Vaccine passports – path to freedom or coercion, manipulation and discrimination?


Coronavirus has a recovery rate of 99.97% in anyone under 70 without underlying conditions.  Moreover to achieve herd immunity in a population, only around 60% of the population need to have had a disease, after which they will have antibody and T-cell immunity which often provides lifelong protection from that disease.

UK government data shows that there have been some 9 million “positive cases” as of November 2021, while some 50 million people have had their first covid vaccination and some 45 million second and are therefore “double (formerly labelled “fully”) vaccinated ie. most of the population. What then would be the case for vaccine passports if most of the population has either natural immunity or are protected by the vaccines?

The UK HART Group says of vaccine certification (a vaccine passport would contain confidential medical information that should only be demanded in extreme circumstances) that it “is highly coercive, threatening the loss of livelihood and the loss of freedom of movement. That is in no sense ‘free’ consent as set out in The Nuremberg Code. Rather it is considerable duress.”

In a series of interviews, Belgian psychologist Mattias Desmet, discusses how governments have masterfully attached a sense of free-floating anxiety – due to the work and housing insecurity that has been created in the last decades – to the threat of coronavirus (and now “climate change”).   He asks, “so, if you feel it’s justified to isolate people in their houses, to force pregnant women to wear masks, if you make all the people die alone and in isolation… why would you not take the next step to building a new camp so we could isolate the people who tested positively on the coronavirus? Typical of totalitarianism… a population is seized by a very simple and absurd logic… that makes them transgress all ethical limits as if there is no other option”.

Key Points & Evidence

The UK's HART Group - a voluntary consortium of doctors and scientists - expresses its grave concerns regarding the proposal of any sort of vaccine certification as a ‘way out’ of repeated lockdowns, or as a condition of foreign travel.


The UK's #Together campaign highlights that the while the Covid jabs (inoculations) may protect the vaccinated from serious disease, data from the UK and other highly vaccinated countries such as Israel now unequivocally show that none of the inoculations prevent you catching or transmitting Coronavirus, which would be the basis for introducing the Covid Pass.

The announcement that the Covid Pass would be introduced goes against the advice of the UK Parliament’s Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee report into Covid-19 status certification, which found that the government could not make a strong scientific case for vaccine passports, and that they would be discriminatory. The report was also clear that it is imperative the Government should produce a cost-benefit analysis, with full financial costings and detailed modelling of the potential impacts. The Government has failed to provide these for public scrutiny.


An article from Canada's Brownstone Institute written by two professors explains how, as increasingly as vaccination is no longer a matter of choice (hundreds, perhaps thousands, of workplaces and schools are instituting COVID-19 vaccine mandates, with more expected following formal FDA licensure of the vaccines), those consciously choosing not to get vaccinated - who tend to be younger and less educated, Republican, non-white and uninsured - will become the new sub-class.

This, they write, "is a recipe for creating new and deeper fractures within our societies, the kind of fractures we may profoundly regret in hindsight.
Let’s not sugar-coat it: This is a new form of institutionalized segregation."


"The case against vaccine passports", David Cayley, September 2021


American libertarian, Tom Woods, features a letter from Lithuania (like New Zealand and Israel, a "test" country) that paints a picture of the bleak future of vaccine apartheid that awaits if vaccine "passports" become mandatory.



A mass advertising campaign funded from taxpayer money involving celebrity endorsement, coercion and guilt can hardly be constituted “voluntary consent” when it comes to vaccination.

The idea of a “green” or “vaccine” passport, based on a premise of granting freedoms which are ina-lien-able such as the right to travel, work or attend events or venues is not a health initiative.  Moreover, being “coerced into vaccination in order to be ‘allowed’ to go on holiday is to belittle the seriousness of the issues at hand, which are critical for any free society, concerning important, enshrined freedoms” – the HART Group.

When it comes to identity cards, which this would be, Boris Johnson once said: “I will in no circumstances carry one and even were I compelled to do so, I would take it out and destroy it on the spot were I ever asked to produce it.”