- Iraq has not yet signed the treaty, but if it were
to ratify it, US soldiers participating in any alleged war crimes on Iraqi
soil could be liable to prosecution by the new court...
THE United States will be put on a collision course with the rest of the
world today when at least seven countries gather for a ceremony at the
United Nations that will trigger the creation of the worldís first
permanent international criminal court. After the statute of the new International
Criminal Court was adopted in Rome in 1998, diplomats believed that it
could take up to two decades to get the 60 ratifications needed for the
new court to come into being.
-
- However, with Washington isolated in its opposition to
the proposed new permanent war crimes tribunal in The Hague, other countries
have been stampeding to show their support.
-
- Bosnia, Bulgaria, Cambodia, Ireland, Mongolia, Romania,
and Slovakia have all signalled their intention to deposit articles of
ratification today, which would push the Rome treaty over the threshold
for the court to come into existence. Niger, Jordan and the Democratic
Republic of Congo have also promised to ratify soon. Britain has ratified
the treaty. From today Greece will be the only European Union nation not
to have ratified.
-
- ìThat is exceeding our expectations,î Philippe
Kirsch, the Canadian chairman of preparatory negotiations, said. ìWhen
we finished the conference in Rome, the pessimists were saying 20 years
and the optimists were saying ten years. We will be under four years.î
-
- The result is that the Rome treaty will come into effect
on July 1. After that date, war criminals will be subject to the jurisdiction
of the court. The court itself is expected to be up and running in offices
already set aside in The Hague in the first three months of next year.
-
- ìThe court has the potential to be the most important
human rights instrument created in the last 50 years,î Richard Dicker,
of Human Rights Watch, said. ìBuilding on Nuremberg, building and
carrying further the work of the Yugoslav and Rwanda tribunals, the court
will limit the gross impunity of the Pinochets, Saddam Husseins and Pol
Pots of the future.î
-
- In a significant rift with its European allies, the Bush
Administration rejects the jurisdiction of the court and is actively considering
withdrawing former President Clintonís signature from the Rome treaty.
-
- Republican politicians have floated a variety of possible
retaliatory measures in Congress, including one proposal that the United
States be willing to use force to free any American held by the court.
-
- Washington fears that the new court does not have adequate
safeguards to prevent political prosecutions of American soldiers captured
abroad. But US servicemen will still be subject to the courtís jurisdiction
if their alleged offences take place on the territory of a nation that
has ratified the treaty.
-
- Iraq has not yet signed the treaty, but if it were to
ratify it, US soldiers participating in any alleged war crimes on Iraqi
soil could be liable to prosecution by the new court.
-
- Israel, which followed the American lead in signing but
not ratifying the treaty, could face similar risk in military actions against
any Arab neighbours that ratify the treaty. Jordan is the only Arab country
whose ratification is considered imminent and there is legal controversy
about whether Palestinians could accede to it.
-
- The courtís proponents insist that it will act
as a judicial, and not a political, body. Under the principle of complementarity,
the court will act only when national legal systems are unwilling or unable
to do so. Prosecutions can be initiated only by the UN Security Council,
by a state-party or by an elected prosecutor, who must vet all decisions
with a pre-trial chamber.
-
- http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/0,,3-263478,00.html
|