supporting or working together with terrorists. Read here similar cases claiming that ISIS has been supported by US, British, French and Israeli intelligence services in order to demolish Syria and that Al Baghdadi was an American product.

As regards the Nigerian case, the ICC has launched a preliminary examination of the the situation in Nigeria since November 2010 (n.b. The ICC has not launched a official investigation). From a legal perspective, no substantive field investigation is under way. Analysts (not investigators) have mostly relied on open source reporting and voluntary interviews with other IOs and NGOs, in order to establish if the Nigerian authorities are appropriately investigating incidents reported to them.

There are several steps that need to be taken in the preliminary investigation before the Chief Prosecutor can eventually ask for the authorisation to open an official investigation (based on Article 15 of the ICC Statute). If the CP decides that there exists a reasonable basis upon which to open an investigation, it will not be based on her initiative, but rather she will have to launch a “request for authorisation” of the Pre-Trial Chamber. The Chief Prosecutor apparently intends to make a decision on the merits of the preliminary investigation by the end of her term later this year.

Often preliminary investigations may be used in order to maintain pressure on the authorities to continue reporting on the conflict, and to continue investigating possible cases of violations.

In the case of Nigeria, the ICC has considered incidents on both sides of the conflict, including possible violations committed by Boko Haram, and Nigerian security forces between 2010 and now.

In her report, ICC prosecutor Fatou Bensouda has strongly condemned Boko Haram for performing war crimes:

According to findings previous published, the Office found that there was a reasonable basis to believe that since 2009 members of Boko Haram had committed crimes against humanity of murder and persecution (page 48).

However, the report also notes that the Nigerian Security Forces, NSF, may also have performed war crimes:

With respect to the NSF, the information assessed during the reporting period provides a reasonable basis to believe that members of the Civilian Joint Task Force (“CJTF”) committed the war crime of conscripting and enlisting children under the age of fifteen years into armed groups and using them to participate actively in hostilities pursuant to article 8(2)(e)(vii) of the Statute (Page 49).

There is a considerable amount of information about the investigation available at https://www.icc-cpi.int/nigeria and at present the focus seems to be on establishing whether or not the ICC has sufficient jurisdiction to act further.





  • Reported in: Issue 185
  • DATE OF PUBLICATION: 12/02/2020
  • Language/target audience: Russian
  • Country: Nigeria
  • Keywords: International Criminal Court, International Law, Terrorism


Cases in the EUvsDisinfo database focus on messages in the international information space that are identified as providing a partial, distorted, or false depiction of reality and spread key pro-Kremlin messages. This does not necessarily imply, however, that a given outlet is linked to the Kremlin or editorially pro-Kremlin, or that it has intentionally sought to disinform. EUvsDisinfo publications do not represent an official EU position, as the information and opinions expressed are based on media reporting and analysis of the East Stratcom Task Force.

see more

Moscow returned Russian identity to Crimea

Moscow agreed to return the Russian identity to the Crimea in 2014.


This is a recurring pro-Kremlin disinformation narrative about the illegal annexation of Crimea.

Moscow did not "return" the Russian identity to Crimea, but was rather illegally annexed. On 27 March 2014, the UN General Assembly adopted a resolution in which it stated that the referendum in Crimea was not valid and could not serve as a basis for any change in the status of the peninsula. On 17 December 2018, the UN General Assembly confirmed its non-recognition of the illegal annexation of Crimea.

European countries are under heavy US control

European countries are heavily influenced by the United States. The United States controls its alleged allies as much as possible. Unfortunately, the US allies are mute. That is, they have the right to follow instructions, but they are deprived of the right to make complaints.


Recurring pro-Kremlin disinformation narrative about the US presence in Europe, portraying Europe as a vassal of the USA and trying to undermine the sovereignty of European countries. This narrative claims that almost all European countries are no longer truly sovereign and the United States dictates policies to the EU and its member states. For pro-Kremlin disinformation, countries that are outside of Russian control are US vassals, and some are vassals of vassals.

In fact, the EU Member States are sovereign countries and make sovereign decisions about their own security and policies. The US is an important ally to the EU but EU policy is not determined by the US.

The OPCW has become a tool for the US and its Western allies

The UN-affiliated OPCW has become fatally compromised as a political tool for the US and its Western allies. Its reports on Syria in particular are discredited, attributing blame to the wrong parties while whitewashing the real culprits – the jihadist militants and their media agents in the White Helmets. What’s more, an organization which is supposed to be dedicated to upholding international security is actually allowing itself to be used for propaganda purposes leading to aggression.


This is a recurring disinformation narrative deflecting blame for chemical attacks away from the Assad regime; painting the White Helmets as terrorists, and aiming to discredit the OPCW. The OPCW is an independent inter-governmental international organisation with 193 member states - including Russia.

Pro-Kremlin outlets began portraying the OPCW as a pawn in Western geopolitical designs around mid-2018, when the organisation was being granted new powers to assign blame for chemical attacks, especially in the Syrian Douma. In a joint statement, Australia, Bulgaria, Canada, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, France, Germany, Iceland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Poland, Slovakia, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America called for an end to the unacceptable Russian defamation of the OPCW.