International Criminal Court Deserves Support

[struggle4progress]

The Independent (Banjul)
OPINION
November 22, 2004
Posted to the web November 23, 2004

Banjul

<snip> In fact, the United States, which had, like the Russian Federation, signed the Rome Statute in 2000, formally communicated to the court on May 6, 2002 that it did not intend to become a party and consequently had no legal obligation arising from its signature. At the roots of such a decision there is concern that American citizens may be subject to "politicised" prosecution by the ICC.

In line with that decision and that concern, the United States has been actively encouraging third countries to conclude Article 98 agreements, also known as non-surrender agreements, aimed at preventing the eventual surrendering to the Court of United States nationals present in those countries that might be subject to a surrender request from the ICC.

A number of countries have signed such agreements, including Antigua and Barbuda in the Eastern Caribbean. Those that have not have seen United States military cooperation severely curtailed in recent times, which in turn may have contributed to some Caribbean countries delaying their signature and/or ratification of the ICC Statute.

As concluded by the Council of Ministers on September 30, 2002, the European Union has expressed interest in developing "a broader dialogue between the European Union and the United States on all matters relating to the ICC, including . . . the desirability of the United States re-engaging in the ICC process . . . and the development of a relationship entailing practical cooperation between the United States and the Court in specific cases . . . ." Regarding Article 98 bilateral agreements in particular, the European Union considers that "entering into those agreements, as presently drafted, would be inconsistent with ICC States Parties' obligations with regard to the ICC Statute and may be inconsistent with other international agreements to which ICC State Parties are parties". <snip>

http://allafrica.com/stories/200411230462.html

[horklet]

1. The ICC would inhibit "liberation" operations.

Bush will never allow the ICC to be seriously considered. His mode of operation requires what could be called in the quaint parlance of the Geneva Conventions, "war crimes." There's a recent account of the murder of Iraqi citizens by the US War Machine, by Dahr Jamail, here http://dahrjamailiraq.com/weblog/archives/dispatches/000136.php#more

The ICC would likely not approve of our methods of "liberation."

[AndyTiedye]

2. VISUALIZE BUSH, CHENEY, RUMSFELD, PERLE, ASHCROFT ET AL HERE:

The UN Prison at the International Criminal Court in the Hague.
Home to convicted war criminals.