KK-Forum,
USA ønsker ikke en internasjonal domstol, men en domstol de kan
kontrollere. De fordømmer en forestående ICC ... "as an infringement on
U.S. sovereignty. They also have said it could be used to undermine U.S.
national security by giving other nations the ability to bring frivolous,
politically motivated charges against U.S. forces serving overseas. ...
United States will continue backing the creation of international
war-crimes courts on a case-by-case basis. They point out that the United
States played key roles in the establishment of U.N. tribunals on the
former Yugoslavia and Rwanda.".
http://inq.philly.com/content/inquirer/2001/06/29/national/TRIBUNAL29.htm
Knu Rognes
***********
Milosevic case may boost proposed court
By Jonathan S. Landay
INQUIRER WASHINGTON BUREAU
WASHINGTON - President Bush could come under increased international
pressure to support creation of a permanent international court after the
extradition yesterday of former Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic to a
U.N. war-crimes tribunal.
Experts said Milosevic's transfer would boost support for the proposed
International Criminal Court (ICC) to adjudicate the same kinds of grave
transgressions of international law for which Milosevic is facing trial in
the Hague, Netherlands.
The increased support for the ICC would focus fresh attention on Bush's
rejection of the initiative, these experts predicted. This would add to
international displeasure with a range of Bush foreign policies, from his
rejection of the Kyoto treaty on global warming to his insistence on
building a missile-defense system and scrapping the 1972 Anti-Ballistic
Missile Treaty.
"This will put a lot of pressure on the Bush administration to accept
international standards of criminal justice," said Paul Risley, the former
chief spokesman for the U.N. war-crimes tribunal. "Contrary to being a
threat to the United States, the ICC champions the greatest U.S. ideals of
liberty and the rights of individuals."
The ICC would be established once 60 countries ratified a U.N. treaty
reached in 1998. So far, 35 nations have done so, and many experts expect
that the process will be completed this year.
The court would hear cases involving only the most heinous breaches of
international law that result from conflicts, including genocide, crimes
against humanity, and other war crimes. It would bring charges only if the
government of a suspect were unwilling or unable to investigate allegations
against an individual.
Though it objected to portions of the treaty, the Clinton administration
signed it Jan. 1, the last day it was open for signature.
Former President Bill Clinton said that by signing the accord, the United
States could continue negotiating changes in the functioning and authority
of the court sought by the treaty. He recommended that his successor
withhold the accord from Senate ratification until all of the U.S. concerns
were addressed.
Bush officials have expressed even stronger objections, denouncing the ICC
as an infringement on U.S. sovereignty. They also have said it could be
used to undermine U.S. national security by giving other nations the
ability to bring frivolous, politically motivated charges against U.S.
forces serving overseas.
Opponents also argue that the actions of ICC prosecutors and judges would
be subject to none of the restraints imposed by the legal and political
systems of individual countries.
"The danger lies in pushing the effort to extremes that risk substituting
the tyranny of judges for that of governments," former Secretary of State
Henry A. Kissinger wrote in the latest edition of Foreign Affairs magazine.
Administration officials have been reviewing the treaty to determine if the
U.S. signature should be withdrawn. They also are deciding whether to back
a reintroduction of legislation in Congress to impose U.S. sanctions on
countries that support the ICC.
Milosevic's extradition, experts said, highlights the rising tide of
support for an international mechanism to hold accountable accused war
criminals who in the past largely escaped justice.
"The train is in motion. The idea that we should somehow spend our time
trying to derail ratification is a foolhardy waste of American time, energy
and prestige," said David Scheffer, the former head of the State
Department's Office of War Crimes Issues who was chief U.S. negotiator on
the ICC treaty.
ICC opponents insist that the United States will continue backing the
creation of international war-crimes courts on a case-by-case basis. They
point out that the United States played key roles in the establishment of
U.N. tribunals on the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda.
******************
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 03-08-01 MET DST