Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Annan Opposes Exempting U.S. From (Int. Criminal) Court

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
UpInArms Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-17-04 10:39 PM
Original message
Annan Opposes Exempting U.S. From (Int. Criminal) Court
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A50531-2004Jun17.html

UNITED NATIONS, June 17 -- U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan on Thursday urged the Security Council to oppose renewal of a resolution that would shield U.S. troops serving in U.N.-approved peacekeeping missions from prosecution before the International Criminal Court, saying the "exemption is wrong."

Annan noted that the United States is facing international criticism for abuses of detainees in Iraq and Afghanistan. He told reporters: "It would be unwise to press for an exemption, and it would be even more unwise on the part of the Security Council to grant it. It would discredit the council and the United Nations that stands for the rule of law."

The U.N. chief's remarks added momentum to a campaign by supporters of the war crimes court to defeat the U.S.-sponsored initiative. Senior U.N. diplomats said Annan would press his case in a closed-door luncheon Friday with the 15 Security Council members.

"Blanket exemption is wrong," Annan said. "It is of dubious judicial value, and I don't think it should be encouraged by the council."

...more...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
LittleApple81 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-17-04 10:41 PM
Response to Original message
1. Time for Bush to mention the Oil-for-food-Annan's Son-ties....again.n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jack Rabbit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-17-04 10:42 PM
Response to Original message
2. Jack Rabbit opposes any exemption to the Rome Statute
Edited on Thu Jun-17-04 10:43 PM by Jack Rabbit
. . . and favors putting Bush and his henchmen in front of it.

Rome Statute for the International Criminal Court
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NCLib23 Donating Member (97 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-17-04 10:58 PM
Response to Original message
3. A blanket exception is wrong, however...
I don't support the ICC when it refuses to grant persons those rights garaunteed them by their own sovereign nation.

Also, I still question the moral authority of the UN in many matters, as it has repeatedly refused to recognize gross incoongruities in its appointment methodology.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
struggle4progress Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-17-04 11:05 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. If their nation gives them the "right" to torture people ...

you think that is OK? I have trouble understanding your point-of-view. :(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NCLib23 Donating Member (97 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-17-04 11:12 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. NIce straw man
I'll talk slower this time:

I believe a person is entitaled to the 'rights of the accused' of their own sovereign nation, if tried in an international court. I can possibly seeing this to mean the 'rights of the accused' of the nation where said person physically acted.

If tried in a foreign court, for comitting acts on foreign soil, then they shoudl be tried in that country's system. But if we are setting up an over-arching court, it shouldn't infringe on the 'accused' rights any more than is absolutely necesary. Theya re presumed innocent and should be afforded the same rights as those people in their judicial system.

If there is no system, then the court shall have the defiend set of rights.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jack Rabbit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-17-04 11:37 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. Rights of the accused under the Rome Stature
Reference: Rome Statue, Articles 62-76

Article 63. The accused shall be present during the trial.

Article 66. Everyone shall be presumed innocent until proved guilty before the Court in accordance with the applicable law.
The onus is on the Prosecutor to prove the guilt of the accused.
In order to convict the accused, the Court must be convinced of the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt.

Article 67. 1. In the determination of any charge, the accused shall be entitled to a public hearing, having regard to the provisions of this statute, to a fair hearing conducted impartially, and to the following minimum guarantees, in full equality:
(a) To be informed promptly and in detail of the nature, cause and content of the charge, in a language which the accused fully understands and speaks;
(b) To have adequate time and facilities for the preparation of the defence and to communicate freely with counsel of the accused's hoosing in confidence;
(c) To be tried without undue delay;
(d) Subject to article 63, paragraph 2, to be present at the trial, to conduct the defence in person or through legal assistance of the accused's choosing, to be informed, if the accused does not have legal assistance, of this right and to have legal assistance assigned by the Court in any case where the interests of justice so require, and without payment if the accused lacks sufficient means to pay for it;
(e) To examine, or have examined, the witnesses against him or her and to obtain the attendance and examination of witnesses on his or her behalf under the same conditions as witnesses against him or her. The accused shall also be entitled to raise defences and to present other evidence admissible under this Statute;
(f) To have, free of any cost, the assistance of a competent interpreter and such translations as are necessary to meet the requirements of fairness, if any of the proceedings of or documents presented to the Court are not in a language which the accused fully understands and speaks;
(g) Not to be compelled to testify or to confess guilt and to remain silent, without such silence being a consideration in the determination of guilt or innocence;
(h) To make an unsworn oral or written statement in his or her defence; and
(i) Not to have imposed on him or her any reversal of the burden of proof or any onus of rebuttal.
2. In addition to any other disclosure provided for in this Statute, the Prosecutor shall, as soon as practicable, disclose to the defence evidence in the Prosecutor's possession or control which he or she believes shows or tends to show the innocence of the accused, or to mitigate the guilt of the accused, or which may affect the credibility of prosecution evidence. In case of doubt as to the application of this paragraph, the Court shall decide.

