US: Helms Amendment Shows 'Utter Contempt' for Safety of US Soldiers

Copyright 2001 AScribe Inc.

AScribe Newswire

December 13, 2001 Thursday

LENGTH: 1011 words

HEADLINE: International Law Scholar: Helms Amendment on International
Court Shows 'Utter Contempt' for Safety of U.S. Soldiers

BODY:
ST. LOUIS, Dec. 13 [AScribe Newswire] -- On Dec. 7, the U.S. Senate
endorsed provisions introduced into a defense spending bill by Sen. Jesse
Helms, voting overwhelmingly to block U.S. participation in an
international criminal court.
Despite the vote, it is increasingly clear that the International Criminal
Court [ICC] Treaty will enter into force sometime next year. Alone among
Western nations, however, the United States has declared its opposition to
the Court in terms that have become increasingly shrill. America's
isolation on this issue has delighted our enemies and infuriated our
friends. In the wake of the September 11 terrorist attacks on our country,
this stand has become increasingly dangerous, contends Leila Nadya Sadat,
Professor of Law at Washington University in St. Louis.
Sadat is Chair of the International Law Association [American Branch]
Committee on the International Criminal Court, is the author of the leading
treatise on the international criminal court, "The International Criminal
Court and the Transformation of International Law: Justice for the New
Millennium" [Transnational, 2002]. She details her position in the
statement below:
The best way to protect American soldiers from ill-founded prosecutions in
the ICC is to ratify the treaty and opt out of the war crimes jurisdiction
of the court for 7 years pursuant to article 124 of the Statute. This will
allow us to influence the institution by having Americans in key positions
of power, but protect our soldiers from prosecutions while we observe how
the Court works. France has done this, and while no other State has felt
it necessary, the U.S. delegation negotiated the opt-out and we are
entitled to use it. In addition, the principle of complementarity ensures
that no soldier may be prosecuted by the Court if a State opens an
investigation into the conduct that is the subject of the prosecution.
Finally, as a matter of law, once we send our soldiers into combat, they
can be prosecuted by their captors, wherever they are captured. Senator
Helms evidences his utter contempt for the safety and well being of our
soldiers by denying them the possibility of a full and fair hearing at the
Hague, as opposed to the swift and potentially hostile judgment they will
face in the military courts of their captors.
The ICC is far from a "kangaroo court." Defendants before the ICC, unlike
defendants before the President's proposed military commissions, will
receive full due process rights to counsel, to an appeal, to confront their
accusers, to challenge evidence unlawfully obtained, to challenge the
court's subject matter jurisdiction and to be free from unlawful coercion.
The ICC Statute has built upon the practice of the two ad hoc tribunals for
the Former Yugoslavia and Rwanda and represents the most modern,
progressive and advanced consensus on international criminal procedure.
Indeed, one of the reasons that the administration apparently eschewed the
use of international tribunals in favor of its proposed military
commissions was the concern that international tribunals could not impose
the death penalty and might offer defendants too much in the way of
procedural safeguards.
In rejecting the ICC Treaty the US is alone among civilized nations.
Indeed, Senator Helms is attempting to undo fifty years of international
peace building by advocating American unilateralism as a substitute for
international cooperation. The ICC Statute was overwhelmingly approved by
the Diplomatic Conference that adopted it, and will probably enter into
force next year. This action of the Senate effectively declares war on the
world, and particularly given the need for international cooperation in the
campaign against international terrorism, is ill advised and poorly timed.
It will lead to more, not less, friction between the United States and its
allies, as well as its enemies. Indeed, it shows a disdain for
international institutions that is shocking in its extremism.
After September 11, U.S. support for the ICC Treaty has become vital. The
crimes committed on that day were so heinous and horrific that they may be
characterized as "crimes against humanity," as now defined in the Treaty.
They are crimes that the Security Council has condemned as a threat to
international peace and security, and appear to have been committed by an
international terrorist organization with a reported 3,000 operatives in 60
countries. Crimes committed on such a wide scale necessarily require an
international response, and while the ICC will not have retroactive
jurisdiction, it could play an important role in similar cases in the
future.
Ratifying the ICC statute will mute, if not silence America's critics, who
claim that we believe only in victor's justice, not universal justice. Our
speedy ratification would also lend credibility to any initiative we might
bring before the Security Council to establish an international tribunal to
prosecute the perpetrators of the September 11 or other attacks.
Importantly, it will permit us to nominate Americans for positions on the
Court and to influence this new international institution. Finally, we
should ratify the ICC Treaty to honor the victims of atrocities everywhere.
The victims of the Nazi holocaust, Cambodia's killing fields and Rwanda's
genocide, among others, deserve our unwavering commitment to make our
promises of international justice ring true. So do those who died on
September 11, 2001.
-- The views expressed in this editorial are the personal views of the
author, not of any institution with which she may be affiliated. The
author's biography is available at http://www.law.wustl.edu , and she may
be directly contacted at [email protected] . The editorial is available
for free and immediate use.

CONTACT:
Leila Nadya Sadat, Professor of Law, Washington University
in St. Louis, 314-935-6411; [email protected]
Jessica Roberts, Senior News Editor, Washington
University in St. Louis, 314-935-5251;
[email protected]

Ms. Mariana Rodriguez-Pareja
Outreach Liaison/ Oficial de Enlace
=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=
NGO Coalition for an International Criminal Court
Coalicion de ONGs por la Corte Penal Internacional
Coalition des ONGs pour la Cour Penale Internationale
=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=
CICC c/o World Federalist Movement -IGP
777 United Nations Plaza 12th Floor
New York NY 10017 USA
Tel: 1 212 687 2176 Fax: 1 212 599 1332
http://www.iccnow.org. En español visite http://www.iccnow.org/espanol

To: email:
Unsubscribe: [email protected]
Subscribe: [email protected]
Contact owner: [email protected]
Get help: [email protected]
Get 1 post/day: [email protected]
Stop email: [email protected]
Restore defaults: [email protected]

Para suscribirse a la lista en espanol,
envie un email a: [email protected]
Pour souscrire a la liste d'information en français,
envoyer un e-mail: [email protected]

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/icc-info/messages
Coalition for an International Criminal Court:
http://www.iccnow.org

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/