Tornado Alley (PROG)

[fuagf]

What value a law when the law is ignored.

"They pick on the helpless and rail against Hamas.
At what point do we call them out for what they are?"

The criminal atrocity is clear:

United Nations Prevention of Genocide and Related Atrocity Crimes

Responsibility to Protect

Definitions -- Genocide .. Crimes Against Humanity .. War Crimes .. Ethnic Cleansing

Crimes Against Humanity

Background


United Nations Transitional Authority in Cambodia (UNTAC).
UN Photo/John Isaac

It is not clear in which context the term “crimes against humanity” was first developed. Some scholars[1] point to the use of this term (or very similar terms) as early as late eighteenth and early nineteenth century, particularly in the context of slavery and the slave trade, and to describe atrocities associated with European colonialism in Africa and elsewhere such as, for example, the atrocities committed by Leopold II of Belgium in the Congo Free State. Other scholars[2] point to the declaration issued in 1915 by the Allied governments (France, Great Britain and Russia) condemning the mass killing of Armenians in the Ottoman Empire, to be the origin of the use of the term as the label for a category of international crimes.

Since then, the notion of crimes against humanity has evolved under international customary law and through the jurisdictions of international courts such as the International Criminal Court, the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda. Many States have also criminalized crimes against humanity in their domestic law; others have yet to do so.

Crimes against humanity have not yet been codified in a dedicated treaty of international law, unlike genocide and war crimes, although there are efforts to do so. Despite this, the prohibition of crimes against humanity, similar to the prohibition of genocide, has been considered a peremptory norm of international law, from which no derogation is permitted and which is applicable to all States.

The 1998 Rome Statute establishing the International Criminal Court .. https://www.icc-cpi.int/resource-library/Documents/RS-Eng.pdf Rome Statute) is the document that reflects the latest consensus among the international community on this matter. It is also the treaty that offers the most extensive list of specific acts that may constitute the crime.

Definition

Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court
https://www.icc-cpi.int/resource-library/Documents/RS-Eng.pdf

Article 7
Crimes Against Humanity

For the purpose of this Statute, ‘crime against humanity’ means any of the following acts when committed as
part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population, with knowledge of the attack:
Murder;
Extermination;
Enslavement;
Deportation or forcible transfer of population;

More - https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/crimes-against-humanity.shtml

The criminal atrocity is clear. Our complicity is as clear:

Six Countries that Aren’t Part of the ICC

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 How Does the ICC Operate
2 Countries Not Part of the ICC
3 What to Make of the ICC?

The topic of this article has been in our minds at Nomad Capitalist for a while now, and it all started when I was watching a Roman Polanski film, “The Ghost Writer” starring Ewan McGregor and Pierce Brosnan, and it goes about a former British Prime Minister who is wanted for his involvement in war crimes and at one point he says something like he could stay in the United States so that the ICC couldn’t get to him.

Some time ago, Andrew wrote an article on non-extradition countries .. https://nomadcapitalist.com/expat/the-best-non-extradition-countries-to-be-invisible/ .. where the world’s fugitives are hiding out. It was done tongue-in-cheek, of course, but we wanted to similarly examine the countries where political leaders can’t be tried at The Hague.

Believe it or not, the three first world powers – United States, Russia, and China – aren’t part of the ICC, each for its own particular reasons. These absences have been a very common topic since the creation of this intergovernmental organization twenty years ago, and until this day it’s quite often spoken among politicians, journalists, analysts and diplomats.

Other notable absences are Israel, Qatar, Iraq, and Libya; some of them with a very turbulent past (and present) and with a few not-very-good things in common.
But let’s start with some basics about the ICC.

What’s the purpose of the ICC? To prosecute anyone responsible for war crimes, genocide, and crimes against humanity. The main scenario in which this court acts is whenever a government with or without a judicial system .. https://nomadcapitalist.com/global-citizen/best-countries-rule-of-law/ .. is unwilling or unable to prosecute criminals in their countries.

Unlike other organizations, like the International Court of Justice, the ICC .. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Court_of_Justice .. can prosecute individuals and that’s probably one of the key points for which some big nations like the United States, China and Russia aren’t a part of this treaty.

