-Caveat Lector-
It's hard to be the World's #1 Goon if you must follow the rules
of basic human decency. --- Joshua2
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: RIGHTS: Formation of International Criminal Court Closer
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 11:25:00 -0600 (CST)
From: IGC News Desk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Organization: ?
To: undisclosed-recipients:;
Copyright 1999 InterPress Service, all rights reserved.
Worldwide distribution via the APC networks.
*** 22-Dec-99 ***
Title: RIGHTS: Formation of International Criminal Court Closer
By Jim Wurst
UNITED NATIONS, Dec. 22 (IPS) - The International Criminal Court
(ICC) came closer to reality this month with week with UN members
agreeing on the details of crimes to be tried by the court.
Canadian ambassador Philippe Kirsch, chairman of a lengthy ICC
preparatory meeting from Nov 29-Dec 17, said the session had been
"very satisfactory" and he was confident all work on formation of
the new court would be completed next year.
The ICC statutes, established in Rome last year, gave the Court
authority to try individuals (not states) for three categories of
crimes: genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity.
Genocide already was defined in an international convention and
the latest session of the committee dealt with refining the
definitions of the other two categories, Kirsch said.
"Provisions on war crimes probably will not be altered
significantly, but provisions on crimes against humanity -
because they are more novel and most sensitive - might," he
said."My sense is that many provisions...probably will be left as
they are."
The definition of war crimes were "well advanced...in many
respects, probably in their final form," Kirsch said.
One breakthrough came with agreement on the issue of the transfer
of populations by an occupying power. "It was a sensitive issue,
but it was resolved," Kirsch said.
Crimes against humanity, however, remained "more difficult to
resolve because you don't have as much of a basis to define them
as you do for war crimes" and because such crimes can be committed
in wartime or in peace, Kirsch said.
Crimes against humanity were classified as: murder,
extermination, enslavement, deportation or forceable transfer of
populations, imprisonment, torture, rape and other acts of sexual
violence, persecutions, enforced disappearance of persons and
apartheid - the separation of persons and communities based on
their race.
The meeting also considered the question of aggression. "While
everyone understands aggression - the unprovoked attack by one
state against another - there is no universal, legal definition,"
Kirsch said,
"Some states would like to have a very expansive definition with
a lot of acts that would be aggression while other states would
like to limit the act of aggression to being vague, classical
acts."
No final decision is expected before June 2000, but the working
group did come up with three alternative definitions which will be
debated next year. In general, the proposals draw from the
Nuremburg and Tokyo tribunals after World War II and a 1974 UN
General Assembly resolution on aggression.
This issue also involves the Security Council, since it is the
only international body that legally can define an act of
aggression and mobilize against it.
Kirsch framed the problem as a question: "Can the Court try a
person as having committed an act of aggression if the Security
Council has not determined that there has been aggression in the
first place?"
The United States, which had opposed the statutes drawn up in
Rome because the language failed to exempt such US nationals as
military personnel from the court's jurisdiction, had played a
"constructive role" in the latest committee meeting, Kirsch said.
He acknowledged, however, that some difficulties remained. "The
general issue for the United States is to ensure that their
nationals will not be tried before the [Court]...The question is
whether that position can be reconciled with the text and
objectives of the statute."
Kirsch said the natural position of the United States would be
on the side of the Court, "because if you look at history...there
is trend of wanting to punish criminals who have committed serious
international crimes. It is very unfortunate that this particular
problem is preventing the US from joining all of us without
reservation."
Bruce Broomhall of the non-governmental Lawyers Committee on
Human Rights said the United States had not pushed its "Big Fix,"
which he defined as wording that would exempt US nationals and
creating a Court "that only the Security Council can use" - in
other words, a Court where Washington could exercise its veto.
Instead, the United States had proposed a 'little fix' - rules
that "would so entangle the prosecutor in the earliest stages of
investigation in legal, procedural hurdles...that the Court would
be good for nobody but the Security Council."
He said he found it "disturbing" that the four other veto-
holding members of the Council "appeared to be going along with
the United States" but the majority of other states rejected the
proposal, Broomhall said.
Although 91 states have signed the ICC Statutes, they have been
ratified by only six nations whereas 60 ratifications are needed
for the court to become a reality.
Kirsch said he expected the rate of ratification to increase
since states often have to pass new laws recognizing the Court
before ratification can take place. He believed that within two
years, many states would be ratifying the statutes at the same
time.
"There is no question in my mind that, not only that the Court
will exist, but it will exist reasonably soon." (END/IPS/jw/mk/99)
Origin: ROMAWAS/RIGHTS/
----
[c] 1999, InterPress Third World News Agency (IPS)
All rights reserved
May not be reproduced, reprinted or posted to any system or
service outside of the APC networks, without specific
permission from IPS. This limitation includes distribution
via Usenet News, bulletin board systems, mailing lists,
print media and broadcast. For information about cross-
posting, send a message to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. For
information about print or broadcast reproduction please
contact the IPS coordinator at <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>.
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic
screeds are not allowed. Substance—not soapboxing! These are sordid matters
and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright
frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects
spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL
gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers;
be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and
nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
