Crimes? What crimes?

Jump to Comments

Here is some pretty depressing news to all of us hoping and praying that if justice will not be served here in the United States, the Hague will take care of it. Via Human Rights Watch. Although this was news back in 2002, I doubt too many people know of it or how it is affecting countries trying to support the ICC today.

(New York, August 3, 2002) A new law supposedly protecting U.S. servicemembers from the International Criminal Court shows that the Bush administration will stop at nothing in its campaign against the court, Human Rights Watch warned today. “The states that have ratified this treaty are trying to strengthen the rule of law. The Bush administration is trying to punish them for that.”Richard Dicker Director International Justice Program Human Rights Watch U.S. President George Bush today signed into law the American Servicemembers Protection Act of 2002, which is intended to intimidate countries that ratify the treaty for the International Criminal Court (ICC). The new law authorizes the use of military force to liberate any American or citizen of a U.S.-allied country being held by the court, which is located in The Hague. This provision, dubbed the “Hague invasion clause,” has caused a strong reaction from U.S. allies around the world, particularly in the Netherlands.In addition, the law provides for the withdrawal of U.S. military assistance from countries ratifying the ICC treaty, and restricts U.S. participation in United Nations peacekeeping unless the United States obtains immunity from prosecution. At the same time, these provisions can be waived by the president on “national interest” grounds. “The states that have ratified this treaty are trying to strengthen the rule of law,” said Richard Dicker, director of the International Justice Program at Human Rights Watch. “The Bush administration is trying to punish them for that.” Dicker pointed out that many of the ICC’s biggest supporters are fragile democracies and countries emerging from human rights crises, such as Sierra Leone, Argentina and Fiji. The law is part of a multi-pronged U.S. effort against the International Criminal Court. On May 6, in an unprecedented move, the Bush administration announced it was “renouncing” U.S. signature on the treaty. In June, the administration vetoed continuation of the U.N. peacekeeping force in Bosnia in an effort to obtain permanent immunity for U.N. peacekeepers. In July, U.S. officials launched a campaign around the world to obtain bilateral agreements that would grant immunity for Americans from the court’s authority. Yesterday, Washington announced that it obtained such an agreement from Romania.

Read the rest of the article here.

For more on the Hague Invasion Act look here. Here is an excerpt.

“This Congressional action is part of a multi-pronged effort of the US government to undermine international justice, international law and international peacekeeping,” stated William R. Pace, Convenor of the global Coalition for the International Criminal Court. Pace added, “As an American, I am ashamed of the lies and hypocrisy of the US government towards the ICC, and the disastrous reversal of US leadership on international law and justice during the new Bush Administration.”

If there are no international crimes being committed, why go to all the trouble of passing this? Does this mean the end of our dreams for justice? Sound in on it. What do you think?

: : : : : : : : : :

12 Comments

Filed under America - Law, Government & Institutions - Congress, Human & Civil Rights, International, Military

Tags: Bluedahlia @ TPZoo