|
|
The ICC, the Other Option
un article par Janet Hudgins
The International Criminal Court, officially opened in The Hague last month after more than fifty years in the making, promises "universal justice," said Kofi Annan, Secretary General of the United Nations (UN). The court will "ensure that no ruler, no State, no junta and no army anywhere can abuse human rights with impunity." (See the ICC website).
It could be said that the Court is one of the first casualties of the War in Iraq. By refusing to participate in the UN tribunal, the United States could defeat the ICC¹s most important mandate: to deter now and future war criminals.
The Bush administration fears that the ICC will give other regimes a forum to file arbitrary charges against certain Americans in order to gain political currency. And the ICC would provide for life imprisonment, not the death penalty.
Justice as opposed to war would have been the proper solution to ridding Iraq of its dictator. The ICC could have tried Saddam Hussein and his followers long before the war started with a special tribunal, just as it is now doing with Slobodan Milosevic who was president of Yugoslavia.
Iraqis would likely prefer to bring the surviving Baathists before their own bar, but there is no independent judiciary in Iraq, only the severely compromised justice system controlled by Hussein. An ICC tribunal could still try Hussein if he is alive and it should begin the course for trials of similar despots. There would be no question then of where Bush is going next to remove state leaders.
Canada has been very much involved in the advancement of the ICC. As well, a Canadian, Philippe Kirsch, has been named its first president and another, Louise Arbour, was the chief prosecutor for the Milosevic tribunal for four years. It would behoove those of us in Canada to champion the case to bring Hussein before the ICC and to begin the arduous process of trying the many other brutal tyrants in the world, some of whom are actually signatories to the ICC.
|
|
DISCUSSION
Question(s) liée(s) à cet article:
Could use of the ICC help prevent future wars?,
* * * * *
Commentaire le plus récent:
To change the United States culture of war to a culture of peace we need to hear from our Veterans who understand the true costs of war. We need to hear from them daily. I watch Democracy Now and often wonder where are the voices of veterans who have chosen to promote peace as the ultimate defence of our country.
We, having dutifully served our nation, do hereby affirm our greater responsibility to serve the cause of world peace. To this end we will work, with others
(a) Toward increasing public awareness of the costs of war.
(b) To restrain our government from intervening, overtly and covertly, in the internal affairs of other nations
© To end the arms race and to reduce and eventually eliminate nuclear weapons
(d) To seek justice for veterans and victims of war
(e) To abolish war as an instrument of national policy.
To achieve these goals, members of Veterans For Peace pledge to use non-violent means and to maintain an organization that is both democratic and open with the understanding that all members are trusted to act in the best interests of the group for the larger purpose of world peace.
We urge all people who share this vision to join us.
http://www.veteransforpeace.org
I would recommend that veterans and non veterans join the Veterans For Peace and foster the message of peace.
National media is the only way to get the word out. We all know that corporate news will not give us the time of day much less equal time on issues of war, national security, and world peace. In order to foster this message, we sould start by producing community access television show(s) that are moderated by members of Veterans For Peace. . ... continuation.
|
|
par domain d'action
par date