Article 69. Before testifying, each witness shall, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, give an undertaking as to the truthfulness of the evidence to be given by that witness.
The testimony of a witness at trial shall be given in person, except to the extent provided by the measures set forth in article 68 or in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence.
Evidence obtained by means of a violation of this Statute or internationally recognized human rights shall not be admissible if:
(a) The violation casts substantial doubt on the reliability of the evidence; or
(b) The admission of the evidence would be antithetical to and would seriously damage the integrity of the proceedings.

Article 72. If a State learns that information or documents of the State are being, or are likely to be, disclosed at any stage of the proceedings, and it is of the opinion that disclosure would prejudice its national security interests, that State shall have the right to intervene in order to obtain resolution of the issue in accordance with this article.
If the Court determines that the evidence is relevant and necessary for the establishment of the guilt or innocence of the accused, the Court may undertake the following actions:
(a) Where disclosure of the information or document is sought pursuant to a request for cooperation under Part 9 or the circumstances described in paragraph 2, and the State has invoked the ground for refusal referred to in article 93, paragraph 4:
(i) The Court may, before making any conclusion referred to in subparagraph 7 (a) (ii), request further consultations for the purpose of considering the State's representations, which may include, as appropriate, hearings in camera and ex parte;
(ii) If the Court concludes that, by invoking the ground for refusal under article 93, paragraph 4, in the circumstances of the case, the requested State is not acting in accordance with its obligations under this Statute, the Court may refer the matter in accordance with article 87, paragraph 7, specifying the reasons for its conclusion; and
(iii) The Court may make such inference in the trial of the accused as to the existence or non-existence of a fact, as may be appropriate in the circumstances; or
(b) In all other circumstances:
(i) Order disclosure; or
(ii) To the extent it does not order disclosure, make such inference in the trial of the accused as to the existence or non-existence of a fact, as may be appropriate in the circumstances.

Article 74. All the judges of the Trial Chamber shall be present at each stage of the trial and throughout their deliberations. The Presidency may, on a case-by-case basis, designate, as available, one or more alternate judges to be present at each stage of the trial and to replace a member of the Trial Chamber if that member is unable to continue attending.
The Trial Chamber's decision shall be based on its evaluation of the evidence and the entire proceedings. The decision shall not exceed the facts and circumstances described in the charges and any amendments to the charges. The Court may base its decision only on evidence submitted and discussed before it at the trial.

Article 76. In the event of a conviction, the Trial Chamber shall consider the appropriate sentence to be imposed and shall take into account the evidence presented and submissions made during the trial that are relevant to the sentence.
The sentence shall be pronounced in public and, wherever possible, in the presence of the accused.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NCLib23 Donating Member (97 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-17-04 11:41 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. They still don't garaunteee rights
of the sovereign nation. I've read them once, maybe I missed it but I see an outlining of rights which makes no statement that these are minimums and that the sovereign nation's 'rights' are protected as well
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jack Rabbit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-17-04 11:54 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. Frankly
That's as much as I can expect if I were to be accused of a crime in California.

I'd rather be tried by the ICC than in most state courts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NCLib23 Donating Member (97 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-18-04 12:02 AM
Response to Reply #10
11. Fine
Spousal testimony?

Applicable privacy laws/rights?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ConsAreLiars Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-18-04 01:15 AM
Response to Reply #11
12. Don't forget White Skin Privilege
as a part of the rights of the accused in the US. Plus the rights associated with wealth.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NCLib23 Donating Member (97 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-18-04 07:04 AM
Response to Reply #12
14. What in the hell
does that have to do with anything I've said?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Occulus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-18-04 12:43 PM
Response to Reply #14
18. Everything.
Edited on Fri Jun-18-04 12:43 PM by kgfnally
We cannot claim to be cleaning house when our own broom is dirty.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
alittlelark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-18-04 01:40 AM
Response to Reply #9
13. Go back from whence ye came
...and take your wretched spelling with you}(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NCLib23 Donating Member (97 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-18-04 07:05 AM
Response to Reply #13
15. Effective
both intelligent and thoughtful, thank you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
struggle4progress Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-18-04 12:33 PM
Response to Reply #6
17. No, it's NOT a straw man.

The idea that genocide and "crimes against humanity" are subject to international sanction goes back to Nuremburg, where the defendants essentially argued that their actions were acceptable under the laws imposed by their own country.

We now know that the Administration has produced a long string of memos arguing that torture is NOT illegal under national and international law, that is, those who torture are "within their rights."

I would be very concerned by any formulation of exemptions which broadly painted a principle that all "rights at home" supersede all international law.

I accept that this may not be what you meant, but I think it is what you said.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MasonJar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-17-04 11:02 PM
Response to Original message
4. We are torturing people and we want an exemption?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NCLib23 Donating Member (97 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-17-04 11:12 PM
Response to Reply #4
7. This isn't a UN peace keeping mission
no exception would apply here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-18-04 07:21 AM
Response to Reply #4
16. Remember crediblity?
No wonder we are hated the world over..I can't even go to Argntina without being asked how we can put up with Bush.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 30th 2024, 04:23 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC