Reply
Tue 11 Mar, 2003 03:58 am
The world's first permanent war crimes tribunal is due to be inaugurated at The Hague with the swearing in of its judges.
They will be sworn in by Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands, in the presence of United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan.
But the court still needs to appoint a prosecutor, and it is not expected to try any cases for at least a year.
Numerous countries, including the United States, have refused to endorse the new court, fearing it will be used for politically-motivated prosecutions.
Supporters have praised the ICC as an important step forward for human rights.
"The mere existence of the court and the possibilities of being held accountable will hopefully deter the committing of war crimes and crimes against humanity, genocide and other human rights violations," said Navanethem Pillay, one of the court's new judges.
The court has already received more than 200 complaints waiting to be investigated, although it will be up to a chief prosecutor to decide whether to proceed with any of the cases.
ICC member states are expected to select a chief prosecutor in April, but there will still be a long way to go before the court sees its first suspect.
"It will be many, many months before you might see a trial or even the completion of a major investigation," said William Pace of the Coalition for the International Criminal Court (CICC).
The court has already run into difficulties.
Almost two-thirds of countries which signed the 1998 Rome Treaty to set the court up have not yet endorsed it.
The United States has withheld support, fearing its citizens might become targets for politically-motivated persecution.
It has signed agreements with 24 other countries guaranteeing immunity for American subjects in those countries.
Russia and China have also refused to ratify the treaty.
Despite its wide remit, the ICC will be able to try crimes only committed after 1 July, 2002, and only when states are unwilling to take action against suspected individuals themselves.
Frolic wrote:Numerous countries, including the United States, have refused to endorse the new court, fearing it will be used for politically-motivated prosecutions.
It seems to me that the countries mentioned have some reasons doing this. The pro-Third World bias of the European lawyers is obvious. And imposing restrictions that these lawyers want to impose on the military and para-military operations may seriously impair possibility of fighting back terror, separatism, etc. Many countires are more concerned of their national security than in implementation of the professional ambitions of the bunch of Dutch lawyers.
Luckily there are also people in the US in favor of the International Criminal Court.
USA for the International Criminal Court (ICC)
GET THE FACTS: Why we need the ICC?
Frolic, USA is a very large country with more than 270 million people. Statistically, it is probable that you can find there supporters for any idea; for example, legalization of pedophilic sex. But these people do not represent point of view of mentally sane and patriotic majority.
steissd
To call those, who are in favour of the court, menatlly insane and unüatriotic, is more than .... insane.
steissd wrote: Many countires are more concerned of their national security than in implementation of the professional ambitions of the bunch of Dutch lawyers.
Why do you mention especially Dutch lawyers?
And for your information, here is a list of countries, who ratified
http://www.iccnow.org/countryinfo/worldsigsandratifications.html
OK, let us broaden the list of lawyers. By all means, the fact that a large number of countries (36 percent of those that signed, including USA and Russia) did not ratify the Roman Statute shows that it endangers their abilities to provide their national security.
Yes, it's a very interesting list of states, who didn't ratify.
Majority of these countries have national security problems, and they have to deal with terror threat. Rules of war against terror differ from the rules of the regular war, and these countries do not want their officers being pursued for their just being loyal to their own country.
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace