How the International Criminal Court Might Have Jurisdiction

No Comments

I don’t normally post my emails to other lists here, but I thought this one, part of the discussion on the JOINint* list involved enough thought (well actually enough Googling) that I should post it here.

We were discussing a rather bone-headed statement by Tom Lantos, and some issues of international law came up.
On Tue, 30 Oct 2007, Ari Blumenfeld wrote:

Dear Matthew,

Thank you for correcting that. Are you absolutely certain about the
child-prisoners?

At least one, and he is charged with throwing a grenade at a soldier in Afghanistan in a pitched battle and killing him, which he denies.

This story mentions 3 children aged 13-15, and “more than two and fewer than five” children aged 16-18.

What other war crimes are there?

Systematic torture. Rendition to be tortured. The admission of torture derived evidence.

Additionally, you have “Waging Aggressive War”, which is probably not covered, but was what some people were executed for following WW II (von Ribbentrop and Tojo).

Of interest are some of the charges against Tojo (from the Wiki):

  • count 1 (waging wars of aggression, and war or wars in violation of international law)
  • count 27 (waging unprovoked war against the Republic of China)
  • count 29 (waging aggressive war against the United States)
  • count 31 (waging aggressive war against the British Commonwealth (Hong Kong))
  • count 32 (waging aggressive war against the Netherlands (Indonesia))
  • count 33 (waging aggressive war against France (Indochina))
  • count 54 (ordering, authorizing, and permitting inhumane treatment of Prisoners of War (POWs) and others)

Can we extradite the Bush administration to the Hague for their part in what appears to be war crimes?

Agencies are forbidden under US law to cooperate with the ICC. That legislation also included an authorization of the use of Military force to remove US citizens from custody.

Of interest is the geographic range of the court (also from Wiki):

  • where the person accused of committing a crime is a national of a state party (or where the person’s state has accepted the jurisdiction of the Court);
  • where the alleged crime was committed on the territory of a state party (or where the state on whose territory the crime was committed has accepted the jurisdiction of the Court); or
  • where a situation is referred to the Court by the UN Security Council.

Since Afghanistan is a signatory, it could apply to actions originating there, but the secret gulags in Poland would probably not be, because Poland is not a full signatory yet. It would, however, apply to someone seized in Afghanistan and sent to Gitmo or the other Gulags.

*Jewish Opinions, Ideas, and News, International It spun off from another group when it descended into right wing agitprop.

Leave a Reply