The common complains and bad comments about international organizations originate due to their lack of concrete and successful actions and the ICC is no exception. Their first verdict came 10 years after the Rome Statute entered into force .. https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/what-is-the-rome-statute.html . In 2012, Thomas Lubanga, leader of a militia in Congo, was convicted because of his war crimes, mainly for the use of children in his ranks. After this event, the actions of the ICC centered in Africa and currently the organization is being accused by some nations of alleged African bias. Although, it’s important to remember that their involvement in African issues have been referred, in some cases, by the UN or even self-referred by a member state, which was the case with Uganda and the conflicts with the LRA.


Wartorn Yemen is no longer an ICC participant

How Does the ICC Operate

It’s actually pretty straight forward. First, each ratified country has the right to nominate one candidate to be elected as a judge. The panel of judges will approve the prosecution in case an independent action wants to be made. The United Nations Security Council may also refer an investigation .. https://www.globalpolicy.org/security-council.html .. to a prosecutor.

Technically, the ICC has global jurisdiction because even if a nation isn’t a party, it would be compelled to cooperate with the court if the particular case is referred by the UN Security Council. The organization has no police force or enforcement body, so they rely on the cooperation of nations worldwide to support them if they need to make an arrest or a transference of an arrested person.

What’s the common opinion of the international community about the ICC? International cooperation may sound like the right thing to do and the correct course of humanity, but recent events like Brexit or Trump’s victory in the United States show that nationalism is overcoming that fact and even turning it around. The ICC has been called inefficient and biased, and former state members of the court actually decided to stop cooperating with it.

There’s a quote from the ICC’s ex-president Silvia Fernández that it’s worth mentioning: “International criminal justice is a long-term project,” but as much as it sounds logical it’s still a hard pill to swallow for the victims of crimes against humanity.

Countries Not Part of the ICC

Now, with the basics covered, let’s proceed to mention some of the nations that are reluctant to be a part of the ICC or that have withdrawal their signatures and therefore their involvement in the court.


Just like in the movie The Ghost Writer, the United States does not take part in the ICC

The United States

For some, this is the most surprising absence in the ICC, for others, it’s a no-brainer. The ICC can prosecute only individuals and not organizations or governments, and with global jurisdiction, they can focus on high-level government officials that aren’t usually a target for an international organization because of the difficulty to prosecute them.

It’s important to remember that during Bill Clinton’s presidency the treaty was signed and later revoked by George W. Bush, who was afraid of the possibility of American soldiers being targeted by the international community.

In 2013, the American Bar Association hosted a congressional briefing on human rights and the main speaker was Stephen Rapp, the former Ambassador for Global Criminal Justice. He pointed out the position of the United States towards intergovernmental organizations, specifically the ICC. Rapp explains that it is a matter of philosophical tradition why his country isn’t a part of it. The main tradition he mentioned is the one where Americans believe that they know how to help others better than the international community. That means, in his mind, that if they ever joined an organization such as the ICC their identity would be threatened because the United States would have to go by rules and laws alien to them.

The International Criminal Court is financed only by its member states, but the US and other non-signatory o non-ratified nations have helped the court by sharing information and intelligence about fugitives, and with logistical support on specific cases. For Stephen Rapp, it is a concern that if his nation ever decided to join the ICC, the global community would target them because of their aggressive foreign policy and the court could prosecute American soldiers and other individuals involved in bellicose actions overseas. The actions in Afghanistan during the George W. Bush presidency were in the eye of the ICC’s members as some of them accused the Americans of committing war crimes during that time.

At this briefing, Rapp also mentioned that the United States is concerned about issues outside their borders regarding human rights violations and that they are continuously working to help victims and prevent further acts against humanity.

Russia

Being one of the superpowers that supported the ICC almost from its inception in 1998 (they signed it in 2000) and its entry into force later in 2002; in 2016 Putin decided to withdraw .. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/nov/16/russia-withdraws-signature-from-international-criminal-court-statute .. their signature. This was more of a symbolic move because Russia never actually ratified the treaty so they simply cooperated with the court while staying out of their jurisdiction.

[...]

Israel

With decades of conflict with the Palestinians and dozens of accusations of war crimes, it seems a little bit obvious that Israel isn’t a part of the ICC. Nevertheless, they used to support the court at its beginnings but eventually they never ratified the treaty.

