|
Exemption rebuffed { July 10 2002 } Original Source Link: (May no longer be active)
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines02/0710-06.htmhttp://www.commondreams.org/headlines02/0710-06.htm
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/oneworld/20020710/wl_oneworld/1032_1026347779
http://www.ipsnews.net/
Published on Wednesday, July 10, 2002 by Inter Press Service
U.S. Bid for Exemption from Criminal Court Rebuffed
by Thalif Deen
UNITED NATIONS - The United States appeared isolated Wednesday in seeking -- and failing to secure -- exemptions for its U.N. peacekeepers from the jurisdiction of the nascent International Criminal Court (ICC).
At a meeting of the Security Council, the 15-member European Union (EU), a traditional U.S. ally, and the 114-member Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) rejected the U.S. request to shield its citizens from the Court, which has entered into treaty force and is expected to open its doors early next year.
Speaking on behalf of the EU, Ambassador Ellen Margrethe Loj of Denmark told the Security Council "it is understandable that the United States is seeking protection from politically motivated accusations".
"The EU, however, believes that these concerns have been met and that sufficient safeguards against politically motivated accusations have been built into the (Rome) Statute (that created the ICC)", she added.
Ambassador Dumisani Kumalo of South Africa, current chair of NAM, said the Security Council, which is entrusted with the task of maintaining international peace and security, is now being asked to question the authority of an international body.
"We believe that within the Council's mandate, there is no room either to re-interpret or even amend treaties that have been negotiated and agreed by the rest of the U.N. membership," he said.
Last month, the United States exercised its veto against the renewal of the mandate of the U.N. Mission in Bosnia and Herzegovina (UNMIBH) because the Council refused to exempt U.S. peacekeepers from ICC jurisdiction.
Subsequently, the Untied States agreed to extend the mandate for another three days, and later for an additional two weeks, ending Jul 15.
If the United States exercises its veto a second time when the Council meets to renew the UNMIBH mandate next week, the United Nations will be forced to abandon its peace mission in Bosnia and Herzegovina.
Kumalo said that for several years, the United Nations has assisted the people of Bosnia and Herzegovina to rebuild their war shattered government institutions and to work towards the establishment of effective and credible police and border control services.
"These achievements are now threatened by one permanent member of the Security Council in its misunderstanding and unfounded fears concerning the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court, which came into force just 10 days ago," he told the Council.
"This action by one member of this Council affects peace and stability in the entire Balkans and has implications for all U.N. peacekeeping operations throughout the world," he added.
The South African envoy also expressed fears that the U.S. position may also undermine several U.N. peacekeeping missions whose mandates are up for renewal later this month. These include U.N. missions in Western Saharan, Lebanon, Georgia and Prevlaka.
He also said that the fact that any permanent member can unilaterally decide to exercise its veto privilege to defeat the efforts of all the other 14 members of the Security Council holds "disturbing implications" for the rest of the 174 members in the United Nations and the entire world in general.
In a letter to U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell last week, U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan sought to allay Washington's fears.
"I think I can state confidently that in the history of the United Nations, and certainly during the period that I have worked for the Organization, no peacekeeper or any other U.N. mission personnel have been anywhere near the kind of crimes that fall under the jurisdiction of the ICC", he said.
"The issue that the United States is raising in the (Security) Council is therefore highly improbable with respect to U.N. peacekeeping operations. At the same time, the whole system of U.N. peacekeeping operations is being put at risk," Annan said.
Canada, another longstanding ally, also criticized the U.S. stance.
The current debate has been mischaracterized as a choice between peacekeeping and ICC, said Canadian Ambassador Paul Heinbecker. The stakes are higher, he added: "Fundamental principles of international law and the place of those principles in the conduct of global affairs are in question."
Heinbecker said that members of the Security Council should not endorse any blanket immunity for potential war criminals. "We appeal to members of the U.N. Security Council to ensure that the essential principles of international law, and the spirit and letter of the Rome Statute, not be compromised."
"We have just emerged from a century that saw the works of Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, Idi Amin and Slobodan Milosevic, and the Holocaust and the Rwandan genocide. Surely, we have all learned the fundamental lesson of this bloodies of centuries, which is that immunity from prosecution for grievous crimes must end," he added.
U.S. Ambassador John Negroponte told delegates that "as our record demonstrates, the United States believes in justice and the rule of law, and in accountability for war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide."
But, he added, the responsibility to investigate and prosecute American citizens for such crimes should be solely that of the United States, not the ICC.
Since the United States has not ratified the Rome Statute creating the ICC, Negroponte told the Security Council that he hopes that other states will, in turn, respect "our concerns about our peacekeepers."
The U.S. proposal, he said, is to use Article 16 of the Rome Statute, which allows the Security Council to force the ICC to defer investigation or prosecution of a suspect for 12 months. But the U.S. proposal also calls for automatic renewal of the deferment every year unless the Council voted to stop.
Yvonne Terlingen of Amnesty International called on Council members to reject the U.S. proposal.
"These proposals take away the jurisdiction of the ICC to decide these questions and as such violate the integrity of the Rome Statute and undermine the rule of law by, in effect, granting immunity to nationals of non-states parties to the Rome Statute, responsible for the worst possible crimes," she said.
Copyright © 2001 IPS-Inter Press Service
|
|