The Palestinians, members of the court since 2015, have been submitting alleged evidence of war crimes from the Israeli army to the ICC for some years now but there hasn’t been much action from the organization besides the recognition of the problem and the need to address it. In 2016, Israel agreed to a visit of a delegation from the ICC to their country and the occupied territories and currently, there’s an ongoing investigation over some officials in the Israeli army. Israel has also accused the Palestinians of war crimes but it’s important to remember a few numbers about these conflicts.

It’s important to remember that during the conflicts in Gaza in 2014, Israel, Hamas, and other factions killed over 2,200 Palestinians. Israel claims that half of the victims were combatants and accuse Hamas of the use of heavy military infrastructure in populated areas. On the other hand, over 70 Israeli were killed during that time, 66 of them soldiers.

The never-ending issue between Israel and Palestine has been a diplomatic nightmare in which many nations in and out of the ICC are currently involved, supporting one side or the other.

Libya

Another oil-rich country, socially and politically unstable, with an ongoing civil war, and out of the International Criminal Court.

[...]

China

This is a particularly interesting situation because China’s concern isn’t about its nationals, military or not, being prosecuted by the ICC, unlike the United States, Israel or Russia.

Being part of the ICC means to cooperate with them in their pursuit of fugitives, to help them build cases on alleged war criminals, to gather evidence, or to provide logistical assistance if needed. China’s foreign relations are sometimes controversial and vexed, such is the case with Bashar al-Assad, the current president of Syria. Bashar has been accused of war crimes, including the use of chemical weapons, but there’s currently no definitive proof for that.

[...]

The president Xi Jinping is willing to help the ICC with matters that won’t affect his nation’s own interests directly. This means that they won’t help any international organization to get to al-Assad and instead they will continue to support his cause as the civil war continues, hoping that he will win so they can start making money.

[...]

Qatar

There’s a word commonly used in the international community to describe Qatar’s Emir, Tamim Al Thani, and its foreign policy: pragmatic. The Arab country holds good relations with both sides of some of the major international conflicts of the last decade.

Qatar is a rich country .. https://nomadcapitalist.com/expat/top-5-richest-countries-world/ .. with one of the third-largest natural gas reserves in the world and oil. They have the highest income rate per-capita in the world and it’s classified by the UN as a country of very high human development. Still, Qatar managed to make enemies out of the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia, because of its alleged relations with radical groups and terrorist organizations, like Hamas and ISIS. Its neighbor nations claim that Qatar has been funding them, but what’s even more remarkable is the fact that Qatar holds very good relations with the United States and even Israel, despite these accusations.

How does all of this relate to the ICC? Many of Qatar’s problems and concerns could start to diminish if they decided to enter the ICC and ratify the Rome Statute. This is an action that’s actually under consideration, especially after the blockade .. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/may/06/qatar-blockade-unexpected-new-vision-isolation .. against the Gulf nation began last year. They presented their case to the court against the United Arab Emirates arguing that there are human rights violations of both Qatari and Emirati citizens.

Currently, Qatar’s international relations are stronger than ever, unlike the ones of its enemies next door. If they finally decide to join the ICC, besides being the “the right thing to do,” it would make them the first Arab nation in it and they would serve as an example for the rest of the region. Whether it’s a matter of morals or convenience, Tamir Al Thani seems to be managing things just fine. This wouldn’t erase the past and the mistakes made by the Emir but it would definitely be a huge step forward.

What to Make of the ICC?

While some Nomad Capitalists may disagree, in my opinion, the ICC is a great idea and its creation was a major win for the international community. However, it has been a bumpy ride for the organization based in The Hague. There have been some step-backs during the way, like the pull outs of some influential nations.

Its legitimacy has been compromised a couple of times, and their effectiveness still needs to be proven; but with over 120 nations supporting the court, one can only hope for the remaining countries to understand that international cooperation is the right course to take.

It’s clear that dictators will do their best to stay out of the ICC while making an effort to delay its growth, but nationalism remains the number one enemy of forward-thinking and globalization.

https://nomadcapitalist.com/global-citizen/countries-arent-part-of-icc/